Reading Time: 12 minutes

Well hey there, fellow road warriors and ER heroes. Now, I know what you’re thinking – “Who’s this fella telling us about medications?” – and that’s fair. I’m just a guy who’s been running calls for twenty-three years, learning something new every day, and trying to be a goldfish when it comes to my mistakes. But there’s something that’s been weighing on my heart like a soggy biscuit, and I reckon it’s time we had ourselves an honest conversation.

You know how I always say that the happiest animal on Earth is a goldfish? Well, sometimes in medicine, we need to be goldfish too – forget the old ways that aren’t serving us anymore and embrace something better. And friends, it’s time we talk about breaking up with diphenhydramine. I know, I know – it’s been as reliable as a Maryland sunrise over the Chesapeake Bay, but hear me out, because our patients deserve the very best we can give them.

The Problem with Our Old Reliable

Now, I’m not here to throw diphenhydramine under the bus like it’s some villain in a mustache-twirling competition. This medication has been faithful as a golden retriever for decades. But you know what they say – just because you’ve always done something one way doesn’t mean it’s the best way. Sometimes the bravest thing you can do is admit when it’s time for a change.

Let’s talk about what diphenhydramine actually does in the body, because understanding this is like knowing why a good strategy works – it’s all about the details. Diphenhydramine is what we call a first-generation antihistamine, and bless its heart, it crosses the blood-brain barrier like it’s got VIP access to an exclusive event. But here’s the thing – once it gets up there, it doesn’t just block H1 receptors. Oh no, that would be too simple. This medication is what pharmacologists call “dirty,” which means it hits more targets than a kid with a BB gun in a room full of tin cans.

It messes with muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (hello there, anticholinergic effects), blocks sodium channels (that’s some serious cardiotoxicity potential), and inhibits serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake. Basically, diphenhydramine is like that overeager team member who tries to help with everyone’s job but ends up causing more confusion than a traffic jam in a thunderstorm.

The Anticholinergic Pickle

Now, the anticholinergic effects – that’s where things get as messy as a toddler with finger paints. We’ve all seen it happen: give a sweet elderly patient 25mg of diphenhydramine for their “allergic reaction” (which, between you and me, is probably just anxiety dressed up in a fancy hat), and suddenly they’re more confused than someone trying to assemble IKEA furniture without instructions.

These anticholinergic effects include dry mouth, trouble peeing, constipation, a racing heart, overheating, and confusion that would make a tourist in a foreign country look confident. In our older folks, these effects can stick around longer than a bad song stuck in your head and significantly increase their risk of falling, getting delirious, and staying in the hospital longer than anyone wants.

Studies have shown us – and I mean really good studies, not just someone’s cousin’s opinion – that medications with high anticholinergic burden are associated with thinking problems and increased mortality in elderly patients. That’s not the kind of outcome we’re aiming for, if you know what I mean.

Heart Troubles That Aren’t the Good Kind

Here’s something that should make us pause and think twice: diphenhydramine has some serious effects on the heart beyond just making it race from those anticholinergic shenanigans. It blocks sodium channels, which can lead to electrical problems in the heart and dangerous rhythms, especially when folks take too much.

I’ve seen patients come into the ER after taking “just a few extra Benadryl to help me sleep” who ended up with heart rhythms that looked like someone let a toddler draw their EKG. The medication also weakens the heart’s pumping action, which is about as helpful as a chocolate teapot when you’re dealing with someone who already has heart problems.

The Sleepy Time Problem

Let’s chat about the sedation issue, because this one’s as clear as day. Sure, diphenhydramine makes people drowsy, but it’s not the good kind of sleepy. It messes with REM sleep and can cause rebound insomnia – which is like promising someone the best crab cakes in Maryland and then serving them a sad sandwich.

More importantly for us folks in the field, that sedation can hide important signs and make it harder to figure out what’s really going on with our patients. I remember a call where we gave diphenhydramine to a young person for what looked like an allergic reaction. The sedation was so strong that we couldn’t properly monitor their breathing or check their neurological status. Turns out they’d taken some recreational substances that didn’t play nice with the diphenhydramine. Not exactly our finest hour – made us feel about as useful as a chocolate teapot.

