ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2020
Why Z-drugs are used even if doctors and nurses feel unable to judge their benefits and risks-a hospital survey.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sleep Complaints in the Psychiatric Hospital: A Qualitative Study of Nurses and Psychiatrists' Approaches to Sleep Management in a Swiss Psychiatric Hospital.Clocks & sleep · 2026Article
- Facilitators and barriers to the deprescribing of benzodiazepines and Z-drug hypnotics in patients under 65 on adult mental health wards.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A Cross-Sectional Study on the Drug Use of Insomnia in a Chinese Medicine Hospital in Shenzhen.Psychiatry and clinical psychopharmacology · 2025Article
- Medical Professionals and Pharmacological Intervention for the Treatment of Insomnia: A Cross-Sectional Study.Sleep science (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2025Article
- Optimizing Sleep Disorder Management in Hospitalized Patients: Practical Approach for Healthcare Providers.Brain and behavior · 2025Review
- Reducing the use of sleep-inducing drugs during hospitalisation by a multi-faceted intervention: a pilot study.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2024Article
- In Reply.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2023Article
- Prescribing decision making by medical residents on night shifts: A qualitative study.Medical education · 2022Article
- Evolution of benzodiazepine receptor agonist prescriptions in general practice: A registry-based study.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- The Barriers and Facilitators of Different Stakeholders When Deprescribing Benzodiazepine Receptor Agonists in Older Patients-A Systematic Review.Metabolites · 2021Review
- Trends in benzodiazepine receptor agonists use and associated factors in the Belgian general older population: analysis of the Belgian health interview survey data.Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMany patients receive Z-drugs for hospital-associated sleep problems, in spite of well-known risks. The aim of this study was to learn more about the attractiveness of Z-drugs, seen from the doctors' and nurses' perspective.
methodsUsing a standardized questionnaire, doctors (63/116) and nurses (73/243) in a German general hospital were surveyed about the risks and benefits of Z-drugs, compared with benzodiazepines.
result"Reduced time to get to sleep" was perceived by doctors (51%) and nurses (53%) to be a strong benefit of Z-drugs; "confusion" and "falls" were perceived by ca. 10% of doctors and ca. 15% of nurses to be a frequent problem. Compared with benzodiazepines, respondents more often answered "unable to judge" for Z-drugs; e.g. for doctors, 18% (benzodiazepines) vs. 45% (Z-drugs) were unable to judge "improved daytime functioning" and 12% (benzodiazepines) vs. 37% (Z-drugs) were unable to judge "falls."
conclusionZ-drugs seem to be attractive because experiential knowledge overemphasizes their benefits and fails to take risks such as drug-related falls and confusion into account. Difficulties to judge a drug's risk-benefit ratio do not prevent doctors and nurses from using them. Interventions for reducing Z-drug usage should incorporate local quality assurance data about relevant patient risks.
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.