Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2018 Oct 31;10(10):CD011709.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011709.pub2.

Chlorpromazine versus piperacetazine for schizophrenia

Mahin Eslami Shahrbabaki  1 , Reza Dehnavieh, Leila Vali, Rahim Sharafkhani
Affiliations
Review

Chlorpromazine versus piperacetazine for schizophrenia

Mahin Eslami Shahrbabaki et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Schizophrenia is a severe mental disorder with a prevalence of about 1% among the general population. It is listed among the top 10 causes of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) worldwide. Antipsychotics are the mainstay treatment. Piperacetazine has been reported to be as clinically effective as chlorpromazine, a well established 'benchmark' antipsychotic, for people with schizophrenia. However, the side effect profiles of these antipsychotics differ and it is important that an evidence base is available comparing the benefits, and potential harms of these two antipsychotics.

Objectives: To assess the clinical and side effects of chlorpromazine for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses in comparison with piperacetazine.

Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register (6 June 2015 and 8 October 2018) which is based on regular searches of CINAHL, CENTRAL, BIOSIS, AMED, Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and registries of clinical trials. There are no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records in the register.

Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on chlorpromazine versus piperacetazine for people with schizophrenia, reporting useable data.

Data collection and analysis: We extracted data independently. For binary outcomes, we calculated risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI), on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we estimated the mean difference (MD) between groups and its 95% CI. We employed a fixed-effect model for analyses. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created 'Summary of findings' tables using GRADE.

Main results: We found 12 records referring to six trials. We included five trials, all from the 1970s, randomising 343 participants. We excluded one trial. The overall methodology and data reporting by the trials was poor. Only short-term data were available.Results from the included trials found that, in terms of global state improvement, when rated by a psychiatrist, there was no clear difference between chlorpromazine and piperacetazine (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.02; participants = 208; studies = 2; very low-quality evidence). One trial reported change scores on the mental state scale Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS); no clear difference was observed (MD -0.40, 95% CI -1.41 to 0.61; participants = 182; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence). Chlorpromazine appears no worse or better than piperacetazine regarding adverse effects. In both treatment groups, around 60% of participants experienced some sort of adverse effect (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.33; participants = 74; studies = 3; very low-quality evidence), with approximately 40% of these participants experiencing some parkinsonism-type movement disorder (RR 0.95, CI 0.61 to 1.49; participants = 106; studies = 3; very low-quality evidence). No clear difference in numbers of participants leaving the study early for any reason was observed (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.56; participants = 256; studies = 4; very low-quality evidence). No trial reported data for change in negative symptoms or economic costs.

Authors' conclusions: The results of this review show chlorpromazine and piperacetazine may have similar clinical efficacy, but data are based on very small numbers of participants and the evidence is very low quality. We can not make firm conclusions based on such data. Currently, should clinicians and people with schizophrenia need to choose between chlorpromazine and piperacetazine they should be aware there is no good quality evidence to base decisions. More high quality research is needed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Mahin Eslami Shahrbabaki: none known Rahim Sharafkhani: none known Reza Dehnavieh: none known Leila Vali: none known

Figures

1
1
Chlorpromazine structure
2
2
Piperacetazine structure
3
3
Study flow diagram for searches, up to 2018
4
4
Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
5
5
Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Update of

  • doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011709

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

References to studies included in this review

Gallant 1970a {published data only}
    1. Gallant DM, Bishop MP. Piperacetazine (quide): a controlled evaluation of the elixir in chronic schizophrenic patients. Current Therapeutic Research, Clinical and Experimental 1970;12(6):387‐9. - PubMed
    1. Gallant DM, Bishop MP. Piperacetazine versus chlorpromazine (liquid). Psychopharmacology Bulletin 1970;7(1):38‐40.
Gallant 1970b {published data only}
    1. Gallant DM, Bishop MP. Piperacetazine versus chlorpromazine (tablet). Psychopharmacology Bulletin 1970;6(4):101‐3.
Johnson 1970 {published data only}
    1. Johnson AC. Piperacetazine (liquid) versus chlorpromazine. Psychopharmacology Bulletin 1970;7(1):55‐7.
Kulkarni 1972 {published data only}
    1. Johnson AC, Kulkarni AS. Piperacetazine and chlorpromazine: a comparison. American Journal of Psychiatry 1973;130(5):603‐5. - PubMed
    1. Kiev A, Guclu B, Kulkarni AS. Evaluation of piperacetazine (quide) injection in acute schizophrenics. Current Therapeutic Research, Clinical and Experimental 1972;14(7):376‐80. - PubMed
    1. Kulkarni AS. Clinical effectiveness of piperacetazine injection in schizophrenic patients: a controlled study. Advances in Biochemical Psychopharmacology 1974;9:691‐9. - PubMed
    1. McLaughlin B, Kulkarni AS. Comparative evaluation of injectable chlorpromazine and piperacetazine. Psychosomatics 1973;14:220‐1. - PubMed
    1. Simeon J, Wadud A, Itil T. A comparison of phenothiazines in managing aggressive episodes in schizophrenic patients. Hospital and Community Psychiatry 1975;26(9):574. - PubMed
Kurland 1970 {published data only}
    1. Kurland O. Piperacetazine versus Chlorpromazine‐revision of summary reported on 2/13/70 with additional subjects. Psychopharmacology Bulletin 1970;7(1):57‐60.
    1. Kurland O. Piperacetazine versus chlorpromazine. Psychopharmacology Bulletin 1970;6(4):107‐9.

References to studies excluded from this review

Small 1970 {published data only}
    1. Small S. Piperacetazine (liquid) versus chlorpromazine. Psychopharmacology Bulletin 1970;7(1):52‐4.

Additional references

Adams 2005
    1. Adams CE, Rathbone J, Thornley B, Clarke M, Borrill J, Wahlbeck K, et al. Chlorpromazine for schizophrenia: a Cochrane systematic review of 50 years of randomised controlled trials. BMC Medicine 2005;3:15. [PUBMED: 16229742] - PMC - PubMed
Adams 2014
    1. Adams CE, Awad GA, Rathbone J, Thornley B, Soares‐Weiser K. Chlorpromazine versus placebo for schizophrenia. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000284.pub3; CD000284] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Ahmed 2010
    1. Ahmed U, Jones H, Adams CE. Chlorpromazine for psychosis induced aggression or agitation. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007445.pub2; CD007445] - DOI - PubMed
Almerie 2007
    1. Almerie MQ, Alkhateeb H, Essali A, Matar HE, Rezk E. Cessation of medication for people with schizophrenia already stable on chlorpromazine. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006329; CD006329] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Altman 1996
    1. Altman DG, Bland JM. Detecting skewness from summary information. BMJ 1996;313(7066):1200. - PMC - PubMed
Anonymous 1971
    1. Anonymous. Evaluation of a new antipsychotic agent. Piperacetazine (quide). JAMA 1971;215(5):783‐4. - PubMed
Barber 2002
    1. Barber CC, Neese DT, Coyne L, Fultz J, Fonagy P. The target symptom rating: A brief clinical measure of acute psychiatric symptoms in children and adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology 2002 May 1;31(2):181‐92. - PubMed
Bland 1997
    1. Bland JM. Statistics notes. Trials randomised in clusters. BMJ 1997;315:600. - PMC - PubMed
Boissel 1999
    1. Boissel JP, Cucherat M, Li W, Chatellier G, Gueyffier F, Buyse M, et al. The problem of therapeutic efficacy indices. 3. Comparison of the indices and their use [Apercu sur la problematique des indices d'efficacite therapeutique, 3: comparaison des indices et utilisation. Groupe d'Etude des Indices D'efficacite]. Therapie 1999;54(4):405‐11. [PUBMED: 10667106] - PubMed
Busner 2007
    1. Busner J, Targum SD. The clinical global impressions scale: applying a research tool in clinical practice. Psychiatry (Edgmont) 2007 Jul;4(7):28. - PMC - PubMed
Carpenter 1994
    1. Carpenter WTJ, Buchanan RW. Schizophrenia. New England Journal of Medicine 1994;330(10):681‐90. [PUBMED: 8107719] - PubMed
Deeks 2000
    1. Deeks J. Issues in the selection for meta‐analyses of binary data. Eight International Cochrane Colloquium; 2000 Oct 25‐28; Cape Town. Cape Town: The Cochrane Collaboration, 2000.
Deeks 2011
    1. Deeks JJ, Higgins JP, Altman DG, editor(s). Chapter 9: Analysing data and undertaking meta‐analyses. In: Higgins JP, Green S editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from handbook.cochrane.org.
Divine 1992
    1. Divine GW, Brown JT, Frazier LM. The unit of analysis error in studies about physicians' patient care behavior. Journal of General Internal Medicine 1992;7(6):623‐9. - PubMed
Donner 2002
    1. Donner A, Klar N. Issues in the meta‐analysis of cluster randomized trials. Statistics in Medicine 2002;21:2971‐80. - PubMed
Egger 1997
    1. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta‐analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997;315:629‐34. - PMC - PubMed
Elbourne 2002
    1. Elbourne D, Altman DG, Higgins JP, Curtina F, Worthingtond HV, Vaile A. Meta‐analyses involving cross‐over trials: methodological issues. International Journal of Epidemiology 2002;31(1):140‐9. - PubMed
Furukawa 2006
    1. Furukawa TA, Barbui C, Cipriani A, Brambilla P, Watanabe N. Imputing missing standard deviations in meta‐analyses can provide accurate results. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2006;59(7):7‐10. - PubMed
Goldstein 1976
    1. Goldstein SE, Birnbom F. Piperacetazine versus thioridazine in the treatment of organic brain disease: a controlled double‐blind study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 1976;24(8):355‐8. - PubMed
Gulliford 1999
    1. Gulliford MC. Components of variance and intraclass correlations for the design of community‐based surveys and intervention studies: data from the Health Survey for England 1994. American Journal of Epidemiology 1999;149:876‐83. - PubMed
Higgins 2003
    1. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta‐analyses. BMJ 2003;327:557‐60. - PMC - PubMed
Higgins 2011a
    1. Higgins JP, Deeks JJ, editor(s). Chapter 7: Selecting studies and collecting data. In: Higgins JP, Green S editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from handbook.cochrane.org.
Higgins 2011b
    1. Higgins JP, Altman DG, Sterne JA, editor(s). Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JP, Green S editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from handbook.cochrane.org.
Hutton 2009
    1. Hutton JL. Number needed to treat and number needed to harm are not the best way to report and assess the results of randomised clinical trials. British Journal of Haematology 2009;146(1):27‐30. - PubMed
Kay 1986
    1. Kay SR, Opler LA, Fiszbein A. Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Manual. North Tonawanda, NY: Multi‐Health Systems, 1986.
Kishimoto 2013
    1. Kishimoto T, Agarwal V, Kishi T, Leucht S, Kane JM, Correll CU. Relapse prevention in schizophrenia: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of second‐generation antipsychotics versus first‐generation antipsychotics. Molecular Psychiatry 2013;18(1):53‐66. [PUBMED: 22124274] - PMC - PubMed
Kusumi 2015
    1. Kusumi I, Boku S, Takahashi Y. Psychopharmacology of atypical antipsychotic drugs: From the receptor binding profile to neuroprotection and neurogenesis. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences 2015;69(5):243‐58. [PUBMED: 25296946] - PubMed
Leon 2006
    1. Leon AC, Mallinckrodt CH, Chuang‐Stein C, Archibald DG, Archer GE, Chartier K. Attrition in randomized controlled clinical trials: methodological issues in psychopharmacology. Biological Psychiatry 2006;59(11):1001‐5. [PUBMED: 16905632] - PubMed
Leucht 2005a
    1. Leucht S, Kane JM, Kissling W, Hamann J, Etschel E, Engel R. Clinical implications of brief psychiatric rating scale scores. British Journal of Psychiatry 2005;187:366‐71. [PUBMED: 16199797] - PubMed
Leucht 2005b
    1. Leucht S, Kane JM, Kissling W, Hamann J, Etschel E, Engel RR. What does the PANSS mean?. Schizophrenia Research 2005;79(2‐3):231‐8. [PUBMED: 15982856] - PubMed
Leucht 2008
    1. Leucht C, Kitzmantel M, Chua WL, Kane J, Leucht S. Haloperidol versus chlorpromazine for schizophrenia. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004278.pub2; CD004278] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Liu 2009
    1. Liu X, Han S. Chlorpromazine dose for people with schizophrenia. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007778; CD007778] - DOI - PubMed
Marshall 2000
    1. Marshall M, Lockwood A, Bradley C, Adams C, Joy C, Fenton M. Unpublished rating scales: a major source of bias in randomised controlled trials of treatments for schizophrenia. British Journal of Psychiatry 2000;176:249‐52. - PubMed
Overall 1962
    1. Overall JE, Gorham DR. The brief psychiatric rating scale. Psychological Reports 1962;10:799‐812.
Palmer 2005
    1. Palmer BA, Pankratz VS, Bostwick JM. The lifetime risk of suicide in schizophrenia: a re‐examination. Archives of General Psychiatry 2005;62:247‐53. - PubMed
Rada 1972
    1. Rada RT, Donlon PT. Piperacetazine vs. thioridazine for the control of schizophrenia in outpatients. Psychosomatics 1972;13(6):373‐6. [PUBMED: 4153002] - PubMed
Rossler 2005
    1. Rossler W, Salize HJ, Os J, Riecher‐Rossler A. Size of burden of schizophrenia and psychotic disorders. European neuropsychopharmacology 2005;15(4):399‐409. [PUBMED: 15925493] - PubMed
Saha 2007
    1. Saha S, Chant D, McGrath J. A systematic review of mortality in schizophrenia: Is the differential mortality gap worsening over time?. Archives of General Psychiatry 2007;64:1123‐31. - PubMed
Saha 2013
    1. Saha KB, Sampson S, Zaman RU. Chlorpromazine versus atypical antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 7. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010631; CD010631] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Schünemann 2011
    1. Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Higgins JP, Deeks JJ, Glasziou P, et al. Chapter 12: Interpreting results and drawing conclusions. In Higgins JP, Green S editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from handbook.cochrane.org.
Shokraneh 2017
    1. Shokraneh F, Adams CE. Study‐based registers of randomized controlled trials: Starting a systematic review with data extraction or meta‐analysis. BioImpacts 2017;7(4):209‐17. [DOI: 10.15171/bi.2017.25] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Shokraneh 2018
    1. Shokraneh F, Adams CE. Gallstone, snake venom and witchcraft for schizophrenia: the challenges of classifying [schizophrenia] trials. Evidence‐Based Medicine 2018;23(Suppl. 1):A18. [DOI: 10.1136/bmjebm-2018-111024.36] - DOI
Sterne 2011
    1. Sterne JA, Egger M, Moher D, editor(s). Chapter 10: Addressing reporting biases. In: Higgins JP, Green S editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from handbook.cochrane.org.
Ukoumunne 1999
    1. Ukoumunne OC, Gulliford MC, Chinn S, Sterne JA, Burney PG. Methods for evaluating area‐wide and organisation‐based intervention in health and health care: a systematic review. Health Technology Assessment 1999;3(5):1‐75. - PubMed
Xia 2009
    1. Xia J, Adams CE, Bhagat N, Bhagat V, Bhoopathi P, El‐Sayeh H, et al. Loss to outcomes stakeholder survey: the LOSS study. Psychiatric Bulletin 2009;33(7):254‐7.

References to other published versions of this review

Eslami Shahrbabaki 2015
    1. Eslami Shahrbabaki M, Sharafkhani R, Dehnavieh R, Vali L. Chlorpromazine versus piperacetazine for schizophrenia. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015, Issue 6. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011709] - DOI - PMC - PubMed