Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Limitations of rapid tranquillisation trial

  • O. P. Jhirwal (a1), P. Kulhara (a1) and D. Basu (a1)
  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Limitations of rapid tranquillisation trial
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Limitations of rapid tranquillisation trial
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Limitations of rapid tranquillisation trial
      Available formats
      ×

Abstract

  • An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided below. To view the full text please use the links above to select your preferred format.

Copyright

References

Hide All
Alexander, J., Tharyan, P., Adams, C., et al (2004) Rapid tranquillisation of violent or agitated patients in a psychiatric emergency setting. Pragmatic randomised trial of intramuscular lorazepam v. haloperidol plus promethazine. British Journal of Psychiatry, 185, 6369.
Battaglia, J., Moss, S., Rush, J., et al (1997) Haloperidol, lorazepam, or both for psychotic agitation? A multicenter, prospective, double-blind, emergency department study. American Journal of Emergency Medicine, 15, 335340.
Petrack, E. M., Marx, C. M. & Wright, M. S. (1996) Intramuscular ketamine is superior to meperidine, promethazine, and chlorpromazine for paediatric emergency department sedation. Archives of Paediatric and Adolescent Medicine, 150, 676681.
Temple, R. & Ellenberg, S. (2000) Placebo-controlled trials and active control trials in the evaluation of new treatment. Part I: ethical and scientific issues. Annals of Internal Medicine, 133, 455463.

Limitations of rapid tranquillisation trial

  • O. P. Jhirwal (a1), P. Kulhara (a1) and D. Basu (a1)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.

Limitations of rapid tranquillisation trial

  • O. P. Jhirwal (a1), P. Kulhara (a1) and D. Basu (a1)
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *