Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35804428›Full record

SynthesisImplementation science : IS2022

Barriers and enablers for deprescribing benzodiazepine receptor agonists in older adults: a systematic review of qualitative and quantitative studies using the theoretical domains framework.

Perrine Evrard, Catherine Pétein, Jean-Baptiste Beuscart, Anne Spinewine

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Implementation science : IS, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Perrine EvrardClinical Pharmacy Research Group, Louvain Drug Research Institute, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium. perrine.evard@uclouvain.be.ORCID 0000-0002-0559-3787
Catherine PéteinClinical Pharmacy Research Group, Louvain Drug Research Institute, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
Jean-Baptiste BeuscartUniv. Lille, CHU Lille, ULR 2694 - METRICS: Évaluation des technologies de santé et des pratiques médicales, F-59000, Lille, France.
Anne SpinewineClinical Pharmacy Research Group, Louvain Drug Research Institute, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
UCLouvain · BECHU Dinant Godinne UCL Namur · BEUniversité de Lille · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany strategies aimed at deprescribing benzodiazepine receptor agonists (BZRA) in older adults have already been evaluated with various success rates. There is so far no consensus on which strategy components increase deprescribing the most. Yet, despite an unfavourable benefit-to-risk ratio, BZRA use among older adults remains high. We systematically reviewed barriers and enablers for BZRA deprescribing in older adults.

methodsTwo reviewers independently screened records identified from five electronic databases-Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and the Cochrane library-and published before October 2020. They searched for grey literature using Google Scholar. Qualitative and quantitative records reporting data on the attitudes of older adults, caregivers and healthcare providers towards BZRA deprescribing were included. Populations at the end of life or with specific psychiatric illness, except for dementia, were excluded. The two reviewers independently assessed the quality of the included studies using the mixed-methods appraisal tool. Barriers and enablers were identified and then coded into domains of the theoretical domains framework (TDF) using a combination of deductive and inductive qualitative analysis. The most relevant TDF domains for BZRA deprescribing were then identified.

resultsTwenty-three studies were included 13 quantitative, 8 qualitative and 2 mixed-method studies. The points of view of older adults, general practitioners and nurses were reported in 19, 9 and 3 records, respectively. We identified barriers and enablers in the majority of TDF domains and in two additional themes: "patient characteristics" and "BZRA prescribing patterns". Overall, the most relevant TDF domains were "beliefs about capabilities", "beliefs about consequences", "environmental context and resources", "intention", "goals", "social influences", "memory, attention and decision processes". Perceived barriers and enablers within domains differed across settings and across stakeholders.

conclusionThe relevant TDF domains we identified can now be linked to behavioural change techniques to help in the design of future strategies and health policies. Future studies should also assess barriers and enablers perceived by under-evaluated stakeholders (such as pharmacists, psychiatrists and health care professionals in the hospital setting).

trial registrationThis work was registered on PROSPERO under the title "Barriers and enablers to benzodiazepine receptor agonists deprescribing". REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020213035.

Indexed as

DeprescriptionsGeneral PractitionersAgedHumansIntentionPharmacistsQualitative ResearchReceptors, GABA-AReceptors, GABA-ABarriers and enablers to implementationBenzodiazepinesDeprescribingOlder adultsTheoretical domains framework

Identifiers

PMID35804428
PMCPMC9264665
OpenAlexW4284889623

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.