Optimising the prescribing of drugs that may cause dependency: An evidence and gap map of systematic reviews.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Liz Shaw, Michael Nunns, Simon Briscoe, Ruth Garside, Malcolm Turner, G J Melendez-Torres, Hassanat M Lawal, Jo Thompson Coon
{"title":"Optimising the prescribing of drugs that may cause dependency: An evidence and gap map of systematic reviews.","authors":"Liz Shaw,&nbsp;Michael Nunns,&nbsp;Simon Briscoe,&nbsp;Ruth Garside,&nbsp;Malcolm Turner,&nbsp;G J Melendez-Torres,&nbsp;Hassanat M Lawal,&nbsp;Jo Thompson Coon","doi":"10.1177/13558196231164592","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>We set out to map the quantitative and qualitative systematic review evidence available to inform the optimal prescribing of drugs that can cause dependency (benzodiazepines, opioids, non-benzodiazepine hypnotics, gabapentinoids and antidepressants). We also consider how this evidence can be used to inform decision-making in the patient care pathway for each type of medication.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eight bibliographic databases were searched for the period 2010 to 2020. All included reviews were initially appraised using four items from the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence Synthesis Assessment Tool, with reviews that scored well on all items proceeding to full quality appraisal. Key characteristics of the reviews were tabulated, and each review was incorporated into an evidence and gap map based on a patient care pathway. The care pathway was based upon an amalgamation of existing NICE guidelines and feedback from clinical and patient stakeholders.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 80 relevant reviews and displayed them in an evidence and gap map. The evidence included in these reviews was predominantly of low overall quality. Areas where systematic reviews have been conducted include barriers and facilitators to the deprescribing of drugs that may cause dependency, although we identified little evidence exploring the experiences or evaluations of specific interventions to promote deprescribing. All medications of interest, apart from gabapentinoids, were included in at least one review.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The evidence and gap map provides an interactive resource to support (i) policy developers and service commissioners to use evidence in the development and delivery of services for people receiving a prescription of drugs that may cause dependency, where withdrawal of medication may be appropriate, (ii) the clinical decision-making of prescribers and (iii) the commissioning of further research. The map can also be used to inform the commissioning of further systematic reviews. To address the concerns regarding the quality of the existing evidence based raised in this report, future reviews should be conducted according to best-practice guidelines. Systematic reviews focusing on evaluating interventions to promote deprescribing would be particularly beneficial, as would reviews focusing on addressing the paucity of evidence regarding the deprescription of gabapentinoids.</p>","PeriodicalId":15953,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy","volume":" ","pages":"271-281"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10515472/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Health Services Research & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13558196231164592","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objectives: We set out to map the quantitative and qualitative systematic review evidence available to inform the optimal prescribing of drugs that can cause dependency (benzodiazepines, opioids, non-benzodiazepine hypnotics, gabapentinoids and antidepressants). We also consider how this evidence can be used to inform decision-making in the patient care pathway for each type of medication.

Methods: Eight bibliographic databases were searched for the period 2010 to 2020. All included reviews were initially appraised using four items from the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence Synthesis Assessment Tool, with reviews that scored well on all items proceeding to full quality appraisal. Key characteristics of the reviews were tabulated, and each review was incorporated into an evidence and gap map based on a patient care pathway. The care pathway was based upon an amalgamation of existing NICE guidelines and feedback from clinical and patient stakeholders.

Results: We identified 80 relevant reviews and displayed them in an evidence and gap map. The evidence included in these reviews was predominantly of low overall quality. Areas where systematic reviews have been conducted include barriers and facilitators to the deprescribing of drugs that may cause dependency, although we identified little evidence exploring the experiences or evaluations of specific interventions to promote deprescribing. All medications of interest, apart from gabapentinoids, were included in at least one review.

Conclusions: The evidence and gap map provides an interactive resource to support (i) policy developers and service commissioners to use evidence in the development and delivery of services for people receiving a prescription of drugs that may cause dependency, where withdrawal of medication may be appropriate, (ii) the clinical decision-making of prescribers and (iii) the commissioning of further research. The map can also be used to inform the commissioning of further systematic reviews. To address the concerns regarding the quality of the existing evidence based raised in this report, future reviews should be conducted according to best-practice guidelines. Systematic reviews focusing on evaluating interventions to promote deprescribing would be particularly beneficial, as would reviews focusing on addressing the paucity of evidence regarding the deprescription of gabapentinoids.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

优化可能导致依赖性的药物处方:系统综述的证据和差距图。
目的:我们着手绘制可用的定量和定性系统审查证据,为可能导致依赖性的药物(苯二氮卓类药物、阿片类药物、非苯二氮卓类催眠药、加巴喷丁类药物和抗抑郁药)的最佳处方提供信息。我们还考虑了如何利用这些证据为每种药物的患者护理途径决策提供信息。方法:检索2010-2020年8个文献数据库。所有纳入的审查最初都是使用环境证据综合评估工具合作组织的四个项目进行评估的,所有项目得分良好的审查都将进入全面质量评估。将审查的关键特征制成表格,并将每项审查纳入基于患者护理途径的证据和差距图中。护理途径基于现有NICE指南以及临床和患者利益相关者的反馈。结果:我们确定了80条相关评论,并将其显示在证据和差距图中。这些审查中包含的证据主要是总体质量较低的证据。进行系统审查的领域包括可能导致依赖性的药物去描述的障碍和促进因素,尽管我们发现很少有证据探索促进去描述的具体干预措施的经验或评估。除了加巴喷丁类药物外,所有感兴趣的药物都包括在至少一项综述中。结论:证据和差距图提供了一个互动资源,以支持(i)政策制定者和服务专员在为接受可能导致依赖性的药物处方的人开发和提供服务时使用证据,在适当的情况下停药,(ii)处方医生的临床决策和(iii)委托进行进一步研究。该地图还可用于为进一步系统审查的调试提供信息。为了解决本报告中提出的对现有证据质量的担忧,未来的审查应根据最佳实践指南进行。专注于评估促进去描述的干预措施的系统审查将特别有益,专注于解决缺乏关于去描述加巴喷丁类药物的证据的审查也将特别有益。
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
4.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: Journal of Health Services Research & Policy provides a unique opportunity to explore the ideas, policies and decisions shaping health services throughout the world. Edited and peer-reviewed by experts in the field and with a high academic standard and multidisciplinary approach, readers will gain a greater understanding of the current issues in healthcare policy and research. The journal"s strong international editorial advisory board also ensures that readers obtain a truly global and insightful perspective.
×
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