MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Barriers to Deprescribing Benzodiazepines in Older Adults in a Survey of European Physicians

2025· article· en· W4408091502 on OpenAlexaff
Vladyslav Shapoval, Marie de Saint Hubert, Perrine Evrard, François‐Xavier Sibille, Carole E. Aubert, Lucy Bolt, Vagioula Tsoutsi, Panagoula Κollia, Antoni Salvà, Ramón Miralles, Adam Wichniak, Katarzyna Gustavsson, Torgeir Bruun Wyller, Enrico Callegari, Jeremy Grimshaw, Justin Presseau, Séverine Henrard, Anne Spinewine

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Network Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeprescribingMedicineFamily medicineBeers CriteriaLogistic regressionPolypharmacyMedical prescriptionNursingIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: The use of benzodiazepine receptor agonists (BZRA) poses serious health risks to older adults. Although several guidelines recommend deprescribing, implementation in clinical practice remains limited. Objective: To identify physicians' barriers to and enablers of deprescribing BZRA in adults aged 65 years and older taking a BZRA for sleep problems; to determine factors associated with hospital physicians' intention to deprescribe BZRA and their self-reported routine BZRA deprescribing. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study included hospital physicians and general practitioners (GPs) working across 6 European Countries (Belgium, Greece, Norway, Poland, Spain, and Switzerland) between December 2022 and March 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Barriers identification via a 35-item questionnaire based upon the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Responses were categorized as major barriers, moderate barriers, and enablers based on their mean scores. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to identify background characteristics and TDF-based domains associated with hospital physicians' intention to deprescribe and self-reported routine deprescribing. Results: Questionnaires from 240 hospital physicians and 96 GPs were analyzed. Most participants were women: 144 (61.0%) hospital physicians and 52 (54.2%) GPs. In terms of experience, the most common reported time in practice was less than 5 years for hospital physicians (76 [31.7%]) and between 10 and 14 years for GPs (35 [36.5%]). Most reported deprescribing BZRA routinely (135 hospital physicians [57.2%] and 66 GPs [72.5%]). Major barriers (and TDF domains) were similar for hospital physicians and GPs across the 6 countries. These barriers included: lack of training (skills), low self-efficacy (beliefs about capabilities), prioritization of other health issues (goals), frustration with the challenges of deprescribing (emotions), insufficient staff and time, absence of local policies (environmental context and resources), and reluctance from patients (social influence). Intention to deprescribe was significantly associated with country, occupation type, and 5 TDF domains: memory, attention, and decision process (odds ratio [OR], 1.70; 95% Ci, 1.22-2.40); social and/or professional role and identity (OR, 5.92; 95% CI, 3.28-11.07); beliefs about capabilities (OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.55-3.63); beliefs about consequences (OR, 3.00; 95% CI, 1.61-5.71); and reinforcement (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.05-2.15). Routine deprescribing was significantly associated with 3 TDF domains: memory, attention, and decision processes; intentions; and emotions. Conclusion: In this theory-based survey study of physicians, physicians and general practitioners described numerous barriers to deprescribing BZRA in older adults. Our findings indicate that effective deprescribing efforts require approaches that address both reflective processes (eg, enhancing capability) and impulsive processes (eg, managing emotions).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Network OpenSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207