An approach to reduce benzodiazepine and cyclopyrrolone use in general practice : a study based on a Danish population

Addressing Barriers to Reducing Prescribing and Implementing Deprescribing of Sedative-Hypnotics in Primary Care

Objective:

To describe interventions that target patient, provider, and system barriers to sedative-hypnotic (SH) deprescribing in the community and suggest strategies for healthcare teams.

Data Sources:

Ovid MEDLINE ALL and EMBASE Classic + EMBASE (March 10, 2021).

Study Selection and Data Extraction:

English-language studies in primary care settings.

Data Synthesis:

20 studies were themed as patient-related and prescriber inertia, physician skills and awareness, and health system constraints. Patient education strategies reduced SH dose for 10% to 62% of participants, leading to discontinuation in 13% to 80% of participants. Policy interventions reduced targeted medication use by 10% to 50%.

Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice:

Patient engagement and empowerment successfully convince patients to deprescribe chronic SHs. Quality improvement strategies should also consider interventions directed at prescribers, including education and training, drug utilization reviews, or computer alerts indicating a potentially inappropriate prescription by medication, age, dose, or disease. Educational interventions were effective when they facilitated patient engagement and provided information on the harms and limited evidence supporting chronic use as well as the effectiveness of alternatives. Decision support tools were less effective than prescriber education with patient engagement, although they can be readily incorporated in the workflow through prescribing software.

Conclusions:

Several strategies with demonstrated efficacy in reducing SH use in community practice were identified. Education regarding SH risks, how to taper, and potential alternatives are essential details to provide to clinicians, patients, and families. The strategies presented can guide community healthcare teams toward reducing the community burden of SH use.

Electroacupuncture for tapering off long-term benzodiazepine use: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of using electroacupuncture as an adjunct treatment in enhancing the benzodiazepine cessation rate in long-term benzodiazepine users.

METHODS

This was a randomized, assessor- and subject-blinded, controlled trial. One hundred and forty-four long-term benzodiazepine users were randomly assigned to receive either electroacupuncture or placebo acupuncture (a sham itervention using non-invasive placebo needles) combined with a gradual benzodiazepine tapering schedule for 4 weeks. The primary outcome was the cessation rate of benzodiazepine use. Subjects were assessed on their benzodiazepine usage, benzodiazepine withdrawal symptoms, insomnia severity, and anxiety and depressive symptoms at baseline, week 6 and week 16.

RESULTS

The cessation rates of the electroacupuncture and placebo acupuncture groups at 12 weeks post-treatment were 9.17% and 10.83%, respectively. Both groups showed a reduction in benzodiazepine usage by a self-completed drug record at week 16 (compared to baseline: electroacupuncture group -40.23% versus placebo acupuncture group -48.76%). However, no significant between-group differences were found in the benzodiazepine cessation rate, reduction in benzodiazepine usage, and other secondary measures across all the study time points.

CONCLUSIONS

Electroacupuncture showed a similar cessation rate in benzodiazepine use to that of non-invasive placebo acupuncture in long-term users during a 4-week gradual tapering schedule. The evidence did not support advantages of electroacupuncture over non-invasive placebo acupuncture on reducing insomnia, anxiety, depression, or other withdrawal symptoms during the gradual tapering schedule. Despite a 40% decrease in the benzodiazepine usage in both groups, the effects may be attributed to the non-specific effects of acupuncture.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT02475538.

A systematic review of regulatory and educational interventions to reduce the burden associated with the prescriptions of sedative-hypnotics in adults treated for sleep disorders

BACKGROUND

The burden of Sedative-Hypnotics (SHs) has been known since the 1980s. Yet, their consumption remains high. A systematic review of the literature should help to assess efficient interventions to improve the appropriate use of SHs in sleep disorders.

OBJECTIVES

To identify and assess regulatory and educational interventions designed to improve the appropriate use of SHs for insomnia treatment.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature according to PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search covering the period 1980-2015 was carried out in Medline, Web of Science, Embase and PsycInfo. We included studies reporting the implementation of regulatory or educational strategies directed towards patients and/or healthcare professionals to improve the appropriate use of SHs to treat insomnia in the community, hospitals and nursing homes.