“But Benadryl Works So Fast!” – Let’s Talk About Speed and Strategy

Now, I know what you’re thinking, and I can hear it loud and clear: “Hold on there, friend, Benadryl hits fast and hard. When I’ve got someone having a reaction in the back of my ambulance, I need something that works quickly!” Trust me, I’ve heard this argument more times than I can count, and it usually comes from the same paramedic who still thinks every chest pain needs a full bottle of aspirin.

Let’s look at the real numbers, because data doesn’t lie – unlike some of my stories about Maryland crab cakes:

Diphenhydramine IV: Peak effect in 15-30 minutes, lasts 4-6 hours
Cetirizine IV: Peak effect in 30-60 minutes, lasts 24 hours
Diphenhydramine PO: Peak effect in 1-3 hours (yeah, that oral Benadryl isn’t doing much in the first hour)

So yes, IV diphenhydramine does work a bit faster than IV cetirizine – about 15-30 minutes faster. But here’s the thing – and this is important – most of our transport times are under an hour anyway. Are we really going to put our patients through all those nasty side effects for the sake of 15 minutes? That’s like choosing to eat gas station sushi because it’s five minutes closer.

The Real Emergency MVP

Here’s what I’ve learned after all these years on the road: if someone is having a true emergency allergic reaction – meaning their airway is closing, they can’t breathe, or their blood pressure is tanking – NO antihistamine is your primary treatment. Not diphenhydramine, not cetirizine, not even magical fairy dust. Epinephrine is your MVP, your life-saver, your most important tool.

I’ve seen too many providers get fixated on giving Benadryl quickly while the epi sits unused. If your patient needs something “fast,” they need epinephrine, not an antihistamine. The antihistamine is support staff – important, but not the star of the show.

When Speed Actually Matters (And When It Doesn’t)

Let me break this down clearly:

True Anaphylaxis: Epinephrine first, always and forever. The antihistamine is the follow-up treatment – important but secondary. That 15-minute difference doesn’t matter when you’re managing airways and blood pressure.

Hives and Itching: These aren’t usually life-threatening emergencies. The patient will survive those extra 15 minutes for cetirizine to kick in, and they’ll be much better off without feeling like they’ve been hit by the confusion bus.

Suspected Food Allergies: Again, if it’s truly severe, you need epi first. If it’s mild, the patient can wait for a cleaner medication that won’t make them feel like they’re in a fog thicker than a London morning.

The “Faster” Myth Busted

Here’s something I learned the hard way, like most of life’s important lessons: just because a medication causes immediate side effects doesn’t mean it’s working faster therapeutically. I used to think diphenhydramine was “working” because patients got drowsy quickly. But drowsiness isn’t the same as actually blocking histamine – that’s like thinking you’re winning because you’re making noise, when really you’re just creating chaos.

Studies comparing cetirizine to diphenhydramine show that while diphenhydramine causes faster sedation, the actual reduction in symptoms happens at similar rates. The difference is that cetirizine provides relief without turning your patient into a confused person who thinks the IV pole is their long-lost relative.

Transport Time Reality Check

Let’s be honest about our transport times. The average EMS transport is 30-45 minutes. Even if diphenhydramine kicks in 15 minutes faster, by the time we’re rolling into the ED, both medications are working. But with diphenhydramine, you’re handing off a sedated, potentially confused patient. With cetirizine, you’re handing off someone who can still participate in their care.

The bottom line on speed: if your patient needs something that works in under 15 minutes, they need epinephrine, not Benadryl. If they can wait 15 minutes, they can wait 30 minutes for a much safer medication.

“But What About the Cost?” – Let’s Talk Economics

Now, I can hear some administrators in the back saying, “We can’t afford the fancy new medication!” – and I get it. Healthcare budgets are tighter than a new pair of boots. But let’s look at the real numbers, because sometimes spending a little more upfront saves you a lot more down the road.

Oral Medication Costs – The Pleasant Surprise

For oral dosing, the cost difference is actually pretty minimal:

  • Diphenhydramine 25mg: About $3-10 for 30 tablets
  • Cetirizine 10mg: About $2-10 for 30 tablets
  • Loratadine 10mg: About $3-8 for 30 tablets

Wait, hold up there, partner. Did you catch that? Generic cetirizine actually costs LESS than diphenhydramine in many cases. So the “cost” argument for oral medications just went out the window.

IV Medication Costs – Where Things Get Interesting

Here’s where the numbers get bigger:

  • IV Diphenhydramine 50mg: Approximately $30-50 per vial
  • IV Cetirizine 10mg: Approximately $320 per dose, or about 10 times more than IV diphenhydramine

I can hear the gasps from the supply officers already. “Three hundred dollars?! Are you kidding me?” But hold on, because this is where healthcare economics gets interesting.

The Total Cost of Care – The Real Game Changer

A 2022 budget impact analysis looked at the real costs of using IV cetirizine versus IV diphenhydramine in emergency departments, and the results were eye-opening. When researchers factored in:

  • Shorter ED visits (less sedation = faster discharge)
  • Fewer 24-hour return visits
  • Reduced complications from anticholinergic effects
  • Less nursing time spent managing confused patients

They found that hospitals actually had a POSITIVE net budget impact of $27,876 to $55,752 per year when switching to IV cetirizine. Let me say that again: hospitals made money by using the more expensive medication.

The Hidden Costs of Diphenhydramine

What we don’t often calculate are the hidden costs of using diphenhydramine:

Extended Transport Times: That confused, agitated elderly patient who’s now trying to climb out of the stretcher? That’s extra time, extra hands, potentially a longer transport because you’re dealing with complications instead of the original problem.

Hospital Complications: Patients given diphenhydramine had longer ED stays and more return visits within 24 hours. Every extra hour in the ED costs money, and readmissions are increasingly penalized by insurance.

Fall Risk: An 82-year-old with anticholinergic delirium who falls and breaks a hip? That’s a $40,000+ hospital stay that could have been prevented with a $10 medication.

Legal Liability: I’m not saying you’ll get sued, but when a family asks why grandma became confused and fell after receiving medication that’s known to cause confusion in elderly patients, and there were safer alternatives available… well, that’s a conversation I wouldn’t want to have with anyone, let alone a lawyer.

The Value Proposition

Here’s how I explain it to administrators: Would you rather spend $30 on diphenhydramine and then deal with a confused patient who requires extra monitoring, has a longer hospital stay, and potentially returns to the ED? Or spend $320 on cetirizine and have an alert patient who goes home faster and stays home?

The research shows that despite the higher upfront drug cost, the total cost of care is actually lower with IV cetirizine. It’s like buying quality equipment – it costs more upfront, but it works better and causes fewer problems.

Evidence-Based Alternatives for Emergency Medicine

Alright, enough talk about problems. Let’s talk solutions, because that’s what we’re here for – making things better for our patients, one call at a time.

The Route of Administration Reality Check

Here’s something crucial that might affect your protocols: currently, cetirizine is only FDA-approved for IV administration, not intramuscular injection. Cetirizine is the only second-generation H1 antihistamine approved for intravenous use, and the prescribing information specifically states IV push over 1-2 minutes.

Loratadine and fexofenadine? They’re only available in oral formulations – no injectable versions exist at all. So if your patient truly can’t take oral medication and you need IM access, you’re still looking at first-generation options like diphenhydramine or hydroxyzine (though hydroxyzine injection isn’t FDA-approved for allergic reactions either).

This is actually a significant limitation that we need to acknowledge. In EMS, we love our IM routes for patients who are vomiting, have altered mental status, or when IV access is challenging. But for now, if you want the benefits of second-generation antihistamines, you need either oral administration or IV access for cetirizine.

For True Allergic Reactions and Anaphylaxis

Cetirizine IV – This is our game-changer when we have IV access. Compared with IV diphenhydramine, IV cetirizine has an improved safety profile including less sedation, fewer contraindications, fewer warnings and precautions, and less risk in the elderly population. The typical dose is 10mg IV push over 1-2 minutes, and it provides 24-hour coverage.

