Association between hypnotics use and increased mortality: causation or confounding?

Association Between Hypnotic Use and All-Cause Mortality in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Insomnia

Purpose

Hypnotics are commonly prescribed in patients with COPD to manage insomnia. Given the considerable risks associated with these drugs, the aim of the study was to evaluate the risk of all-cause mortality associated with hypnotics in a cohort of veterans with COPD presenting with insomnia.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study that used Veterans Health Administration Corporate Data Warehouse with data supplemented by linkage to Medicare, Medicaid, and National Death Index data from 2010 through 2019. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Analyses were conducted using propensity score 1:1 matching to balance baseline characteristics.

Results

Of the 5759 veterans with COPD (mean [SD] age, 71.7 [11.2]; 92% men), 3585 newly initiated hypnotic agents during the study period. During a mean follow-up of 7.4 (SD, 2.7) years, a total of 2301 deaths occurred, with 65.2 and 48.7 total deaths per 1000 person-years among hypnotic users and nonusers, respectively. After propensity matching, hypnotic use was associated with a 22% increased risk of mortality compared with hypnotic nonusers (hazard ratio [HR] 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI],1.11-1.35). The benzodiazepine receptor agonists (BZRAs) group experienced a higher incidence rate of all-cause mortality compared to hypnotic nonusers (Incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.27; 95% CI, 1.14-1.43). Conversely, the mortality rate of non-BZRA hypnotics decreased after the first 2 years and was not significantly different for hypnotic nonusers (IRR 1.04; 95% CI, 0.82-1.11).

Conclusion

Among patients with COPD and insomnia, treatment with hypnotics was associated with a higher risk of all-cause mortality. The association was observed in patients prescribed BZRAs. The risk of mortality for non-BZRAs moderated after the first 2 years, indicating a class effect.

Use of prescription benzodiazepines and related drugs in family caregivers: a nation-wide register-based study

BACKGROUND

objective indicators of sleep and mental health problems in family caregivers have rarely been reported.

OBJECTIVE

to study the use of prescription benzodiazepines and related drugs (BZDRD) in Finnish family caregivers and matched controls.

DESIGN

prospective follow-up in 2012-17.

SETTING

nationwide register-linkage study.

SUBJECTS

all individuals who received family caregiver's allowance in Finland in 2012 (N = 42,256; mean age 67 years; 71% women) and controls matched for age, sex and municipality of residence (N = 83,618).

METHODS

information on purchases of prescription BZDRD, including the number of defined daily doses (DDDs), between 2012 and 2017 was obtained from the Dispensations Reimbursable under the National Health Insurance Scheme register. Background information was obtained from national registers.

RESULTS

more caregivers than controls used BZDRD, both among women (users per 100 person-years: 17.2 versus 15.2, P < 0.001) and men (14.6 versus 11.8, P < 0.001). These differences were largely explained by hypnotic BZDRD use. There were also more long-term BZDRD users per 100 person-years among caregivers than controls, both among women (5.0 versus 4.3, P = 0.001) and men (5.3 versus 3.8, P < 0.001). Use of hypnotic BZDRD in number of DDDs was higher in caregivers than in controls, particularly among men above 50 years. Caregivers used more anxiolytic BZDRD than controls from middle age to 75 years but less in the oldest age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

higher level of BZDRD use among caregivers indicates that caregivers have more sleep and mental health problems than non-caregivers. Adequate treatment of these problems and support for caregiving should be ensured for caregivers.

The effect of cognitive function and central nervous system depressant use on mortality—A prospective observational study of previously hospitalised older patients

Background

Older patients are often users of prolonged Central Nervous System Depressants (CNSD) (Z-hypnotics, benzodiazepines and opioids), which may be associated with reduced cognition. The long-term effects of CNSD use and reduced cognitive function in older patients are unclear. The aim of this study was to examine whether cognitive function and CNSD use at baseline hospitalisation were associated with all-cause mortality two years after discharge.

