Journal
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 76, Issue 2, Pages 285-290Publisher
SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00228-019-02783-1
Keywords
Hypnotics and sedatives; Attitudes of health personnel; Drug utilization; Questionnaires; Sleep initiation and maintenance disorders; Perception; Risk assessment
Categories
Funding
- Bundesministerium für Gesundheit [II A5-2513DSM228] Funding Source: Medline
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Background Many 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. Methods Using 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. Conclusion Z-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.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available