Current practice of pharmacological treatment for hyperactive delirium in terminally ill cancer patients: results of a nationwide survey of Japanese palliative care physicians and liaison psychiatrists

• Published in: Japanese journal of clinical oncology 2022-08, Vol.52 (8), p.905-910
• Main Authors: Matsuda, Yoshinobu, Morita, Tatsuya, Oya, Kiyofumi, Tagami, Keita, Naito, Akemi Shirado, Kashiwagi, Hideyuki, Otani, Hiroyuki
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• ISSN: 1465-3621; 1465-3621
• DOI: 10.1093/jjco/hyac081

Abstract Objective The objective of this survey was to identify areas where doctors have divergent practices in pharmacological treatment for hyperactive delirium in terminally ill patients with cancer. Methods We conducted a survey of Japanese palliative care physicians and liaison psychiatrists. Inquiries were made regarding: (i) choice of drug class in the first-line treatment, (ii) administration methods of the first-line antipsychotic treatment, (iii) starting dose of antipsychotics in the first line treatment and maximum dose of antipsychotics in refractory delirium, and (iv) choice of treatment when the first-line haloperidol treatment failed. Respondents used a five-point Likert scale. Results Regarding choice of drug class in the first-line treatment, more doctors reported that they ‘frequently’ or ‘very frequently’ use antipsychotics only than antipsychotics and benzodiazepine (oral: 73.4 vs. 12.2%; injection: 61.3 vs. 11.6%, respectively). Regarding administration methods of the first-line antipsychotic treatment, the percentage of doctors who reported that they used antipsychotics as needed and around the clock were 55.4 and 68.8% (oral), 49.2 and 45.4% (injection), respectively. There were different opinions on the maximum dose of antipsychotics in refractory delirium. Regarding the choice of treatment when the first-line haloperidol treatment failed, the percentage of doctors who reported that they increased the dose of haloperidol, used haloperidol and benzodiazepines, and switched to chlorpromazine were 47.0, 32.1 and 16.4%, respectively. Conclusions Doctors have divergent practices in administration methods of the first-line antipsychotic treatment, maximum dose of antipsychotics, and choice of treatment when the first-line haloperidol treatment failed. Further studies are needed to determine the optimal treatment. Doctors have divergent practices in administration methods of the first-line antipsychotics treatment, maximum dose of antipsychotics and choice of treatment when the first-line haloperidol treatment failed.