Methods

We conducted a prospective observational study, including baseline data (2017–2018) from previously hospitalised older patients (65–90 years), assessing all-cause mortality two years after discharge. We used logistic regression to assess the primary outcome, all-cause mortality two years after baseline hospitalisation. The primary predictors were cognitive function measured by The Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) and prolonged CNSD use (continuous use ≥ 4 weeks). Adjustment variables: age, gender, education, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale for Geriatrics (CIRS-G), using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) to compare the predictive power of the models. In a sub-analysis we used, the Neurobehavioural Cognitive State Examination (Cognistat) and the Clock Drawing Test.

Results

Two years after discharge, out of 246 baseline patients, 43 were deceased at follow-up, among these 27 (63%) were CNSD users, and 16 (36%) were non-users at baseline, (p = 0.002). In the multivariable models cognitive function (MMSE score) was a predictor of mortality (OR 0.81 (95% CI 0.69; 0.96), p = 0.014). CNSD use was associated with mortality (OR 2.71 (95% CI 1.06; 6.95), p = 0.038), with ROC AUC: 0.74–0.77 for these models. Results using Cognistat supported the findings. The Clock Drawing Test was not significant predictor of mortality.

Conclusion

Two years after discharge from the hospital, older patients with reduced cognitive function and CNSD use during hospital stay had higher mortality. This underlines that inappropriate (prolonged and concurrent) use of CNSDs should be avoided by older patients, particularly in patients with reduced cognitive function.

Trial registration

NCT03162081, 22 May 2017.

Mortality and concurrent use of opioids and hypnotics in older patients: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Benzodiazepine hypnotics and the related nonbenzodiazepine hypnotics (z-drugs) are among the most frequently prescribed medications for older adults. Both can depress respiration, which could have fatal cardiorespiratory effects, particularly among patients with concurrent opioid use. Trazodone, frequently prescribed in low doses for insomnia, has minimal respiratory effects, and, consequently, may be a safer hypnotic for older patients. Thus, for patients beginning treatment with benzodiazepine hypnotics or z-drugs, we compared deaths during periods of current hypnotic use, without or with concurrent opioids, to those for comparable patients receiving trazodone in doses up to 100 mg.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

The retrospective cohort study in the United States included 400,924 Medicare beneficiaries 65 years of age or older without severe illness or evidence of substance use disorder initiating study hypnotic therapy from January 2014 through September 2015. Study endpoints were out-of-hospital (primary) and total mortality. Hazard ratios (HRs) were adjusted for demographic characteristics, psychiatric and neurologic disorders, cardiovascular and renal conditions, respiratory diseases, pain-related diagnoses and medications, measures of frailty, and medical care utilization in a time-dependent propensity score-stratified analysis. Patients without concurrent opioids had 32,388 person-years of current use, 260 (8.0/1,000 person-years) out-of-hospital and 418 (12.9/1,000) total deaths for benzodiazepines; 26,497 person-years,150 (5.7/1,000) out-of-hospital and 227 (8.6/1,000) total deaths for z-drugs; and 16,177 person-years,156 (9.6/1,000) out-of-hospital and 256 (15.8/1,000) total deaths for trazodone. Out-of-hospital and total mortality for benzodiazepines (respective HRs: 0.99 [95% confidence interval, 0.81 to 1.22, p = 0.954] and 0.95 [0.82 to 1.14, p = 0.513] and z-drugs (HRs: 0.96 [0.76 to 1.23], p = 0.767 and 0.87 [0.72 to 1.05], p = 0.153) did not differ significantly from that for trazodone. Patients with concurrent opioids had 4,278 person-years of current use, 90 (21.0/1,000) out-of-hospital and 127 (29.7/1,000) total deaths for benzodiazepines; 3,541 person-years, 40 (11.3/1,000) out-of-hospital and 64 (18.1/1,000) total deaths for z-drugs; and 2,347 person-years, 19 (8.1/1,000) out-of-hospital and 36 (15.3/1,000) total deaths for trazodone. Out-of-hospital and total mortality for benzodiazepines (HRs: 3.02 [1.83 to 4.97], p < 0.001 and 2.21 [1.52 to 3.20], p < 0.001) and z-drugs (HRs: 1.98 [1.14 to 3.44], p = 0.015 and 1.65 [1.09 to 2.49], p = 0.018) were significantly increased relative to trazodone; findings were similar with exclusion of overdose deaths or restriction to those with cardiovascular causes. Limitations included composition of the study cohort and potential confounding by unmeasured variables.

