Dataset Information

Brief interventions targeting long-term benzodiazepine and Z-drug use in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: AIMS:To assess the effectiveness of brief interventions in primary care aimed at reducing or discontinuing long-term benzodiazepine/Z-drug (BZRA) use. METHOD:Systematic review of randomized controlled trials of brief interventions in primary care settings aimed at reducing or discontinuing long-term BZRA use in adults taking BZRAs for ? 3 months. Four electronic databases were searched: PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CENTRAL. The primary outcome was BZRA use, classified as discontinuation or reduction by ? 25%. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was used to retrospectively code behavioural determinants targeted by the interventions. The Behaviour Change Technique (BCT) Taxonomy was used to identify the interventions' active components. Study-specific estimates were pooled, where appropriate, to yield summary risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Pearson's correlations were used to determine the relationship between intervention effect size and the results of both the TDF and BCT coding. RESULTS:Eight studies were included (n = 2071 patients). Compared with usual care, intervention patients were more likely to have discontinued BZRA use at 6 months (eight studies, RR = 2.73, 95% CI = 1.84-4.06) and 12 months post-intervention (two studies, RR = 3.41, 95% CI = 2.22-5.25). TDF domains 'knowledge', 'memory, attention and decision processes', 'environmental context and resources' and 'social influences' were identified as having been included in every intervention. Commonly identified BCTs included 'information about health consequences', 'credible source' and 'adding objects to the environment'. There was no detectable relationship between effect size and the results of either the TDF or BCT coding. CONCLUSION:Brief interventions delivered in primary care are more effective than usual care in reducing and discontinuing long-term benzodiazepine/Z-drug use.

SUBMITTER: Lynch T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7891570 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Brief interventions targeting long-term benzodiazepine and Z-drug use in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Lynch Tom T Ryan Cristín C Hughes Carmel M CM Presseau Justin J van Allen Zachary M ZM Bradley Colin P CP Cadogan Cathal A CA

Addiction (Abingdon, England) 20200211 9

<h4>Aims</h4>To assess the effectiveness of brief interventions in primary care aimed at reducing or discontinuing long-term benzodiazepine/Z-drug (BZRA) use.<h4>Method</h4>Systematic review of randomized controlled trials of brief interventions in primary care settings aimed at reducing or discontinuing long-term BZRA use in adults taking BZRAs for ≥ 3 months. Four electronic databases were searched: PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CENTRAL. The primary outcome was BZRA use, classified as discontin ...[more]

PMID: 31985127

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBenzodiazepine receptor agonists (BZRAs) are often prescribed for long-term use. However, guidelines recommend limiting prescriptions to short-term use (< 4 weeks) to reduce the risk of adverse effects and dependence. A recent systematic review reported that brief interventions targeting long-term BZRA use in primary care (e.g., short consultations, written letters to patients) were effective in helping patients to discontinue BZRA medication. However, the complexity of these interventions has not been examined in detail. This study aimed to apply the intervention Complexity Assessment Tool for Systematic Reviews (iCAT_SR) to brief interventions targeting long-term BZRA use. METHODS: Two reviewers independently assessed the interventions using the six core iCAT_SR dimensions: organisational level/ category targeted, behaviour targeted, number of intervention components, degree of tailoring, skill level required by those delivering and receiving the intervention. The four optional iCAT_SR dimensions were applied where possible. A scoring system was using to calculate a complexity score for each intervention. Pearson's correlations were used to assess the relationship between intervention complexity and effect size, as well as the relationship between intervention complexity and number of component behaviour change techniques (BCTs). Inter-rater reliability was calculated using Cohen's Kappa coefficient.ResultsFour of the six core iCAT_SR dimensions were applied to the interventions with high inter-rater reliability (Cohen's Kappa = 0.916). Application of the four optional dimensions was prevented by a lack of detail in study reports. Intervention complexity scores ranged from 8 to 11 (median: 11). There was no relationship detected between intervention complexity and either intervention effect size or number of component BCTs.ConclusionsThis study adds to the literature on worked examples of the practical application of the iCAT_SR. The findings highlight how more detailed reporting of interventions is needed in order to optimise the application of iCAT_SR and its potential to differentiate between interventions across the full range of complexity dimensions. Further work is needed to establish the validity of applying a scoring system to iCAT_SR assessments.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough a number of brief intervention approaches for drug use are based on motivational interviewing (MI), relatively little is known about whether the quality of motivational interviewing skills is associated with intervention outcomes.MethodThe current study examined whether indices of motivational interviewing skill were associated with subsequent drug use outcomes following two different MI-based brief interventions delivered in primary care; a 15 min Brief Negotiated Interview (BNI) and a 45 min adaptation of motivational interviewing (MOTIV). Audio recordings from 351 participants in a randomized controlled trial for drug use in primary care were coded using the Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity Scale, (MITI Version 3.1.1). Separate negative binomial regression analyses, stratified by intervention condition, were used to examine the associations between six MITI skill variables and the number of days that the participant used his/her main drug 6 weeks after study entry.ResultsOnly one of the MITI variables (% reflections to questions) was significantly associated with the frequency of drug use in the MOTIV condition and this was opposite to the hypothesized direction (global p=0.01, adjusted IRR 1.50, 95%CI: 1.03-2.20 for middle vs. lowest tertile [higher skill, more drug use]. None were significantly associated with drug use in the BNI condition. Secondary analyses similarly failed to find consistent predictors of better drug outcomes.ConclusionOverall, this study provides little evidence to suggest that the level of MI intervention skills are linked with better drug use outcomes among people who use drugs and receive brief interventions in primary care. Findings should be considered in light of the fact that data from the study are from negative trial of SBI and was limited to primary care patients. Future work should consider alternative ways of examining these process variables (i.e., comparing thresholds of proficient versus non-proficient skills) or considering alternative methods of coding intervention skills.

