In my first post of a trilogy on the agitated patient in the ED I outlined BARS sedation score for defining levels of agitation, discussed how to risk stratify a potentially agitated patient and offered some tips on how to deal with the mildly agitated patient. This post will discuss what to do with moderately and severely agitated patients while the final chapter will delve into the work-up of these challenging patients. If you’ve been enjoying these posts, be sure to check out Kane Guthrie‘s gem of an overview of behavioral emergencies on LITFL.
While dangerously agitated patients require a more aggressive approach than the patients discussed in my first post, I think the strategies suggested for treating those patients still apply to these ones. At every level of the agitation spectrum it is important to consider a patient’s potential for violence and attempt to calm them using effective communication strategies. However, moderately and severely agitated patients will likely require more medication and possibly physical restraint. What should you use? How should it be done?
In my first post I defined a moderately agitated patient as meeting the 6th level of the BARS criteria. They are “extremely or continuously active, not requiring restraint.” While I criticized the BARS criteria for defining a level of agitation with a treatment (restraint), I do see some merit in this definition. Patients can get extremely worked up while still not being such a danger to themselves or others that they require physical restraint. I think determining which patients require a rapid take-down is part of the art of emergency medicine and may partially be influenced by a patient’s response to the suggestion of a medication to help them calm down.
In conjunction with medications, seclusion may also be used to isolate an agitated patient. The American Association of Emergency Psychiatry recommends its use for agitated patients who are at low risk of harming themselves or others.
The options for chemical restraint are extensive but generally include benzodiazepines and antipsychotics. At this level of agitation I would attempt to convince the patient to take a medication cooperatively. Based on the approaches that I have read to prepare this post, many would advocate for the use of an IM or combination of IM medications. However, I think there is a role for the use of SL or PO medications in a patient that is agitated but has not demonstrated harmful or threatening behavior.
The American Association of Emergency Psychiatry (AAEP) provides several recommendations for broaching the topic of medications. When you have determined that the patient will need medication to calm down, they advice using five strategies, three of which I felt were appropriate for a moderately agitated patient:
The AAEP advises offering the patient a choice in the route of administration and/or medication to give them some semblance of control. They may be more agreeable to going with something that they are familiar with. If this is the case, I’d go with it. All of the medications that are commonly used in this setting work and if they take it willingly I think you’ll be further ahead with building a therapeutic relationship than you would be if you insisted on something else.
In a patient with this level of agitation I would prefer sublingual or intravenous dosing as opposed to oral or intramuscular.
Generally, agitated patients are treated with a benzodiazepaine, an antipsychotic or a combination of the two.
The selection of sublingual medications for use in this context is not large. The centers that I have worked in have a sublingual benzodiazepine (Lorazepam) and atypical antipsychotic (Olanzipine – Risperidone is another option that I am less familiar with) available. What to choose?
This 2010 Cochrane Review examined the efficacy of benzopiazepines vs antipsychotics vs both in acutely psychotic patients. It concluded that there no significant difference between the efficacy of the three interventions, but that the antipsychotic group had a higher incidence of extrapyrimidal side effects than the other two groups. With no evidence from which to draw, my practice would be to use antipsychotic medications +/- benzodiazepines in a patient whose agitation seems to have psychotic components and benzodiazepines alone in patients whose agitation seems likely to be due to another cause. How to tell? Stay tuned for part 3.
There is not much good evidence on time to onset of action of sublingual medications. The studies on sublingual olanzapine and lorazepam that I found did not examine a clinically significant marker to quantify time to decreased agitation.
In both studies the peak plasma levels were similar regardless of the route given, suggesting that oral and sublingual routes both have good bioavailability.
There are a ton of intravenous benzodiazepines (lorazepam, midazolam, diazepam, etc) and some typical antipsychotics (haloperidol & droperidol – watch the QTc) that are available for this indication. Because they will all work quite quickly when given intravenously and can be titrated to effect with small doses I’m not going to delve into them further than this.
Bottom line: I recommend giving moderately agitated patients sublingual or intravenous medications. Benzo’s and antipsychotics have relatively similar efficacy.
There is a lot of adrenaline associated with the severely agitated patient. So much, in fact, that I’m not sure it fits in with the theme of my site. And likely because of that adrenaline, the EMCC (emergency medicine and critical care) FOAM world has been exceptionally good at writing about it! Rather than attempt to reinvent the wheel by getting into the subtleties of this topic, I have decided to summarize the conclusions of some of the FOAMites that have already done so.
