A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL OF INTRAVENOUS HALOPERIDOL VS. INTRAVENOUS METOCLOPRAMIDE FOR ACUTE MIGRAINE THERAPY IN THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT

Background: Emergency Department (ED) headache patients are commonly treated with neuroleptic antiemetics like metoclopramide. Haloperidol has been shown to be effective for migraine treatment. Study Objective: Our study compared the use of metoclopramide vs. haloperidol to treat ED migraine patients. Methods: A prospective, double-blinded, randomized control trial of 64 adults aged 18-50 years with migraine headache and no recognized risks for QT-prolongation. Haloperidol 5 mg or metoclopramide 10 mg was given intravenously after 25 mg diphenhydramine. Pain, nausea, restlessness (akathisia), and sedation were assessed with 100-mm visual analog scales (VAS) at baseline and every 20 min, to a maximum of 80 min. The need for rescue medications, side effects, and subject satisfaction were recorded. QTc intervals were measured prior to and after treatment. Follow-upcalls after 48 h assessed satisfaction and recurrent or persistent symptoms. Results: Thirty-one subjects received haloperidol, 33 metoclopramide. The groups were similar on all VAS measurements, side effects, and in their satisfaction with therapy. Pain relief averaged 53 mm VASoverbothgroups, with equal times to maximumim provement. Subjects receiving haloperidol required rescuemedication significantly less often (3% vs. 24%, p < 0.02). MeanQTcs were equal and normal in the two groups and did not change after treatment. In telephone follow-up, 90% of subjects contacted were happy with the medication'' they had received, with haloperidol-treated subjects experiencing more restlessness (43% vs. 10%). Conclusions: Intravenous haloperidol is as safe and effective as metoclopramide for the ED treatment of migraine headaches, with less frequent need for rescue medications. Published by Elsevier Inc.