Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41079523›Full record

ArticleThe mental health clinician2025

Comparison of droperidol and haloperidol for acute agitation in the emergency department: A retrospective cohort study.

Francesca DiGuglielmo, Melanie D'Amico, Julianne Martine, Craig Sastic, Tiffany Vuong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The mental health clinician, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Francesca DiGuglielmo(Corresponding author) Clinical Pharmacist, Inspira Medical Center, Vineland, New Jersey, diguglielmof1@ihn.org.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-9175-4881
Melanie D'AmicoClinical Pharmacist, Inspira Medical Center, Vineland, New Jersey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-2174-9176
Julianne MartineClinical Pharmacist, Inspira Medical Center, Vineland, New Jersey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-8662-8385
Craig SasticClinical Pharmacist, Inspira Medical Center, Vineland, New Jersey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4295-637X
Tiffany VuongClinical Pharmacist, Inspira Medical Center, Vineland, New Jersey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6026-4188

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: To compare the effectiveness of droperidol and haloperidol for acute agitation in the emergency department. Methods: Data from electronic health records were collected from January 1, 2022, to August 25, 2023, across 6 emergency departments for patients who received 1 or more doses of either agent within the emergency department. Medical records were included if patients were 18 years of age and older and received at least 1 intramuscular dose of either agent for acute agitation. The primary endpoint was the number of subsequent doses of antipsychotics or benzodiazepines administered within 4 hours of the first dose of either droperidol or haloperidol. Secondary endpoints were the overall proportion of patients requiring subsequent additional doses of antipsychotics or benzodiazepines, the mean initial doses, and the incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms and QTc prolongation. Results: The results of the independent 2-tailed Conclusion: Droperidol required a statistically significantly lower number of subsequent doses of antipsychotics or benzodiazepines within 4 hours of the initial dose compared with haloperidol. Droperidol also demonstrated a lower overall proportion of patients requiring any additional doses compared with haloperidol and a lower mean first dose in milligrams. From a safety perspective, there was no documented presence of extrapyramidal symptoms or QTc prolongation with either agent.

Indexed as

agitationantipsychoticdroperidolemergency departmenthaloperidol

Identifiers

PMID41079523
PMCPMC12510624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.