Project description:ObjectivesThere are high levels of inappropriate antibiotic use in long-term care facilities (LTCFs). Our objective was to examine evidence of the effectiveness of interventions designed to reduce antibiotic use and/or inappropriate use in LTCFs.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL from 1997 until November 2018.Eligibility criteriaControlled and uncontrolled studies in LTCFs measuring intervention effects on rates of overall antibiotic use and/or appropriateness of use were included. Secondary outcomes were intervention implementation barriers from process evaluations.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers independently applied the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care group's resources to classify interventions and assess risk of bias. Meta-analyses used random effects models to pool results.ResultsOf include studies (n=19), 10 had a control group and 17 had a high risk of bias. All interventions had multiple components. Eight studies (with high risk of bias) showed positive impacts on outcomes and included one of the following interventions: audit and feedback, introduction of care pathways or an infectious disease team. Meta-analyses on change in the percentage of residents on antibiotics (pooled relative risk (RR) (three studies, 6862 residents): 0.85, 95% CI: 0.61 to 1.18), appropriateness of decision to treat with antibiotics (pooled RR (three studies, 993 antibiotic orders): 1.10, 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.91) and appropriateness of antibiotic selection for respiratory tract infections (pooled RR (three studies, 292 orders): 1.15, 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.40), showed no significant intervention effects. However, meta-analyses only included results from intervention groups since most studies lacked a control group. Insufficient data prevented meta-analysis on other outcomes. Process evaluations (n=7) noted poor intervention adoption, low physician engagement and high staff turnover as barriers.ConclusionsThere is insufficient evidence that interventions employed to date are effective at improving antibiotic use in LTCFs. Future studies should use rigorous study designs and tailor intervention implementation to the setting.

Project description:ImportanceBenzodiazepines have been prescribed for short periods to patients with depression who are beginning antidepressant therapy to improve depressive symptoms more quickly, mitigate concomitant anxiety, and improve antidepressant treatment continuation. However, benzodiazepine therapy is associated with risks, including dependency, which may take only a few weeks to develop.ObjectivesTo examine trends in simultaneous benzodiazepine and antidepressant new use among adults with depression initiating an antidepressant, assess antidepressant treatment length by simultaneous new use status, estimate subsequent long-term benzodiazepine use in those with simultaneous antidepressant and benzodiazepine new use, and identify determinants of simultaneous new use and long-term benzodiazepine use.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study using a US commercial claims database included commercially insured adults (aged 18-64 years) from January 1, 2001, through December 31, 2014, with a recent depression diagnosis who began antidepressant therapy but had not used antidepressants or benzodiazepines in the prior year.ExposuresSimultaneous new use, defined as a new benzodiazepine prescription dispensed on the same day as a new antidepressant prescription.Main outcomes and measuresThe proportion of antidepressant initiators with simultaneous new use and continuing antidepressant treatment for 6 months and the proportion of simultaneous new users receiving long-term (6-months) benzodiazepine therapy.ResultsOf the 765 130 adults (median age, 39 years; interquartile range, 29-49 years; 507 451 women [66.3%]) who initiated antidepressant treatment, 81 020 (10.6%) also initiated benzodiazepine treatment. The mean annual increase in the proportion simultaneously starting use of both agents from 2001 to 2014 was 0.49% (95% CI, 0.47%-0.51%), increasing from 6.1% (95% CI, 5.5%-6.6%) in 2001 to 12.5% (95% CI, 12.3%-12.7%) in 2012 and stabilizing through 2014 (11.3%; 95% CI, 11.1%-11.5%). Similar findings were apparent by age group and physician type. Antidepressant treatment length was similar in simultaneous new users and non-simultaneous new users. Among simultaneous new users, 12.3% (95% CI, 12.0%-12.5%) exhibited long-term benzodiazepine use (64.0% discontinued taking benzodiazepines after the initial fill). Determinants of long-term benzodiazepine use after simultaneous new use were longer initial benzodiazepine days' supply, first prescription for a long-acting benzodiazepine, and recent prescription opioid fills.Conclusions and relevanceOne-tenth of antidepressant initiators with depression simultaneously initiated benzodiazepine therapy. No meaningful difference in antidepressant treatment at 6 months was observed by simultaneous new use status. Because of the risks associated with benzodiazepines, simultaneous new use at antidepressant initiation and the benzodiazepine regimen itself require careful consideration.

