A scoping review of motor vehicle operator performance assessments for benzodiazepine receptor agonists

IF 1.8 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Andrea L. Murphy , Korolos Sawires , Sophie M. Peltekian , Melissa Helwig , Marilyn Macdonald , Ruth Martin-Misener , Bandana Saini , Heather Neyedli , Chris Giacomantonio , David M. Gardner
{"title":"A scoping review of motor vehicle operator performance assessments for benzodiazepine receptor agonists","authors":"Andrea L. Murphy ,&nbsp;Korolos Sawires ,&nbsp;Sophie M. Peltekian ,&nbsp;Melissa Helwig ,&nbsp;Marilyn Macdonald ,&nbsp;Ruth Martin-Misener ,&nbsp;Bandana Saini ,&nbsp;Heather Neyedli ,&nbsp;Chris Giacomantonio ,&nbsp;David M. Gardner","doi":"10.1016/j.rcsop.2024.100538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Benzodiazepines and <em>Z</em>-drugs (e.g., zopiclone, zolpidem) (benzodiazepine receptor agonists or BZRAs), are prescribed for anxiety and insomnia disorders. However, they are not indicated as first line therapies for long-term management due to harms and efficacy limitations. BZRAs have also been associated with traffic accident risks. Patients taking BZRAs are told to consult with health care providers regarding motor vehicle operation safety. However, advice on driving is variable. The objective of this scoping review is to identify, map, and characterize the evidence for assessments that measure driving performance in people taking BZRAs.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Embase (Elsevier), MEDLINE (Ovid), and PsycINFO (EBSCO) were searched. Covidence was used for screening. Each stage of screening included two independent reviewers. A REDCap database was used for data extraction by two independent reviewers. Results were tabulated and summarised as a narrative.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Driving performance was assessed with 20 unique BZRAs across 183 studies (<em>n</em> = 92 experimental; <em>n</em> = 91 observational) in 178 publications. Zopiclone was the most studied. In experimental studies, the Standard Deviation of Lateral Position (SDLP) was used most often (<em>n</em> = 54, 62 %) and many studies (<em>n</em> = 35, 38 %) were conducted in the Netherlands. For observational studies, biological detection (e.g., urine, blood) (<em>n</em> = 73, 80 %) followed by prescription drug/dispensing records (<em>n</em> = 17, 19 %) were the most common impairment measures and Norway (<em>n</em> = 20) is where most studies took place. In experimental studies, most (<em>n</em> = 89, 97 %) were conducted using only one driving setting. Simulated driving in a car (<em>n</em> = 36) and road driving in traffic (n = 36) were common as compared to nontraffic driving course (n = 8) and simulated driving (<em>n</em> = 9). In experimental studies, seventy-eight of the 92 studies (85 %) had at least one measure that identified impairment.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>BZRA effects on motor vehicle driving performance have been studied using heterogenous protocols with multiple measures and settings, ranging from simulation to authentic traffic situations in experimental studies to biological detection and dispensing records in observational studies. Many BZRAs have been studied but study representation does not match prescribing pattern prevalence. The interpretation and contextualization of results for clinical practice is challenging due to the complexity (i.e., protocols, measures, settings). Future work in this area should work to improve knowledge translation of results so information is more readily accessible and applicable to health care providers and patients.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73003,"journal":{"name":"Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy","volume":"16 ","pages":"Article 100538"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667276624001355","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Benzodiazepines and Z-drugs (e.g., zopiclone, zolpidem) (benzodiazepine receptor agonists or BZRAs), are prescribed for anxiety and insomnia disorders. However, they are not indicated as first line therapies for long-term management due to harms and efficacy limitations. BZRAs have also been associated with traffic accident risks. Patients taking BZRAs are told to consult with health care providers regarding motor vehicle operation safety. However, advice on driving is variable. The objective of this scoping review is to identify, map, and characterize the evidence for assessments that measure driving performance in people taking BZRAs.

