Cis(Z)‐Clopenthixol The Neuroleptically Active Isomer of Clopenthixol. A presentation of five double‐blind clinical investigations and other studies with cis(Z)‐clopenthixol (Cisordinol®, Clopixol®)

Gravem, A.; Elgen, K.

doi:10.1111/j.1600-0447.1981.tb06207.x

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…not zuclopenthixol acetate Study 3:Allocation: randomised.Particpants: people with schizophrenia.Interventions: oral thiothixene, oral chlorprothixene and oral clopenthixol, not zuclopenthixol acetate Bobon 1989 Allocation: randomised, but unequal numbers in groups said to be because hospitals probably “did not use the 4 envelopes randomisation of each block” Category C.Participants: acute psychoses.Interventions: zuclopenthixol acetate versus haloperidol IM and oral Burke 2002 Allocation: not randomised. Chakravarti 1990 Allocation: not randomised, open clinical trial. Conca 2003 Allocation: not randomised.Participants: people with catatonia including schizophrenia, psychosis and schizoaffective disorder. Interventions: zuclopenthixol acetate Dehnel 1968 Allocation: randomised.Participants: people with schizophrenia.Interventions: oral clopenthixol, oral perphenazine, not zuclopenthixol acetate Fischer-Cornelssen Allocation: not clearly stated.Participants: people with moderate and severe schizophrenia.Interventions: oral clozapine, oral chlorpromazine, oral haloperidol, oral trifluperazine and oral clopenthixol, not zuclopenthixol acetate Glenthoj 2000 Allocation: randomised.Participants: people with drug-naive, first-episode schizophrenia.Interventions: risperidone, oral zuclopenthixol, not zuclopenthixol acetate Gravem 1978 Allocation: not clearly stated.Participants: people with “mainly schizophrenia”.Interventions: oral clopenthixol, oral cis (Z) -clopenthixol, not zuclopenthixol acetate Gravem 1981a Allocation: not stated.Participants: people with classical or paranoid schizophrenia.Interventions: oral clopenthixol, oral cis (Z) -clopenthixol, not zuclopenthixol acetate Gravem 1981b Allocation: not randomised, review article. Gravem 1990 Allocation: randomised.Participants: people with schizophrenia, manic-depressive illness, paranoid psychosis.Interventions: single combined injection of zuclopenthixol acetate and zuclopenthixol decanoate, separate injections of zuclopenthixol acetate and zuclopenthixol decanoate. No comparison of zuclopenthixol acetate with standard treatment…”

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studies [Ordered By Study Id]mentioning

confidence: 99%

Zuclopenthixol acetate for acute schizophrenia and similar serious mental illnesses

Jayakody

Gibson

Kumar

et al. 2012

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Medication used for acute aggression in psychiatry must have rapid onset of effect, low frequency of administration and low levels of adverse effects. Zuclopenthixol acetate is said to have these properties. Objectives To estimate the clinical effects of zuclopenthixol acetate for the management of acute aggression or violence thought to be due to serious mental illnesses, in comparison to other drugs used to treat similar conditions. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia’s Group Trials Register (July 2011). We supplemented this by citation searching and personal contact with authors and relevant pharmaceutical companies. Selection criteria All randomised clinical trials involving people thought to have serious mental illnesses comparing zuclopenthixol acetate with other drugs. Data collection and analysis Two review authors extracted and cross-checked data independently. We calculated fixed-effect relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data. We analysed by intention-to-treat. We used mean differences (MD) for continuous variables. Main results We found no data for the primary outcome, tranquillisation. Compared with haloperidol, zuclopenthixol acetate was no more sedating at two hours (n = 40, 1 RCT, RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.34). People given zuclopenthixol acetate were not at reduced risk of being given supplementary antipsychotics (n = 134, 3 RCTs, RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.30) although additional use of benzodiazepines was less (n = 50, 1 RCT, RR 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.47). People given zuclopenthixol acetate had fewer injections over seven days compared with those allocated to haloperidol IM (n = 70, 1 RCT, RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.84, NNT 4, CI 3 to 14). We found no data on more episodes of aggression or harm to self or others. One trial (n = 148) reported no significant difference in adverse effects for people receiving zuclopenthixol acetate compared with those allocated haloperidol at one, three and six days (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.27). Compared with haloperidol or clotiapine, people allocated zuclopenthixol did not seem to be at more risk of a range of movement disorders (< 20%). Three studies found no difference in the proportion of people getting blurred vision/dry mouth (n = 192, 2 RCTs, RR at 24 hours 0.90, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.70). Similarly, dizziness was equally infrequent for those allocated zuclopenthixol acetate compared with haloperidol (n = 192, 2 RCTs, RR at 24 hours 1.15, 95% CI 0.46 to 2.88). There was no difference between treatments for leaving the study before completion (n = 522, RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.31 to 2.31). One study reported no difference in adverse effects and outcome scores, when high dose (50-100 mg/injection) zuclopenthixol acetate was compared with low dose (25-50 mg/injection) zuclopenthixol acetate. Authors’ conclusions Recommendations on the use of zuclopenthixol acetate for the management of psychiatric emergencies in preference to ‘standard’ treatment have to be viewed with caution. Most of the small...

show abstract