CONCLUSIONS

In US Medicare beneficiaries 65 years of age or older without concurrent opioids who initiated treatment with benzodiazepine hypnotics, z-drugs, or low-dose trazodone, study hypnotics were not associated with mortality. With concurrent opioids, benzodiazepines and z-drugs were associated with increased out-of-hospital and total mortality. These findings indicate that the dangers of benzodiazepine-opioid coadministration go beyond the documented association with overdose death and suggest that in combination with opioids, the z-drugs may be more hazardous than previously thought.

Pharmacological Management of Insomnia

Insomnia is a highly prevalent condition associated with significant morbidity, reduction in quality of life, and increase in healthcare costs, and is a risk factor for multiple physical and mental disorders. The primary treatment modality is cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) but this is associated with difficulties with access and higher cost as well as poor response in some patients. Therefore, pharmacotherapy for insomnia is common and hypnotic agents are among the most frequently prescribed medications in the United States. Older medications for insomnia are limited by their side effect burden and narrow therapeutic window. Newer hypnotics, on the other hand, have been shown to have a better safety profile and longer term efficacy. While some studies have shown that long-term hypnotic use is associated with adverse outcomes, the current evidence is equivocal. The decision to treat chronic insomnia disorder with long-term hypnotics should be individualized and balance the potential risks of continuing hypnotic medication use with the risks of untreated persistent insomnia and associated functional limitations. This clinical review discusses the currently available medication options to treat insomnia, their mechanisms of action, dosing, and side effect profiles. This review also provides guidance on long-term management of hypnotics and the use of these medications in the elderly, those with medical comorbidities, and other special populations.

Non-benzodiazepine hypnotic use for sleep disturbance in people aged over 55 years living with dementia: a series of cohort studies

BACKGROUND

Sleep disturbance affects around 60% of people living with dementia and can negatively affect their quality of life and that of their carers. Hypnotic Z-drugs (zolpidem, zopiclone and zaleplon) are commonly used to treat insomnia, but their safety and efficacy have not been evaluated for people living with dementia.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the benefits and harms of Z-drugs in people living with dementia with sleep disturbance.

DESIGN

A series of observational cohort studies using existing data from (1) primary care linked to hospital admission data and (2) clinical cohort studies of people living with dementia.

DATA SOURCES

Primary care study - Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to Hospital Episode Statistics and Office for National Statistics mortality data. Clinical cohort studies - the Resource Use and Disease Course in Dementia - Nursing Homes (REDIC) study, National Alzheimer's Coordinating Centre (NACC) clinical data set and the Improving Well-being and Health for People with Dementia (WHELD) in nursing homes randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Primary care study - 371 primary care practices in England. Clinical cohort studies - 47 nursing homes in Norway, 34 Alzheimer's disease centres in the USA and 69 care homes in England.

PARTICIPANTS

Primary care study - NHS England primary care patients diagnosed with dementia and aged > 55 years, with sleep disturbance or prescribed Z-drugs or low-dose tricyclic antidepressants, followed over 2 years. Clinical cohort studies - people living with dementia consenting to participate, followed over 3 years, 12 years and 9 months, for REDIC, NACC and WHELD, respectively.

INTERVENTIONS

The primary exposure was prescription or use of Z-drugs. Secondary exposures included prescription or use of benzodiazepines, low-dose tricyclic antidepressants and antipsychotics.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Falls, fractures, infection, stroke, venous thromboembolism, mortality, cognitive function and quality of life. There were insufficient data to investigate sleep disturbance.