Methods

Embase (Elsevier), MEDLINE (Ovid), and PsycINFO (EBSCO) were searched. Covidence was used for screening. Each stage of screening included two independent reviewers. A REDCap database was used for data extraction by two independent reviewers. Results were tabulated and summarised as a narrative.

Results

Driving performance was assessed with 20 unique BZRAs across 183 studies (n = 92 experimental; n = 91 observational) in 178 publications. Zopiclone was the most studied. In experimental studies, the Standard Deviation of Lateral Position (SDLP) was used most often (n = 54, 62 %) and many studies (n = 35, 38 %) were conducted in the Netherlands. For observational studies, biological detection (e.g., urine, blood) (n = 73, 80 %) followed by prescription drug/dispensing records (n = 17, 19 %) were the most common impairment measures and Norway (n = 20) is where most studies took place. In experimental studies, most (n = 89, 97 %) were conducted using only one driving setting. Simulated driving in a car (n = 36) and road driving in traffic (n = 36) were common as compared to nontraffic driving course (n = 8) and simulated driving (n = 9). In experimental studies, seventy-eight of the 92 studies (85 %) had at least one measure that identified impairment.

Conclusions

BZRA effects on motor vehicle driving performance have been studied using heterogenous protocols with multiple measures and settings, ranging from simulation to authentic traffic situations in experimental studies to biological detection and dispensing records in observational studies. Many BZRAs have been studied but study representation does not match prescribing pattern prevalence. The interpretation and contextualization of results for clinical practice is challenging due to the complexity (i.e., protocols, measures, settings). Future work in this area should work to improve knowledge translation of results so information is more readily accessible and applicable to health care providers and patients.
苯并二氮杂卓受体激动剂机动车驾驶员性能评估范围审查
背景苯二氮卓类药物和 Z 类药物(如佐匹克隆、唑吡坦)(苯二氮卓受体激动剂或 BZRA)可用于治疗焦虑症和失眠症。然而,由于其危害性和疗效的局限性,它们并不适合作为长期治疗的一线疗法。BZRAs 还与交通事故风险有关。服用 BZRAs 的患者被告知应向医护人员咨询有关机动车驾驶安全的问题。然而,有关驾驶的建议不尽相同。本范围综述的目的是识别、绘制和描述评估服用 BZRAs 患者驾驶性能的证据。使用 Covidence 进行筛选。每个筛选阶段都有两名独立审稿人。两名独立审稿人使用 REDCap 数据库进行数据提取。结果在 178 篇出版物的 183 项研究(n = 92 项实验研究;n = 91 项观察研究)中使用 20 种独特的 BZRA 对驾驶性能进行了评估。研究最多的是佐匹克隆。在实验研究中,最常使用的是侧位标准偏差(SDLP)(n = 54,62%),许多研究(n = 35,38%)在荷兰进行。在观察性研究中,生物检测(如尿液、血液)(n = 73,80%)是最常用的损伤测量方法,其次是处方药/配药记录(n = 17,19%),挪威(n = 20)是大多数研究的发生地。在实验研究中,大多数研究(n = 89,97%)只使用一种驾驶环境。与非交通驾驶课程(8 项)和模拟驾驶(9 项)相比,汽车模拟驾驶(36 项)和交通道路驾驶(36 项)更为常见。在实验研究中,92 项研究中有 78 项(85%)至少有一种测量方法可确定损伤。结论BZRA 对机动车驾驶性能影响的研究采用了多种测量方法和设置的不同方案,从实验研究中的模拟真实交通状况到观察研究中的生物检测和配药记录。对许多 BZRA 进行了研究,但研究的代表性与处方模式的普遍性并不匹配。由于其复杂性(即协议、措施、设置),对临床实践结果的解释和上下文关联具有挑战性。该领域未来的工作应致力于改善结果的知识转化,使信息更易于获取,并适用于医疗服务提供者和患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
103 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信