Project description:ImportanceThe United States has invested substantially in screening and brief intervention for illicit drug use and prescription drug misuse, based in part on evidence of efficacy for unhealthy alcohol use. However, it is not a recommended universal preventive service in primary care because of lack of evidence of efficacy.ObjectiveTo test the efficacy of 2 brief counseling interventions for unhealthy drug use (any illicit drug use or prescription drug misuse)-a brief negotiated interview (BNI) and an adaptation of motivational interviewing (MOTIV)-compared with no brief intervention.Design, setting, and participantsThis 3-group randomized trial took place at an urban hospital-based primary care internal medicine practice; 528 adult primary care patients with drug use (Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test [ASSIST] substance-specific scores of ≥4) were identified by screening between June 2009 and January 2012 in Boston, Massachusetts.InterventionsTwo interventions were tested: the BNI is a 10- to 15-minute structured interview conducted by health educators; the MOTIV is a 30- to 45-minute intervention based on motivational interviewing with a 20- to 30-minute booster conducted by master's-level counselors. All study participants received a written list of substance use disorder treatment and mutual help resources.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcome was number of days of use in the past 30 days of the self-identified main drug as determined by a validated calendar method at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included other self-reported measures of drug use, drug use according to hair testing, ASSIST scores (severity), drug use consequences, unsafe sex, mutual help meeting attendance, and health care utilization.ResultsAt baseline, 63% of participants reported their main drug was marijuana, 19% cocaine, and 17% opioids. At 6 months, 98% completed follow-up. Mean adjusted number of days using the main drug at 6 months was 12 for no brief intervention vs 11 for the BNI group (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.97; 95% CI, 0.77-1.22) and 12 for the MOTIV group (IRR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.84-1.32; P = .81 for both comparisons vs no brief intervention). There were also no significant effects of BNI or MOTIV on any other outcome or in analyses stratified by main drug or drug use severity.Conclusions and relevanceBrief intervention did not have efficacy for decreasing unhealthy drug use in primary care patients identified by screening. These results do not support widespread implementation of illicit drug use and prescription drug misuse screening and brief intervention.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00876941.

Project description:ImportanceThe proportion of patients who develop long-term benzodiazepine use remains controversial, as do the length of time before long-term use develops and the factors associated with long-term use.ObjectiveTo investigate the incidence of long-term benzodiazepine and related drug (BZDR) use and factors associated with the development of long-term use implementing a follow-up design with new BZDR users.Design, setting, and participantsThis population-based cohort study used a nationwide cohort of 129 732 new BZDR users in Finland. New users of BZDRs aged 18 years or older were identified from the prescription register maintained by the Social Insurance Institution of Finland as individuals who initiated BZDR use during 2006 and had not used BZDRs from 2004 to 2005. The follow-up continued until death, long-term hospitalization, a gap of 2 years in BZDR use, or December 31, 2015. The population was analyzed according to age at treatment initiation, categorized into younger (<65 years) and older (≥65 years) subcohorts. Analyses were conducted from May 2019 to February 2020.ExposuresUse of BZDRs, modeled from register-based data using the PRE2DUP (from prescriptions to drug use periods) method.Main outcomes and measuresLong-term BZDR use, defined as continuous use of 180 days or longer, and factors associated with long-term vs short-term use, compared using Cox proportional hazards models.ResultsAmong the 129 732 incident BZDR users, the mean (SD) age was 52.6 (17.7) years, and 78 017 (60.1%) individuals were women. During the follow-up period, 51 099 BZDR users (39.4%) became long-term users. Long-term treatment was more common in the older subcohort (19 103 individuals [54.5%]) than the younger subcohort (31 996 individuals [33.8%]). At 6 months, 28 586 individuals (22.0%) had become long-term users: 11 805 (33.7%) in the older subcohort and 16 781 (17.7%) in the younger subcohort. The largest proportions of initiators who became long-term users were those persons who initiated treatment with nitrazepam (76.4%; 95% CI, 73.6%-79.1%), temazepam (63.9%; 95% CI, 62.9%-65.0%), lorazepam (62.4%; 95% CI, 59.7%-65.1%), or clonazepam (57.5%; 95% CI, 55.9%-59.2%). Factors associated with the development of long-term use included male sex, older age, receipt of social benefits, psychiatric comorbidities, and substance abuse.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this population-based cohort study conducted in Finland suggest that the incidence of subsequent long-term BZDR use in individuals who initiate use of BZDRs is high, especially among older persons, and that the specific BZDR used initially is associated with the development of long-term BZDR use and should be carefully considered when prescribing BZDRs. The observed factors that appear to be associated with development of long-term BZDR use also should be considered in clinical decision-making when starting and monitoring BZDR treatment.

Dataset Information

Brief interventions targeting long-term benzodiazepine and Z-drug use in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

Brief interventions targeting long-term benzodiazepine and Z-drug use in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets