corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 12589

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: Journal Article

Bachmann CS, Berg EA, Spigset O, Slørdal L.
[Benzodiazepine-like hypnotics - attitudes and prescription practice among general practioners.]
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 2008 Jan 17; 128:(2):166-70
http://www.tidsskriftet.no/index.php?vp_SEKS_ID=1641672


Abstract:

BACKGROUND: The large increase in sales of the benzodiazepine-like hypnotics (z-hypnotics) zopiclone and zolpidem over the last decade prompted an investigation into Norwegian general practitioners’ prescription habits, knowledge of and attitudes to these drugs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to all 928 registered GPs in six Norwegian counties. The physicians were asked to assess statements, patient vignettes and drug preferences with regard to z-hypnotic and benzodiazepine prescription practice. The responders were anonymized and grouped with respect to gender, county, years of professional experience, knowledge and attitudes. RESULTS: A total of 321 (36 %) of the GPs responded. Among the respondents, physicians with adequate knowledge about clinical use of and restrictive prescription attitudes towards z-hypnotics and benzodiazepines prescribed these drugs with a lower frequency. Prescription rates did not vary as a function of sex, geographical localization, work experience or knowledge about drug pharmacodynamics. A total of 56 % of the respondents preferred zopiclone to zolpidem, whereas 8 % preferred zolpidem. :Many of the factors, which were used to justify the preferences, were irrelevant or erroneous. INTERPRETATION: The study revealed a lack of factual knowledge about these drugs, and may suggest that a rational prescription practice is restrictive.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Far too large a section of the treatment of disease is to-day controlled by the big manufacturing pharmacists, who have enslaved us in a plausible pseudo-science...
The blind faith which some men have in medicines illustrates too often the greatest of all human capacities - the capacity for self deception...
Some one will say, Is this all your science has to tell us? Is this the outcome of decades of good clinical work, of patient study of the disease, of anxious trial in such good faith of so many drugs? Give us back the childlike trust of the fathers in antimony and in the lancet rather than this cold nihilism. Not at all! Let us accept the truth, however unpleasant it may be, and with the death rate staring us in the face, let us not be deceived with vain fancies...
we need a stern, iconoclastic spirit which leads, not to nihilism, but to an active skepticism - not the passive skepticism, born of despair, but the active skepticism born of a knowledge that recognizes its limitations and knows full well that only in this attitude of mind can true progress be made.
- William Osler 1909