RESULTS

Thirty-one studies were included: 23 assessed educational interventions (recommendations by mail/email, computer alerts, meetings, mass media campaigns, prescription profile), 8 assessed regulatory interventions (prescription rule restriction, end of reimbursement). The most recent was implemented in 2009. Restrictive prescription rules were effective to reduce the consumption of targeted SHs but led to a switch to other non-recommended SHs. Among educational interventions, only 3 studies out of 7 reported positive results of mono-faceted interventions; whereas, 13 out of the 16 multi-faceted interventions were reported as efficient: particularly, the active involvement of healthcare professionals and patients and the spread of information through mass media were successful. The risk of bias was high for 24 studies (mainly due to the design), moderate for 3 studies and weak for 4 studies.

CONCLUSION

Educational multifaceted studies are presented as the most efficient. But further better designed studies are needed to make evidence-based results more generalizable.

Postoperative use of hypnotics is associated with increased length of stay after uncomplicated surgery for colorectal cancer

Background/Aims:

Hypnotics are used to treat perioperative sleep disorders. These drugs are associated with a higher risk of adverse effects among patients undergoing surgery. This study aims to quantify the use of hypnotics and factors influencing the administration of hypnotics in relation to colorectal cancer surgery.

Method:

A retrospective cohort study of 1979 patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery.

Results:

In all, 381 patients (19%) received new treatment with hypnotics. Two of the six surgical centres used hypnotics less often (odds ratio (95% confidence interval), 0.24 (0.16–0.38) and 0.20 (0.12–0.35)). Active smokers (odds ratio (95% confidence interval), 1.57 (1.11–2.24)) and patients receiving perioperative blood transfusion (odds ratio (95% confidence interval), 1.58 (1.10–2.26)) had increased likelihood of receiving hypnotics. In the uncomplicated cases, a multivariable linear regression analysis showed that consumption of hypnotics postoperatively was significantly associated with increased length of stay (1.5 (0.9–2.2) days).

Conclusion:

One in five patients began treatment with hypnotics after colorectal cancer surgery. Postoperative use of hypnotics was associated with an increased length of stay for uncomplicated cases of colorectal cancer surgery.

Benzodiazepines revisited--will we ever learn?

AIMS

To re-examine various aspects of the benzodiazepines (BZDs), widely prescribed for 50 years, mainly to treat anxiety and insomnia. It is a descriptive review based on the Okey Lecture delivered at the Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, in November 2010.

METHODS

A search of the literature was carried out in the Medline, Embase and Cochrane Collaboration databases, using the codeword 'benzodiazepine(s)', alone and in conjunction with various terms such as 'dependence', 'abuse', etc. Further hand-searches were made based on the reference lists of key papers. As 60,000 references were found, this review is not exhaustive. It concentrates on the adverse effects, dependence and abuse.

RESULTS

Almost from their introduction the BZDs have been controversial, with polarized opinions, advocates pointing out their efficacy, tolerability and patient acceptability, opponents deprecating their adverse effects, dependence and abuse liability. More recently, the advent of alternative and usually safer medications has opened up the debate. The review noted a series of adverse effects that continued to cause concern, such as cognitive and psychomotor impairment. In addition, dependence and abuse remain as serious problems. Despite warnings and guidelines, usage of these drugs remains at a high level. The limitations in their use both as choice of therapy and with respect to conservative dosage and duration of use are highlighted. The distinction between low-dose 'iatrogenic' dependence and high-dose abuse/misuse is emphasized.

CONCLUSIONS

The practical problems with the benzodiazepines have persisted for 50 years, but have been ignored by many practitioners and almost all official bodies. The risk-benefit ratio of the benzodiazepines remains positive in most patients in the short term (2-4 weeks) but is unestablished beyond that time, due mainly to the difficulty in preventing short-term use from extending indefinitely with the risk of dependence. Other research issues include the possibility of long-term brain changes and evaluating the role of the benzodiazepine antagonist, flumazenil, in aiding withdrawal.

Benzodiazepine and cyclopyrrolone reduction in general practice--does this lead to change in the use of antidepressants? A study based on a Danish population

BACKGROUND

The consumption of benzodiazepines and cyclopyrrolones has in recent years attracted considerable interest due to serious side effects. In twelve health care practices in Denmark a few simple rules to reduce the consumption were established. Telephone recipes were abolished, and prescriptions were issued for only a single month's usage and only following personal consultation. These rules are generally in accordance with recommendations applicable in, for example, England, Norway and Denmark. After 15 months, consumption was roughly halved. There is a general lack of knowledge about whether an intervention as described above leads to a substitution with other medicines. Here, especially antidepressants are in the spotlight.

METHODS

In the twelve health care practices, the consumption of antidepressants before, during and after the intervention was followed.

