ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Due to their addictive potential, benzodiazepine (BZ) and non-benzodiazepine-agonists (NBZ, so-called Z-drugs) should be taken no longer than 6 weeks. BZ and NBZ are primarily prescribed by general practitioners (GPs). Therefore, we aimed to analyze GPs' data on the patients collective, the amount of BZ/NBZ prescribed and the rate of private prescriptions. METHODS: We analyzed person years of 2-year intervals from 2009 to 2014 of the primary care CONTENT register that contains routine data from 31 general practitioners' practices. We classified BZ/NBZ prescriptions according to risk groups. The association of BZ/NBZ prescription and potential influencing factors was analyzed by calculating the odds ratio with 95% confidence interval (and corresponding p-value) on the basis of a multiple logistic regression model (adjusted by age, sex and type of health insurance). All patients with drug prescription with and without BZ/NBZ-prescription were compared. RESULTS: Almost 5% of patients with drug prescriptions received at least one prescription of BZ/NBZ during 1 year of observation. On average these patients were older (67.5 vs. 48 years respectively) and the proportion of women was higher than in the comparison group (69 vs. 58%). About one-third of these patients received more than 600 mg diazepam equivalent dose per person year (according to a 2-month daily intake of more than 10 mg diazepam). About one-third of the prescriptions were private prescriptions. A number of variables were significantly associated with the prescription of BZ/NBZ (e. g. age, gender, diagnosis codes, practices). CONCLUSION: The results provide valuable information about BZ/NBZ prescription routines in general practice. For continuous medical education as well as the development of interventions to reduce the use of BZ/NBZ, patient characteristics (e. g. sex, age, comorbidities, type of insurance) as well as different prescription routines (e. g. private prescriptions, reason and frequency of prescriptions, guideline orientation) should be considered.
Subject(s)
Benzodiazepines , General Practitioners , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Aged , Benzodiazepines/therapeutic use , Cross-Sectional Studies , Drug Prescriptions , Female , Germany , Humans , Male , Middle AgedABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Although pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is commonly used for asthmatics in many countries, so far there are no studies addressing the question of whether and for how long an improvement in asthma control (AC) is seen after rehabilitation. The ProKAR study (Prospektive Katamnesestudie Asthma-Rehabilitation) was performed to provide data concerning the short- and long-term impact of PR on AC. METHODS: Two-hundred one adult patients with mild to severe persistent asthma were prospectively followed one year after completion of a 3-week PR program. AC, the primary outcome parameter, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were monitored using the Asthma Control Test (ACT) and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) at initiation (T0) and end of the PR (T1) and 3, 6 and 12 months thereafter. Pulmonary function, physical fitness (6MWD) and asthmatic inflammation (FENO) were measured at T0 and T1. RESULTS: The proportion of patients with well-controlled asthma (ACT score ≥20) increased from 33.2% to 67.3% after PR and was still at 51% after 12 months. Slight but statistically significant improvements in pulmonary functions and an increase in 6MWD of nearly 60 m were reported at T1. One year after discharge 55.8% of the patients still showed a clinically relevant improvement of at least 4 points in the total SGRQ score. CONCLUSIONS: The multidisciplinary inpatient PR program resulted in significant short and long-term improvement in AC and HRQoL in adult asthmatic patients.
