Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33902474›Full record

ArticleBMC geriatrics2021

The prevalence and prescribing patterns of benzodiazepines and Z-drugs in older nursing home residents in different European countries and Israel: retrospective results from the EU SHELTER study.

Anna Lukačišinová, Daniela Fialová, Nancye May Peel, Ruth Eleanor Hubbard, Jovana Brkic, Graziano Onder, Eva Topinková, Jacob Gindin, Tamar Shochat, Leonard Gray and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC geriatrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. [Health status of older people in long-term inpatient care-a narrative review].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Anna LukačišinováDepartment of Social and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy in Hradec Králové, Charles University, Akademika Heyrovského 1203, 500 05, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic. lukacisinova.anna@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-6461-5977
Daniela FialováDepartment of Social and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy in Hradec Králové, Charles University, Akademika Heyrovského 1203, 500 05, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.
Nancye May PeelCentre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Ruth Eleanor HubbardCentre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Jovana BrkicDepartment of Social and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy in Hradec Králové, Charles University, Akademika Heyrovského 1203, 500 05, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.
Graziano OnderDepartment of Cardiovascular, Endocrine-Metabolic Diseases and Aging, Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.
Eva TopinkováDepartment of Geriatrics, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
Jacob GindinThe Center for Standards in Health and Disability, The University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel.
Tamar ShochatThe Cheryl Spencer Department of Nursing, The University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel.
Leonard GrayCentre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Roberto BernabeiCentro Medicina dell'Invecchiamento, Dipartimento di Scienze Gerontologiche, Geriatriche e Fisiatriche, Universita Cattolica Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Charles University · CZThe University of Queensland · AUUniversity of Haifa · ILIstituto Superiore di Sanità · ITUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBenzodiazepines (BZDs) and Z-drugs have high potential for developing frequent adverse drug events in older adults (e.g., psychomotor sedation, drug-related dementia, deliria, drug dependence, etc.). Knowledge of the prevalence and patterns of the use of BZDs/Z-drugs in vulnerable older patients is important in order to prevent and reduce the burden caused by their drug-related complications. Our study focused on international comparisons of the prevalence, country-specific prescribing patterns and risk factors of regular BZD/Z-drug use in nursing home (NH) residents.

methodsThis cross-sectional study retrospectively analysed data of 4156 NH residents, prospectively assessed in the Services and Health in the Elderly in Long TERm care (SHELTER) project conducted from 2009 to 2014. Residents aged 65+ in 57 NHs in 7 European countries and Israel were assessed by the InterRAI Long-Term Care Facilities instrument. Descriptive statistics and multiple logistic regression models were used to describe the country-specific prevalence, patterns and risk factors of BZD/Z-drug use.

resultsThe mean age of the participants was 83.4 ± 9.4 years, 73% were female and 27.7% used BZDs/Z-drugs. The prevalence of BZD/Z-drug use differed significantly across countries, ranging from 44.1% in Israel to 14.5% in Germany. The most frequently prescribed were zopiclone (17.8%), lorazepam (17.1%) and oxazepam (16.3%). Lorazepam, oxazepam and diazepam were used in most of the countries. Brotizolam, temazepam and zolpidem showed highest prevalence in Israel (99.4% of all regular users of this medication in the sample), the Netherlands (72.6%) and France (50.0%), respectively. Residing in Israel was the most significant factor associated with the use of BZDs/Z-drugs or BZDs only (odds ratio [OR] 6.7; 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.8-9.2 and OR 9.7, 95%CI 6.5-14.5, respectively). The use of Z-drugs only was most significantly associated with residing in France (OR 21.0, 95%CI 9.0-48.9).

conclusionsDespite global recommendations and warnings, the preference for and extent of use of individual BZDs and Z-drugs in vulnerable NH residents differ significantly across countries. The strong association with country of residence compared to clinical and functional factors denotes that prescribing habits, social, cultural, behavioural, and regulatory factors still play an important role in the current diverse use of these medications.

Indexed as

BenzodiazepinesPharmaceutical PreparationsAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesEuropeFemaleFranceGermanyHumansIsraelMaleNetherlandsNursing HomesPrevalenceRetrospective StudiesBenzodiazepinesPharmaceutical PreparationsAgedBenzodiazepinesEuropeIsraelNursing homesZ-drugs

Identifiers

PMID33902474
PMCPMC8077828
OpenAlexW3159370898

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.