ArticleGerman medical science : GMS e-journal2013
Benefits and risks of benzodiazepines and Z-drugs: comparison of perceptions of GPs and community pharmacists in Germany.
Article in German medical science : GMS e-journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of on-site pharmacists in residential aged care facilities on the quality of medicines use: a cluster randomised controlled trial (PiRACF study).Scientific reports · 2023Trial
- Exploring the short-term influence of a proprietary oil extract of black cumin (Frontiers in nutrition · 2023Article
- High-dose lormetazepam dependence: strange case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.Internal and emergency medicine · 2019Article
- Bridging the gap between education and appropriate use of benzodiazepines in psychiatric clinical practice.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2015Review
- Role of optimum diagnosis and treatment of insomnia in patients with hypertension and diabetes: A review.Journal of family medicine and primary careArticle
- Dependence on hypnotics: a comparative study between chronic users of benzodiazepines and Z-drugs.Revista brasileira de psiquiatria (Sao Paulo, Brazil : 1999)Article
- Pharmacist-led sedative-hypnotic deprescribing in team-based primary care practice.Canadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPCArticle
- Is the regulation of Z-drugs in Brazil in line with scientific research and international standards?Revista brasileira de psiquiatria (Sao Paulo, Brazil : 1999)Article
- Effect of a medicinal plant (Sleep science (Sao Paulo, Brazil)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveNewer non-benzodiazepines zolpidem and zopiclone ("Z-drugs") are often prescribed instead of benzodiazepine hypnotics, although there is no evidence of differences in effectiveness and safety. Aim was to compare perceptions on benefits and harms of benzodiazepines and Z-drugs between general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists (CPs).
methodsA questionnaire was mailed to a random sample of 1,350 GPs and 600 CPs in 2012. They were asked to rate perceptions on a five-point Likert scale used for both benzodiazepines and Z-drugs. Wilcoxon signed rank test was performed for the comparison of perceptions between GPs and CPs. Due to multiple testing, only p-values ≤0.01 were considered statistically significant.
results458 GPs and 202 CPs returned questionnaires (response 33.9% and 33.7%). Mean age of GPs was 53.3 years (40.6% female) and 48.8 years for CPs (59.2% females). Perceptions on benefits of benzodiazepines (and Z-drugs) between GPs and CPs were not different for 3 (and 2) of 5 items. Concerning side effects of benzodiazepines, there were no statistically significant differences for 3 of 5 comparisons. CPs perceived that 4 of 5 studied side effects of Z-drugs occur significantly more often than GPs (p=0.003 or less). For instance, whereas 45.2% of CPs answered that withdrawal effects on stopping happen often or very often/always on Z-drugs, these were only 28.3% of the GPs.
conclusionsAlthough it is difficult to draw unambiguous conclusions from these findings, pharmacists might have a somewhat more critical view on Z-drugs, especially concerning side effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.