Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22152740›Full record

SynthesisThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2011

Minimal interventions to decrease long-term use of benzodiazepines in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Kayalvili Mugunthan, Treasure McGuire, Paul Glasziou

Erratum issuedOpen access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 122 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Stopping antidepressants: when and how.Australian prescriber · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Fatalities associated with gabapentinoids in England (2004-2020).British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Role of the prescriber in supporting patients to discontinue benzodiazepines: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Prescribing benzodiazepines in general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kayalvili MugunthanBond University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia. kmugunth@bond.edu.au
Treasure McGuire
Paul Glasziou
Bond University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLong-term use of benzodiazepines (BZDs) is common. Not only is such use ineffective, but it also has several risks in addition to dependence, and remains a significant problem among the older population.

aimTo systematically review randomised controlled trials that evaluate the effectiveness of minimal interventions to reduce the long-term use of BZDs in primary care. DESIGN AND

settingSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials in UK general practices.

methodCochrane Central, MEDLINE, and Embase (1967-2010) were searched for trials of minimal interventions (such as a single letter or one consultation from a GP) for patients in primary care with long-term (>3 months) BZD use. Pooled risk differences were calculated with 95% confidence intervals.

resultsFrom 646 potentially relevant abstracts, three studies (615 patients) met all the inclusion criteria. The pooled risk ratio showed a significant reduction/cessation in BZD consumption in the minimal intervention groups compared to usual care (risk ratio [RR] = 2.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.5 to 2.8, [corrected] P<0.001; RR = 2.4, 95% CI = 1.3 to 4.3, P = 0.008) respectively. Two studies also reported a significant proportional reduction in consumption of BZD from baseline to 6 months in intervention groups compared to the control group. The secondary outcome of general health status was measured in two studies; both showed a significant improvement in the intervention group.

conclusionA brief intervention in the form of either a letter or a single consultation by GPs, for long-term users of BZD, is an effective and efficient strategy to decrease or stop their medication, without causing adverse consequences.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAnxiety DisordersBenzodiazepinesCommunicationFemaleGeneral PracticeHumansLong-Term CareMaleMiddle AgedPatient Education as TopicPhysician-Patient RelationsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReferral and ConsultationBenzodiazepines

Identifiers

PMID22152740
PMCPMC3162180
OpenAlexW2153607529

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.