A Comparison of Dexmedetomidine and Haloperidol in Patients With Intensive Care Unit (ICU)-Associated Agitation and Delirium

Sponsor

Austin Health (Other)

Overall Status

Completed

CT.gov ID

NCT00505804

Collaborator

The Alfred (Other)

Enrollment

Arms

Duration (Months)

Study Details

Study Description

Brief Summary

The purpose of the study is to determine whether dexmedetomidine is a more effective medication than haloperidol in the treatment of agitation and delirium in patients receiving mechanical ventilation in an intensive care unit. Haloperidol is a medication conventionally used for this purpose.

The investigators will study only patients who have recovered from their illness to the point that, were it not for agitation and delirium, they would no longer require mechanical ventilation.

The investigators hypothesize that patients receiving dexmedetomidine will be able to discontinue mechanical ventilation earlier than those receiving haloperidol.

Condition or Disease	Intervention/Treatment	Phase
Delirium Agitation Ventilator Weaning Respiration, Artificial Intensive Care	Drug: dexmedetomidine Drug: haloperidol	Phase 2

Detailed Description

Up to 80% of patients undergoing intensive care have delirium. Early in the ICU stay, delirium and agitation are usually prevented using analgesic and sedative drugs which essentially render the patient unconscious. This is appropriate in the context of aggressive treatment of pathophysiological instability, which often requires multiple painful procedures. However, after the underlying pathophysiological problem has resolved, patients sometimes remain delirious and agitated. This often requires ongoing heavy sedation, which in turn necessitates continued mechanical ventilation, and can worsen the (temporarily masked) delirium. Prolonged mechanical ventilation increases the risk of ventilator associated pneumonia and other life threatening complications.

The drug most commonly used to treat delirium is haloperidol, which reduces hallucinations and unstructured thought patterns, but also reduces the interaction with the environment. Haloperidol has significant side effects, including extrapyramidal reactions (in 1-10% of patients), neuroleptic malignant syndrome (in which it is the cause in 50% of cases), and prolonged QT syndrome (which can precipitate fatal arrhythmias).

An ideal sedative agent in this context would have fewer side effects, relieve agitation without causing excessive sedation, and be easily titrated. An analgesic action might allow less opioid use, also lessening delirium. Early studies in other contexts suggest dexmedetomidine has all these properties.

The investigators hypothesise that patients with ICU-associated delirium after the resolution of their underlying pathological process who receive dexmedetomidine will be able to be extubated earlier than those who receive haloperidol.

Study Design

Study Type:

Interventional

Actual Enrollment :

20 participants

Allocation:

Randomized

Intervention Model:

Parallel Assignment

Masking:

None (Open Label)

Primary Purpose:

Treatment

Official Title:

A Randomised Open Label Pilot Study of the Efficacy of Dexmedetomidine and Haloperidol in Ventilated Patients With ICU-associated Agitation and Delirium

Study Start Date :

Jan 1, 2005

Actual Primary Completion Date :

Nov 1, 2008

Actual Study Completion Date :

Nov 1, 2008

Arms and Interventions

Arm	Intervention/Treatment
Experimental: 1	Drug: dexmedetomidine Dexmedetomidine IV infusion of 0.0 to 0.7 mg/kg/min for as long a deemed necessary by the treating clinician.
Active Comparator: 2	Drug: haloperidol Haloperidol IV loading dose of 2.5mg, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.0 to 2mg/hr for as long as deemed necessary by the treating clinician

Arm

Intervention/Treatment

Experimental: 1

Drug: dexmedetomidine

Dexmedetomidine IV infusion of 0.0 to 0.7 mg/kg/min for as long a deemed necessary by the treating clinician.

Active Comparator: 2

Drug: haloperidol

Haloperidol IV loading dose of 2.5mg, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.0 to 2mg/hr for as long as deemed necessary by the treating clinician

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

Time from the commencement of treatment to extubation [days]
the tiem taken to extubate the patient

Secondary Outcome Measures

Time taken to achieve a satisfactory sedation score (score 3 or 4 on the Riker scale) [hours]
time to sedation score
The need for supplemental sedative and analgesic medication (morphine, midazolam or propofol, as clinically indicated) [During delivery of trial medication]
Average Riker score for agitation [During delivery of trial medication]
Average RASS score for agitation [During delivery of trial medication]
Need for re-intubation [During the same ICU admission]
Average Bergeron ICDSC score for delirium [During delivery of trial medication]
Duration of ICU stay [days]

Eligibility Criteria

Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study:

18 Years and Older

Sexes Eligible for Study:

All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers:

Inclusion Criteria:

Patients will be eligible for the study if, in the opinion of the treating clinician, they continue to require mechanical ventilation only because their degree of agitation requires such a high dose of sedative medication (midazolam or propofol, the only commonly used specific sedatives in our unit) that extubation is not possible.

Exclusion Criteria:

Patients who could not be extubated even if delirium or agitation were corrected. This will include:
Patients receiving high dose opioid analgesia (>20 m/morphine/day)
Patients shortly to return to the operating theatre
Patients undergoing repeated invasive procedures, in whom it is desirable to maintain deep sedation.
Patients likely to require ongoing airway protection or control, or ventilatory support (for example, spinal patients with an inadequate vital capacity)
Known allergy to haloperidol or alpha2 agonists

Contacts and Locations

Locations

No locations specified.

Sponsors and Collaborators

Austin Health
The Alfred

Investigators

Principal Investigator: Rinaldo Bellomo, MD FJFICM, Austin Health, University of Melbourne
Study Director: Michael C Reade, MBBS FJFICM, Austin Health, University of Melbourne