[Experimental] List of manuscripts available for review volunteers
1 manuscript available for review volunteers
December 17, 2017

Introduction: Inappropriate benzodiazepines (BZD) and z-drugs use in older populations is associated with a variety of sociodemographic and health-related factors. Recent studies reported that inappropriate BZD and z-drugs use is associated with increased age, female gender, and severe negative psychological (e.g. depression) and somatic (e.g. chronic disease) factors. The current study explores the sociodemographic and health-related factors associated with inappropriate BZD and z-drugs use in older people. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey among randomly selected patients of one health insurance (“AOK North-West”) with BZD and z-drugs prescriptions in the past 12 months. The sample was stratified by appropriateness to German prescription guidelines (yes vs. no) and age (50-65 vs. >65 years). To examine the association of selected sociodemographic and psychological variables (e.g. sex, employment status, quality of life, depression) with inappropriate use a binary logistic regression analysis was conducted. Results: In total, data of 340 patients were analyzed. The mean age was 72.1 (SD=14.5) years, and the most commonly used substances were zopiclon (38.1%), oxazepam (18.1%), and lorazepam (13.8%). The mean defined daily dose (DDD) was 0.73 (SD=0.47). Insomnia was the main reason for prescribing BZD and z-drugs. Inappropriate use of BZD and z-drugs is significantly associated with unemployment (OR=2.9, 95%-CI: 1.2-7.1) and general problematic medication use (OR=0.5, 95%-CI: 0.2-1.0).

Discussion: Unemployment status and problematic medication use have a significant association with potentially inappropriate prescription of BZD and z-drugs. Divergent patterns of prescription might harbor problematic patterns of BZD and z-drugs use. The causal connection between the identified factors and problematic BZD and z-drugs prescription is not released in this paper.

Conclusion: The employment status and possible evidence of inadequate drug use may be a warning signal for the prescriber of BZD and z-drugs.


Is this open peer review?

No, peer review is still single-blind and all recommendations are private between the authors and Academic Editor. However, any reviewer has the option to sign their report, and once accepted for publication then that review can be shown publicly - again this is optional.

Will I be guaranteed to review if I volunteer?

No. Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. This is for many reasons. For one, reviewers must have relevant qualifications for any manuscript and void of any conflicts of interest. Additionally, it could be that enough reviewers have accepted an invitation to review already, in which case we would not invite any more.

Why aren't there more manuscripts available?

Manuscripts are shown when authors have opted-in for obtaining reviewers through the reviewer-match service. Additionally, there may already be enough reviewers found through other means, for example, invitations sent by the Academic Editor in charge.

What are the editorial criteria?

Please visit the editorial criteria page for initial guidance. You will also be given additional information if invited to review.