RESULTS

The total consumption of antidepressants rose by 5.2% per year during the 18 month observation period. This should be compared to the fact that the county had an increase of 8.6% per year during the same period. This increase occurred mainly in the group of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.

LIMITATIONS

The study does not provide information about prescription changes for individual users, or for changes in the number of users. The study is limited to the total prescribed volume of antidepressants.

CONCLUSION

The average prescription volume for the twelve health care practices corresponds to a relative decline. Fears that an intervention of the type mentioned above would lead to an uncontrollable increase in the consumption of antidepressants are unfounded.

Withdrawing benzodiazepines in primary care

The use of benzodiazepine anxiolytics and hypnotics continues to excite controversy. Views differ from expert to expert and from country to country as to the extent of the problem, or even whether long-term benzodiazepine use actually constitutes a problem. The adverse effects of these drugs have been extensively documented and their effectiveness is being increasingly questioned. Discontinuation is usually beneficial as it is followed by improved psychomotor and cognitive functioning, particularly in the elderly. The potential for dependence and addiction have also become more apparent. The licensing of SSRIs for anxiety disorders has widened the prescribers' therapeutic choices (although this group of medications also have their own adverse effects). Melatonin agonists show promise in some forms of insomnia. Accordingly, it is now even more imperative that long-term benzodiazepine users be reviewed with respect to possible discontinuation. Strategies for discontinuation start with primary-care practitioners, who are still the main prescribers.This review sets out the stratagems that have been evaluated, concentrating on those of a pharmacological nature. Simple interventions include basic monitoring of repeat prescriptions and assessment by the doctor. Even a letter from the primary-care practitioner pointing out the continuing usage of benzodiazepines and questioning their need can result in reduction or cessation of use. Pharmacists also have a role to play in monitoring the use of benzodiazepines, although mobilizing their assistance is not yet routine. Such stratagems can avoid the use of specialist back-up services such as psychiatrists, home care, and addiction and alcohol misuse treatment facilities.Pharmacological interventions for benzodiazepine dependence have been reviewed in detail in a recent Cochrane review, but only eight studies proved adequate for analysis. Carbamazepine was the only drug that appeared to have any useful adjunctive properties for assisting in the discontinuation of benzodiazepines but the available data are insufficient for recommendations to be made regarding its use. Antidepressants can help if the patient is depressed before withdrawal or develops a depressive syndrome during withdrawal. The clearest strategy was to taper the medication; abrupt cessation can only be justified if a very serious adverse effect supervenes during treatment. No clear evidence suggests the optimum rate of tapering, and schedules vary from 4 weeks to several years. Our recommendation is to aim for withdrawal in <6 months, otherwise the withdrawal process can become the morbid focus of the patient's existence. Substitution of diazepam for another benzodiazepine can be helpful, at least logistically, as diazepam is available in a liquid formulation.Psychological interventions range from simple support through counselling to expert cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT). Group therapy may be helpful as it at least provides support from other patients. The value of counselling is not established and it can be quite time consuming. CBT needs to be administered by fully trained and experienced personnel but seems effective, particularly in obviating relapse.The outcome of successful withdrawal is gratifying, both in terms of improved functioning and abstinence from the benzodiazepine usage. Economic benefits also ensue.Some of the principles of withdrawing benzodiazepines are listed. Antidepressants may be helpful, as may some symptomatic remedies. Care must be taken not to substitute one drug dependence problem for the original one.

Current awareness: Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety

In order to keep subscribers up‐to‐date with the latest developments in their field, John Wiley & Sons are providing a current awareness service in each issue of the journal. The bibliography contains newly published material in the field of pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety. Each bibliography is divided into 20 sections: 1 Reviews; 2 General; 3 Anti‐infective Agents; 4 Cardiovascular System Agents; 5 CNS Depressive Agents; 6 Non‐steroidal Anti‐inflammatory Agents; 7 CNS Agents; 8 Anti‐neoplastic Agents; 9 Haematological Agents; 10 Neuroregulator‐Blocking Agents; 11 Dermatological Agents; 12 Immunosuppressive Agents; 13 Autonomic Agents; 14 Respiratory System Agents; 15 Neuromuscular Agents; 16 Reproductive System Agents; 17 Gastrointestinal System Agents; 18 Anti‐inflammatory Agents ‐ Steroidal; 19 Teratogens/fetal exposure; 20 Others. Within each section, articles are listed in alphabetical order with respect to author. If, in the preceding period, no publications are located relevant to any one of these headings, that section will be omitted.