Cetirizine (Zyrtec) 10mg PO or Loratadine (Claritin) 10mg PO for patients who can take oral medications. Both provide superior H1 receptor blockade without crossing the blood-brain barrier significantly. Studies show they’re more effective than diphenhydramine for urticaria with minimal sedation.

For severe reactions, we still need epinephrine first and foremost – no antihistamine replaces epi in true anaphylaxis. H2 blockers like famotidine 20mg IV can be added for additional histamine receptor coverage.

For Nausea and Vomiting

Ondansetron (Zofran) 4-8mg IV/ODT is far superior to diphenhydramine for nausea. It’s a selective 5-HT3 receptor antagonist with minimal side effects and doesn’t cause the sedation and confusion we see with diphenhydramine.

Metoclopramide (Reglan) 10mg IV is another option, though we need to be cautious about movement disorders, especially in young patients.

For Agitation (When Appropriate)

Instead of using diphenhydramine as a chemical restraint (which we shouldn’t be doing anyway), consider haloperidol 2.5-5mg IM for true psychiatric emergencies, or better yet, de-escalation techniques and proper psychiatric evaluation.

The Research Behind the Change

The evidence against first-generation antihistamines in certain populations is overwhelming. The 2019 Beers Criteria strongly recommends avoiding diphenhydramine in adults 65 and older due to increased risk of cognitive impairment, delirium, and falls.

Multiple studies have shown that anticholinergic medications like diphenhydramine are associated with:

  • Increased risk of dementia
  • Higher mortality rates in elderly patients
  • Prolonged hospital stays
  • Increased fall risk
  • Worse outcomes in patients with existing cognitive impairment

A 2018 study in JAMA Internal Medicine found that cumulative use of anticholinergic medications was associated with a nearly 50% increased risk of dementia.

Making the Transition

I get it – change is harder than explaining technology to your grandparents. But we’ve made bigger changes before, and we’ve done it because the evidence showed us a better way. Remember when we stopped using high-dose epinephrine in cardiac arrest? Or when we moved away from routine backboarding? Those changes were tough too, but they were based on solid evidence, and they made us better providers.

Start by advocating in your service for protocol updates. Present the evidence to your medical director with facts, passion, and a clear vision of how it’ll make patient care better. Most progressive EMS systems are already making this transition. If your system isn’t ready for a complete switch, at least push for age-based restrictions and clear indications for when diphenhydramine is truly necessary versus when alternatives would be better.

The Bottom Line

Look, I’ve been doing this long enough to remember when we carried more medications than sense and used backboards on everyone. Medicine evolves, and so should we – that’s how we stay at the top of our game. Diphenhydramine served us well for decades, but it’s time to retire this old workhorse in favor of medications that are safer, more effective, and cause fewer problems for our patients.

Our patients trust us to give them the best care possible, and that trust is precious. That means using the best available evidence to guide our treatment decisions, even when it means letting go of old habits that feel comfortable.

Every time we choose a second-generation antihistamine over diphenhydramine for an appropriate patient, we’re reducing their risk of confusion, falls, and prolonged hospitalization. We’re showing them the same care we’d want for our own families – and that’s what this job is really about.

We didn’t become paramedics to do things the way they’ve always been done. We became paramedics to help people, to make a difference, to be the person someone calls when they need help the most. And sometimes, helping people means admitting that there’s a better way.

So let’s have those conversations with our medical directors, update our protocols, and move our profession forward. Our patients – especially our elderly patients – will thank us for it, even if they’re not confused enough from anticholinergic effects to remember to do so.

Stay curious, stay humble, and remember: just because we’ve always done it that way doesn’t mean we should keep doing it that way. Be a goldfish when it comes to old habits, but be an elephant when it comes to learning new ways to help people.

What are your thoughts on transitioning away from diphenhydramine? Have you seen these issues in your practice? Share your experiences – we’re all in this together, trying to provide the best care possible for our communities.

References

  1. American Geriatrics Society. (2019). American Geriatrics Society 2019 Updated AGS Beers Criteria for potentially inappropriate medication use in older adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 67(4), 674-694.
  2. Coupland, C. A., Hill, T., Dening, T., Morriss, R., Arthur, A., Moore, M., … & Hippisley-Cox, J. (2019). Anticholinergic drug exposure and the risk of dementia: a nested case-control study. JAMA Internal Medicine, 179(8), 1084-1093.
  3. Gray, S. L., Anderson, M. L., Dublin, S., Hanlon, J. T., Hubbard, R., Walker, R., … & Larson, E. B. (2015). Cumulative use of strong anticholinergics and incident dementia: a prospective cohort study. JAMA Internal Medicine, 175(3), 401-407.
  4. Blaiss, M. S., Bernstein, J. A., Kessler, A., Pines, J. M., Camargo Jr, C. A., Fulgham, P., … & Moellman, J. (2022). The role of cetirizine in the changing landscape of IV antihistamines: a narrative review. Advances in Therapy, 39(1), 178-192.
  5. Church, M. K., & Church, M. K. (2013). Antihistamines and allergen immunotherapy. Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology, 45(1), 64-79.
  6. Simons, F. E. R., & Simons, K. J. (2011). Histamine and H1-antihistamines: celebrating a century of progress. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 128(6), 1139-1150.
  7. Camargo Jr, C. A., Gomes, A. V., Haumschild, R. J., et al. (2021). Cetirizine versus diphenhydramine in the treatment of acute urticaria in the emergency department: A randomized double-blind clinical trial. Academic Emergency Medicine, 28(12), 1342-1353.
  8. Kessler, A., Yoon, J., Globerman, D., et al. (2022). Budget impact of intravenous cetirizine hydrochloride for the treatment of acute urticaria in the emergency department setting. American Health & Drug Benefits, 15(3), 124-133.
  9. Borowy, C. S., Mukerjee, A., & Nazir, J. (2023). Antihistamine toxicity. In StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing.
  10. Fox, C., Richardson, K., Maidment, I. D., et al. (2011). Anticholinergic medication use and cognitive impairment in the older population: the medical research council cognitive function and ageing study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 59(8), 1477-1483.
  11. Tune, L. E. (2001). Anticholinergic effects of medication in elderly patients. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 62(11), 11-14.
  12. Lieberman, P., Nicklas, R. A., Randolph, C., et al. (2015). Anaphylaxis—a practice parameter update 2015. Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, 115(5), 341-384.
  13. Zhai, H., & Maibach, H. I. (2001). Antihistamines in dermatology: an update. Skin Toxicology, 14(1), 1-18.
  14. Elman, I., Sokolowska, M., Hofer, K. S., et al. (2020). Identification and clinical relevance of quality criteria for allergy patient reported outcome measures: a systematic review. Clinical and Translational Allergy, 10(1), 1-11.
  15. Hindmarch, I., Shamsi, Z., & Stanley, N. (1999). A double-blind, placebo-controlled investigation of the effects of fexofenadine, loratadine and promethazine on cognitive and psychomotor function. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 48(2), 200-206.
  16. Banerji, A., Long, A. A., & Camargo Jr, C. A. (2007). Diphenhydramine versus nonsedating antihistamines for acute allergic reactions: a literature review. Allergy and Asthma Proceedings, 28(4), 418-426.
  17. Verster, J. C., de Weert, A. M., Bijtjes, S. I., et al. (2003). Driving ability after acute and sub-chronic administration of levocetirizine and diphenhydramine: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Psychopharmacology, 169(1), 84-90.
  18. Moss, A. J., Chaikin, P., & Garcia, J. D. (1999). A review of the cardiac systemic side-effects of antihistamines: ebastine. Clinical and Experimental Allergy, 29(2), 200-205.
  19. Hampel, F., Ratner, P., Mansfield, L., et al. (2003). Fexofenadine hydrochloride, 180 mg, exhibits equivalent efficacy to cetirizine, 10 mg, with less drowsiness in patients with moderate-to-severe seasonal allergic rhinitis. Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology, 91(4), 354-361.
  20. Lexchin, J., Bero, L. A., Djulbegovic, B., & Clark, O. (2003). Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ, 326(7400), 1167-1170.