RESULTS

The primary care study and combined clinical cohort studies included 6809 and 18,659 people living with dementia, with 3089 and 914 taking Z-drugs, respectively. New Z-drug use was associated with a greater risk of fractures (hazard ratio 1.40, 95% confidence interval 1.01 to 1.94), with risk increasing with greater cumulative dose (p = 0.002). The hazard ratio for Z-drug use and hip fracture was 1.59 (95% confidence interval 1.00 to 2.53) and for mortality was 1.34 (95% confidence interval 1.10 to 1.64). No excess risks of falls, infections, stroke or venous thromboembolism were detected. Z-drug use also did not have an impact on cognition, neuropsychiatric symptoms, disability or quality of life.

LIMITATIONS

Primary care study - possible residual confounding because of difficulties in identifying patients with sleep disturbance and by dementia severity. Clinical cohort studies - the small numbers of people living with dementia taking Z-drugs and outcomes not necessarily being measured before Z-drug initiation restricted analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed a dose-dependent increase in fracture risk, but no other harms, with Z-drug use in dementia. However, multiple outcomes were examined, increasing the risk of false-positive findings. The mortality association was unlikely to be causal. Further research is needed to confirm the increased fracture risk. Decisions to prescribe Z-drugs may need to consider the risk of fractures, balanced against the impact of improved sleep for people living with dementia and that of their carers. Our findings suggest that when Z-drugs are prescribed, falls prevention strategies may be needed, and that the prescription should be regularly reviewed.

FUTURE WORK

More research is needed on safe and effective management strategies for sleep disturbance in people living with dementia.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as European Union electronic Register of Post-Authorisation Studies (EU PAS) 18006.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 1. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Adverse effects of Z-drugs for sleep disturbance in people living with dementia: a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Sleep disturbance is common in dementia and often treated with Z-drugs (zopiclone, zaleplon, and zolpidem). While some observational studies suggest that Z-drugs are associated with adverse events such as falls and fracture risks in older people, this has not been studied in dementia.

METHODS

We used data from 27,090 patients diagnosed with dementia between January 2000 and March 2016 from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to Hospital Episodes Statistics data in England. We compared adverse events for 3532 patients newly prescribed Z-drugs by time-varying dosage to (1) 1833 non-sedative-users with sleep disturbance; (2) 10,214 non-sedative-users with proximal GP consultation matched on age, sex, and antipsychotic use; and (3) 5172 patients newly prescribed benzodiazepines. We defined higher dose Z-drugs and benzodiazepines as prescriptions equivalent to ≥ 7.5 mg zopiclone or > 5 mg diazepam daily. Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for incident fracture, hip fracture, fall, mortality, acute bacterial infection, ischaemic stroke/transient ischaemic attack, and venous thromboembolism over a 2-year follow-up, adjusted for demographic- and health-related covariates.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) age of patients was 83 (7.7) years, and 16,802 (62%) were women. Of 3532 patients prescribed Z-drugs, 584 (17%) were initiated at higher doses. For patients prescribed higher dose Z-drugs relative to non-users with sleep disturbance, the HRs (95% confidence interval) for fractures, hip fractures, falls, and ischaemic stroke were 1.67 (1.13-2.46), 1.96 (1.16-3.31), 1.33 (1.06-1.66), and 1.88 (1.14-3.10), respectively. We observed similar associations when compared to non-sedative-users with proximal GP consultation. Minimal or inconsistent excess risks were observed at ≤ 3.75 mg zopiclone or equivalent daily, and for mortality, infection, and venous thromboembolism. We observed no differences in adverse events for Z-drugs compared to benzodiazepines, except lower mortality rates with Z-drugs (HR [95% confidence interval] of 0.73 [0.64-0.83]).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher dose Z-drug use in dementia is associated with increased fracture and stroke risks, similar or greater to that for higher dose benzodiazepines. Higher dose Z-drugs should be avoided, if possible, in people living with dementia, and non-pharmacological alternatives preferentially considered. Prescriptions for higher dose Z-drugs in dementia should be regularly reviewed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ENCePP e-register of studies, EUPAS18006.

Associations of Benzodiazepines, Z-Drugs, and Other Anxiolytics With Subsequent Dementia in Patients With Affective Disorders: A Nationwide Cohort and Nested Case-Control Study

OBJECTIVE

Benzodiazepines and Z-drugs are two of the most prescribed agents worldwide. However, because of their cognitive side effects, the question of their influence on the risk of dementia has been raised. The authors examined the association of benzodiazepines, Z-drugs, and other anxiolytics with incident dementia in patients with affective disorders.

METHODS

The authors conducted a cohort and nested case-control study of 235,465 patients over age 20 who were identified in the Danish National Patient Registry as having had a first-time hospital contact for an affective disorder between 1996 and 2015. From the Danish National Prescription Registry, information was obtained on all prescriptions for benzodiazepines, Z-drugs, and other anxiolytics, and patients were followed for incident dementia (defined by hospital discharge diagnosis or acetylcholinesterase inhibitor use). Cox proportional hazards and conditional logistic regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios and odds ratios with adjustment for sociodemographic and clinical variables.

RESULTS

A total of 75.9% (N=171,287) of patients had any use of benzodiazepines or Z-drugs, and during the median follow-up of 6.1 years (interquartile range, 2.7-11), 9,776 (4.2%) patients were diagnosed with dementia. Any use of benzodiazepines or Z-drugs showed no association with dementia after multiple adjustments in either the cohort analysis or a nested case-control design. In the cohort analysis, the number of prescriptions and the cumulated dose of benzodiazepines or Z-drugs at baseline were not associated with dementia. In the nested case-control study, where prescriptions were counted from 1995 until 2 years before the index date, there was a slightly higher odds ratio of dementia in patients with the lowest use of benzodiazepines or Z-drugs (odds ratio=1.08, 95% CI=1.01, 1.15) compared with no lifetime use. However, patients with the highest use had the lowest odds of developing dementia (odds ratio=0.83, 95% CI=0.77, 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

This large cohort study did not reveal associations between use of benzodiazepines or Z-drugs and subsequent dementia, even when exposures were cumulated or divided into long- and short-acting drugs. Some results were compatible with a protective effect.

Association between prescription of hypnotics/anxiolytics and mortality in multimorbid and non-multimorbid patients: a longitudinal cohort study in primary care

OBJECTIVES

To assess the risk of mortality in primary care patients, multimorbid (≥2 chronic conditions) or not, prescribed hypnotics/anxiolytics.

DESIGN

A longitudinal cohort study SETTING: Primary healthcare in the Reykjavik area.

PARTICIPANTS

114 084 individuals (aged 10-79 years, average 38.5, SD 18.4) contacting general practitioners during 2009-2012 (mortality follow-up to 31 December 2016). Of those, the reference group comprised 58 560 persons who were neither multimorbid nor had redeemed prescriptions for hypnotics/anxiolytics. Participants (16 108) redeeming prescriptions for hypnotics/anxiolytics on a regular basis for 3 consecutive years were considered as consistent, long-term users. They were subdivided into low-dose (1-300 defined daily doses (DDD)/3 years), medium-dose (301-1095 DDDs/3 years) and high-dose users (>1095 DDDs/3 years). All six groups taking these drugs were compared with the reference group.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

All-cause mortality.

RESULTS

HRs were calculated with the no multimorbidity-no drug group as a reference, using Cox proportional hazards regression model adjusting for age, sex and the number of chronic conditions (n=111 767), patients with cancer excluded. During follow-up, 516 358 person-years in total, 1926 persons died. Mean follow-up was 1685 days (4.6 years), range 1-1826 days (5.0 years). For all multimorbid patients who took no drugs the HR was 1.14 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.30) compared with those without multimorbidity. HRs in the non-multimorbid participants varied from 1.49 to 3.35 (95% CI ranging from 1.03 to 4.11) with increasing doses of hypnotics/anxiolytics, and correspondingly from 1.55 to 3.52 (1.18 to 4.29) in multimorbid patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality increased in a dose-dependent manner among both multimorbid and non-multimorbid patients taking hypnotics/anxiolytics. This increase was clearly associated with prescribing of these drugs. Their use should be limited to the recommended period of 2-4 up to 6 weeks; long-term use may incur increased risk and should be re-examined.

