Search

Drawing on a critical social-psychological framework for discourse analysis, data from a popular forum for people over 50 were analysed to study how the habitual use of benzodiazepines and Z-drugs (BZD/Z) is discursively negotiated by Flemish older adults. We present five different repertoires (risk and addiction; alternative pathways; suffering; rationalisation; cessation) that illustrate how a pharmaceutical imaginary of these medications is constructed online and how posters act as reflexive users taking on a health role. Most repertoires emerge from a tacit norm on the undesirability of medication use for sleeping problems. In the alternative pathways and cessation repertoires this norm is implicitly accepted by focussing on how to either prevent or overcome chronic use with various alternative solutions or through tapering off, while the risk and addiction repertoire is used to more openly defend and discursively magnify the idea that medication has to be avoided at all cost. We discuss how this reflects a prevailing imperative of health and ethos of healthicisation of sleep. The rationalisation and suffering repertoires on the other hand challenge this norm by defending medication use. We further explore how these repertoires are used to self-position as either ‘noble non-user’, ‘deserving and/or compliant patient’ or ‘rational user’, reflecting previously found moral positions in offline settings. Our data add another position that has thus far not been discussed extensively with regard to prescription medication use, namely that of a ‘recovered user’. As such, this study shows how this particular online community is a site for contestation of health promotion and medical/pharmaceuticalised discourses on sleep by users and non-users alike and offers a unique insight into how people in the age group that is known to use most BZD/Z discursively negotiate the use of these medications in pseudonymised online interactions.

Introduction Problematic benzodiazepine use is a global health issue. Although the adverse side effects of long-term use of benzodiazepines are well known, it remains difficult to implement interventions for discontinuation in primary care. Considering the success of blended care for the treatment of sleeping disorders and the support of substance use disorders, evidence suggests that a blended care approach, combining face-to-face consultations with the general practitioner with web-based self-learning by the patient, is beneficial for the discontinuation of chronic benzodiazepine use for primary insomnia in general practice. Therefore, the aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of such an approach for the discontinuation of benzodiazepine and zolpidem, zopiclone and zaleplon drugs ((z-)BZD) use in the long term and evaluate the implementation process. Methods and analysis This study is a multicentre, pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial with 1200 patients, included by 120 general practitioners. Allocation to usual or blended care happens at the level of the general practice in a 1:1 ratio using a block randomisation system stratified per language. The study population consists of adult primary care patients who have been using (z-)BZD for primary insomnia on a daily basis for at least 6 months. Primary outcome measure is the proportion of patients that discontinued (z-)BZD at 12 months assessed by toxicological screening for (z-)BZD in urine. Secondary outcomes include discontinuation of (z-)BZD at 6 months, quality of life and the number of defined daily doses of (z-)BZD prescribed. Data will be collected using a study-specific online platform and analysed using the intention-to-treat approach. The process of implementing blended care will be evaluated in a nested study. Ethics and dissemination This trial was approved by the Ethics Committee for Research of UZ/KU Leuven (ref. S61194). Study results will be disseminated via open-access, peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. Trial registration number NCT03937180., SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Background Despite guidelines and campaigns to change prescribing behavior, General Practitioners (GPs) continue to overprescribe benzodiazepines (BZDs). New approaches to improve prescribing are needed. Using behavior change techniques and tailoring interventions to user characteristics are vital to promote behavior change. This study evaluated the impact of an e-module on factors known to determine BZD prescribing practice. Methods A tailored e-module that focuses on avoiding initial BZD prescriptions (and using psychological interventions as an alternative) was developed and offered to GPs in vocational training. Three self-report assessments took place: at baseline, immediately after the module (short term) and at least six months after completion (long term). Assessed determinants include GPs’ attitudes concerning treatment options, perceptions of the patient and self-efficacy beliefs. Readiness to adhere to prescribing guidelines was evaluated through assessing motivation, self-efficacy and implementability of non-pharmacological interventions. Changes in determinants were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Changes in readiness to adhere to guidelines was analyzed using the nonparametric McNemar Bowker test. Results A desirable, significant and durable impact on determinants of BZD prescribing was observed. GPs (n = 121) underwent desirable changes in their attitudes, perceptions and self-efficacy beliefs and these changes remained significant months after the intervention. Barriers to using a non-pharmacological approach often cited in literature remained absent and were not highlighted by the intervention. Furthermore a significant impact on GPs’ readiness to adhere to guidelines was observed. Participants reported change in their ability to cope with psychosocial consultations and to have tried using non-pharmacological interventions. Conclusions Tailoring an e-intervention to target group (GPs) characteristics appears to be successful in promoting behavioral change in GPs undertaking vocational training. Significant and lasting changes were observed in determinants of prescribing BZDs. The e-intervention resulted in a positive impact on participants’ readiness to adhere to BZD prescribing guidance and their coping with psychosocial consultations. Investigating which mechanisms of change are responsible for the observed effectiveness could help to refine and improve future interventions. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12909-017-1100-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Purpose: To investigate clinicians’ experiences and perceptions of benzodiazepine prescribing. Theory: To develop a theory for improving benzodiazepine prescribing practice, exploring implications for an integrated health services approach. Methods: A multidisciplinary team conducted a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies published in Western settings between January 1990 and August 2011 using ‘thematic synthesis’. Study quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist. Findings: We included eight studies. Prescribing was complex and demanding within the constraints of daily practice, leading to variable prescribing by individual practitioners and between GPs. Decisions were influenced by the changing context of GPs’ work, their views of their own role and responsibilities, and their perceptions of benzodiazepines and alternative treatment options. Clinical practice was also influenced by GPs’ perception of patient expectations, the relationship with their patient, and whether they were initiating, continuing or withdrawing benzodiazepines. Discussion: Benzodiazepine prescribing could be improved in line with current guidance through improved communication with patients, ensuring GPs accept responsibility for deciding whether or not to continue prescribing for patients who were previously managed in secondary care

‘Dokter, het gaat echt niet meer. Ik slaap niet meer. Schrijft u mij alstublieft iets voor?’ Een schijnbaar eenvoudige vraag die huisartsen wel vaker krijgen.

Background: Benzodiazepines are often prescribed long-term inappropriately. We aimed to systematically review and meta-synthesise qualitative studies exploring clinicians' experiences and perceptions of benzodiazepine prescribing to build an explanatory model of processes underlying current prescribing practices. Methods: We searched seven electronic databases for qualitative studies in Western primary care settings published in a European language between January 1990 and August 2011 analysing GP or practice nurse experiences of benzodiazepine prescribing. We assessed study quality using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Checklist. We analysed findings using thematic synthesis. Results: We included eight studies from seven countries published between 1993 and 2010. Benzodiazepine prescribing decisions are complex, uncomfortable, and demanding, taken within the constraints of daily general practice. Different GPs varied in the extent to which they were willing to prescribe benzodiazepines, and individual GPs' approaches also varied. GPs were ambivalent in their attitude towards prescribing benzodiazepines and inconsistently applied management strategies for their use. This was due to the changing context of prescribing, differing perceptions of the role and responsibility of the GP, variation in GPs' attitudes to benzodiazepines, perceived lack of alternative treatment options, GPs' perception of patient expectations and the doctor-patient relationship. GPs faced different challenges in managing initiation, continuation and withdrawal of benzodiazepines. Conclusion: We have developed a model which could be used to inform future interventions to improve adherence to benzodiazepine prescribing guidance and improve prescribing through education and training of professionals on benzodiazepine use and withdrawal, greater provision of alternatives to drugs, reflective practice, and better communication with patients.