Cited by 223Intensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersAlcoholism and Thiamine DeficiencyAnesthesia and Sedative Agents

Benzodiazepines for delirium

Open access
Lonergan, Edmund, Luxenberg, Jay, Areosa Sastre, Almudena·2009·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Delirium occurs in 30% of hospitalised patients and is associated with prolonged hospital stay and increased morbidity and mortality. The results of uncontrolled studies have been unclear, with some suggesting that benzodiazepines may be useful in controlling non-alcohol related delirium. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and incidence of adverse effects of benzodiazapines in the treatment of non-alcohol withdrawal related delirium. SEARCH STRATEGY: The trials were identified from a search of the Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group on 26 February 2008 using the search terms: (deliri* or confusion) and (benzo* or lorazepam," or "alprazolam" or "ativan" or diazepam or valium or chlordiazepam).The CDCIG Specialized Register contains records from major health databases (including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, LILACS) as well as many ongoing trial databases and grey literature sources. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials had to be unconfounded, randomized and with concealed allocation of subjects. Additionally, selected trials had to have assessed patients pre- and post-treatment. Where crossover design was present, only data from the first part of the trial were to be examined. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers extracted data from included trials. Data were pooled where possible, and were to be analysed using appropriate statistical methods. Odd ratios or average differences were to be calculated. Only "intention to treat" data were to be included. MAIN RESULTS: Only one trial satisfying the selection criteria could be identified. In this trial, comparing the effect of the benzodiazepine, lorazepam, with dexmedetomidine, a selective alpha-2-adrenergic receptor agonist, on delirium among mechanically ventilated intensive care unit patients, dexmedetomidine treatment was associated with an increased number of delirium- and coma-free days compared with lorazepam treated patients (dexmedetomidine patients, average seven days; lorazepam patients, average three days; P = 0.01). One partially controlled study showed no advantage of a benzodiazepine (alprazolam) compared with neuroleptics in treating agitation associated with delirium, and another partially controlled study showed decreased effectiveness of a benzodiazepine (lorazepam), and increased adverse effects, compared with neuroleptics (haloperidol, chlorpromazine) for the treatment of acute confusion. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No adequately controlled trials could be found to support the use of benzodiazepines in the treatment of non-alcohol withdrawal related delirium among hospitalised patients, and at this time benzodiazepines cannot be recommended for the control of this condition. Because of the scarcity of trials with randomization of patients, placebo control, and adequate concealment of allocation of subjects, it is clear that further research is required to determine the role of benzodiazepines in the treatment of non-alcohol withdrawal related delirium.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd006379.pub3

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • No evidence for medication efficacy, including cholinesterase inhibitors, antipsychotic medication, or melatonin, exists.

    “However, no evidence for medication efficacy, including cholinesterase inhibitors, antipsychotic medication, or melatonin exists.287, 288, 289”

    From Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2020 report of the Lancet Commission (2020) · cites this paper as [289]

    The Characteristics of excluded studies section reports that haloperidol and chlorpromazine improved delirium in hospitalized AIDS patients, contrary to the claim that no evidence of antipsychotic medication efficacy exists. This review focuses on benzodiazepines; the cited passages do not assess cholinesterase inhibitors or melatonin. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 30 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Adams R. Neuropsychiatric evaluation and treatment of delirium in the critically ill cancer patient. Cancer Bulletin 1984;36:156-60. APA 1994 American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Discorders. IV. American Psychiatric Publishing, Washington, DC, 1994.
  2. Breitbart W, Marotta R, Platt M, Weisman H, Derevenco M, Grau C, Corbera K, Raymond S, Lund S, Jacobsen P. A double- blind trial of haloperidol, chlorpromazine, and lorazepamn in the treatment of delirium in hospitalized AIDS patients. American Journal of Psychiatry 1996;153:231-7.
  3. McCusker J, Cole M, Dendukuri N, et al. Delirium in older medical inpatients. Marker for subsequent cognitive and functional status. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2001;165:575-83.
  4. C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S O F S T U D I E S Characteristics of included studies [ordered by study ID] Methods Double-blind, randomized (computer-generated, permuted block randomization); intention to treat analysis Participants Medial and surgical ICU patients requiring mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours. 106 patients 54 patients (average age, 59, 23 men) in control group. 52 patients (average age 60; 30 men) received study drug. Delirium diagnosed using IC-CAM method or RASS scale Interventions Patients were treated for up to 120 hrs, with: control group receiving intravenous lorazepam; study group receiving intravenous dexmedetomidine). Drug infusion rate was titrated to reach a sedation lev- el determined by the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale. Rescue intervention for acute agitation while on treatment included propofol infusion; for increased pain, fentanyl was given Outcomes Prevalence of coma was significantly higher among lorazepam patients compared with dexmedeto- midine patients (92% vs 63%; P < 0.001). Delirium-free days were not significantly different comparing the two groups (L pts av 7 d, D pts av 9 d, P = 0.09); delirium-free and coma free days were significantly greater for D patients compared with L patients (Dpts av 7 d, Lpts av 3 d; P = 0.01) Notes Authors note that dexmedetomidine has analgesic properties, but that this group received more fen- tanyl than lorazepam patients, introducing two uncontrolled variables (pain control and sedation ef- fect of fentanyl) that may have affected the outcomes. Authors (Prandharipande 2008) noted that the long half-life of lopazepam (8-15 hours) compared to dexmedetomidine (2 hours) could contibute to the differences in oversedation favoring the shorter acting drug. 2007 Benzodiazepines for delirium (Review) Copyright © 2010 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lonergan, E., Luxenberg, J., & Areosa Sastre, A.
Affiliations
  • 4 Captain Drive Apt 215 Emeryville CA USA 94608
  • Jewish Home (US)
  • c/ Mauricio Legendre 17, 5-A Madrid Spain 28046
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-10-07
Volume
2010
Issue
1
Pages
CD006379-CD006379
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
OpenAlex
W1903577601
Cited by
223
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 22
FWCI
2.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Intensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Alcoholism and Thiamine Deficiency
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Anesthesia and Sedative Agents
Keywords
delirium, benzodiazepines, lorazepam, dexmedetomidine, alprazolam, antipsychotic drugs, haloperidol, chlorpromazine, agitation, mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit patients, adverse effects, treatment effectiveness, hospitalized patients, benzodiazepine withdrawal
MeSH terms
Benzodiazepines, Delirium, Humans, Lorazepam, Dexmedetomidine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review