This study and this study support his assertion that Droperidol beats Haloperidol by demonstrating significantly lower scores on an agitation scale at 15 and 30 minutes. This one supports midazolam 5mg IM over lorazepam 2mg IM with a time to sedation of 18 minutes for the former versus 28 minutes for the latter. Notably, the patients given Midazolam also roused 130 minutes earlier which may be beneficial in facilitating further assessment. Finally, this study supports the use of midazolam 5mg IM or droperidol 5mg IM over Ziprasidone 20mg IM due to faster onset of sedation.
There has been a lot of chatter recently about using intramuscular ketamine for rapid take-down. Several recent case reports (here and here) discuss how it can be used effectively to take-down agitated patients. Minh Le Cong put together podcasts reviewing the literature on the use of Ketamine for agitation, listed recent updates in the literature in another post, collaborated with Kane Guthrie on a podcast focused on excited delirium that discussed the use of ketamine in the rapid take-down, and published some of the literature on ketamine in aeromedical retrieval. He uses ketamine as a second line drug to sedate patients with infusions during flight.
All of these medications have the potential to affect cardiorespiratory parameters and their use requires pre-sedation assessment and planning for post-sedation airway management and monitoring. After sedation is achieved an IV should be obtained and additional sedation needs can be met by using a sedation scoring system (ie – BARS or RASS). Depending on their response to sedation and disposition (ie need for transport?) RSI may be indicated for some of these patients but I think that discussion is beyond the scope of this post.
Bottom line: Droperidol 5mg IM and Midazolam 5mg IM are the best supported medications for use in a rapid take-down. Ketamine may also be an excellent drug for use in this context but the literature on it is still sparse. Prior to initiating a rapid take down be sure to anticipate and plan for airway management and cardiorespiratory monitoring.
The AAEP Consensus Statement advises avoiding the use of physical restraints as much as possible as it can be both psychologically and physiologically damaging to the patient. However, a survey of psychiatry medical directors primarily working in academic centers estimated that restraints were used in approximately 8.5% of emergency psychiatric presentations for an average of 3.3 hours per episode. While acknowledging that this study tells us almost nothing as a result of its methodology, I mention it to illustrate that, at least anecdotally, we are still doing this with some frequency.
I will not address the ethical or legal aspects of the use of physical restraints in this post. However, I think there is wide agreement that, while undesirable, physical restraints are occasionally a necessary evil. Patients that are out of control are at risk of harming themselves or others and need to be restrained so that they can be safely sedated and assessed.
A prospective study of 298 patients physically restrained in the ED found them to be extremely safe. The complications listed (9 got out, 3 vomited, 2 injured others, 2 spit, and 1 injured themselves) were quite minor. However, restraints have been found to be harmful when used incorrectly in other settings when larger populations were reviewed. This 2012 study examined 27,353 deaths in patients that were physically restrained to find 22 that were felt to be caused by the physical restraint. In 21 of these 22 cases the restraints were fastened incorrectly (19) or weird things were used (2). In most cases, the error was not using side straps or raising the bedrails. While this population is less analogous to agitated patients in the ED, it demonstrates the importance of ensuring that physical restraints are applied correctly.
I have been searching the internet for a solid physical restraint video, but I have yet to find one. If you have one please send me a link! If I don’t find one I’ll be looking at SOCMOB to make one.
(EDIT April 2, 2013: Dr. Weingart has reposted the video by Gary Marks, DO showing how to effectively restrain patients on his show notes for EMCrit Podcast 60. I strongly urge you to check it out! Differences from the technique described above include tying each leg to the opposite side of the bed [GREAT tip!] and having 1 arm up which [decreases movement but may increase aspiration risk]).
Moderately and severely agitated patients are at high risk of hurting themselves and others and require the same level of attention as critically ill patients. Preemptive planning and training is necessary to sedate and restrain uncooperative patients and the treatment of a severely agitated patient only begins with physical restraints. Be sure to plan for ongoing sedation, monitoring and airway management prior to sedation. Having addressed the agitation of these challenging patients, my next post (which will hopefully be much shorter!) will address their needs for sedation
Thanks for reading! If you found this post helpful please support BoringEM by following on twitter, facebook, google+, RSS or email (all links at the top of the sidebar). Tweets, retweets and e-mails are also appreciated.