IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0191211.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A systematic review of regulatory and educational interventions to reduce the burden associated with the prescriptions of sedative-hypnotics in adults treated for sleep disorders

Author

Listed:
  • Elsa Bourcier
  • Virginie Korb-Savoldelli
  • Gilles Hejblum
  • Christine Fernandez
  • Patrick Hindlet

Abstract

Background: The burden of Sedative-Hypnotics (SHs) has been known since the 1980s. Yet, their consumption remains high. A systematic review of the literature should help to assess efficient interventions to improve the appropriate use of SHs in sleep disorders. Objectives: To identify and assess regulatory and educational interventions designed to improve the appropriate use of SHs for insomnia treatment. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of the literature according to PRISMA guidelines. A systematic search covering the period 1980–2015 was carried out in Medline, Web of Science, Embase and PsycInfo. We included studies reporting the implementation of regulatory or educational strategies directed towards patients and/or healthcare professionals to improve the appropriate use of SHs to treat insomnia in the community, hospitals and nursing homes. Results: Thirty-one studies were included: 23 assessed educational interventions (recommendations by mail/email, computer alerts, meetings, mass media campaigns, prescription profile), 8 assessed regulatory interventions (prescription rule restriction, end of reimbursement). The most recent was implemented in 2009. Restrictive prescription rules were effective to reduce the consumption of targeted SHs but led to a switch to other non-recommended SHs. Among educational interventions, only 3 studies out of 7 reported positive results of mono-faceted interventions; whereas, 13 out of the 16 multi-faceted interventions were reported as efficient: particularly, the active involvement of healthcare professionals and patients and the spread of information through mass media were successful. The risk of bias was high for 24 studies (mainly due to the design), moderate for 3 studies and weak for 4 studies. Conclusion: Educational multifaceted studies are presented as the most efficient. But further better designed studies are needed to make evidence-based results more generalizable.

Suggested Citation

  • Elsa Bourcier & Virginie Korb-Savoldelli & Gilles Hejblum & Christine Fernandez & Patrick Hindlet, 2018. "A systematic review of regulatory and educational interventions to reduce the burden associated with the prescriptions of sedative-hypnotics in adults treated for sleep disorders," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0191211
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0191211
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0191211
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0191211&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0191211?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0191211. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.