Zolpidem Use and Suicide Death in South Korea: A Population-Based Case-Control Study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether zolpidem use is associated with suicide death in adults.

METHOD

We conducted a case-control study using the National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort (NHIS-NSC) database. Cases were adults with a suicide record (ICD-10 codes; X-60-X84, Y87.0) between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2013. 10 Controls were matched to each case by age, sex, index year, region, income level, and health insurance type. Zolpidem use during 2 years before suicide was quantified. Adjusted odd ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using conditional logistic regression.

RESULTS

The percentage of zolpidem users was significantly higher in cases (451 of 1,928 [23.4%]) than in controls (832 of 18,404 [4.5%]). After controlling for potential confounders, zolpidem use was significantly associated with suicide (aORs, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.74-2.52). Dose-response relationships were observed (for trend, p < .0001). Consistent findings were observed when analyses were restricted to suicide death (aORs, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.73-2.51) and nonmedication poisoning suicide death cases (aORs, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.74-2.53).

CONCLUSIONS

We found a significant and positive association between zolpidem use and suicide. Zolpidem should be prescribed cautiously and with due caution of increased suicide risk.

Mortality in older adults with frequent alcohol consumption and use of drugs with addiction potential - The Nord Trøndelag Health Study 2006-2008 (HUNT3), Norway, a population-based study

Background

The aim of this study was to investigate whether frequent drinking, use of drugs with addiction potential and the possible combination of frequent drinking and use of prescribed drugs with addiction potential were associated with all-cause mortality in older adults.

Methods

We used data from the Nord-Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT3 2006–08), a population-based study in Norway. A total of 11,545 (6,084 women) individuals 65 years and older at baseline participated. We assessed frequent drinking (≥ 4 days a week), occasional drinking (i.e. a few times a year), never drinking and non-drinking in the last year. Drugs with addiction potential were defined as at least one prescription of benzodiazepines, z-hypnotics or opioids during one year for a minimum of two consecutive years between 2005 and 2009. This information was drawn from the Norwegian Prescription Database. The main outcome was all-cause mortality with information drawn from the Norwegian Cause of Death Registry. Follow-up continued until death or latest at 31 December 2013. Logistic regression analyses were used to investigate all-cause mortality since date of study entry and exact age at time of death was unknown.

Results

The adjusted logistic regression analyses showed that frequent drinking was not associated with all-cause mortality compared to occasional drinking. Men who reported to be never drinkers and non-drinkers in the last year had higher odds of mortality compared to those who drank occasionally. Use of prescribed drugs with addiction potential was associated with increased mortality in men, but not in women. No association was found between the possible combination of frequent drinking and use of prescribed drugs with addiction potential and mortality.

Conclusion

Neither frequent drinking nor the possible combination of frequent drinking and use of prescribed drugs with addiction potential were associated with all-cause mortality in older women and men. Use of prescribed drugs with addiction potential was associated with higher odds of mortality in men. This finding should lead to more caution in prescribing drugs with addiction potential to this group.

Associations between the use of specific psychotropic drugs and all-cause mortality among older adults in Germany: Results of the mortality follow-up of the German National Health Interview and Examination Survey 1998

Background

Use of psychotropic drugs is common among older adults. Population-based studies on the associations of psychotropic drug use with mortality are sparse.

Objectives

To investigate the associations between the use of specific psychotropic drug groups (opioids, antipsychotics, antidepressants and benzodiazepines) and all-cause mortality among community-dwelling older adults in Germany.

Methods

Participants of the German National Health Interview and Examination Survey 1998 were followed up for mortality from 1997 to 2011. Persons aged 60–79 years with complete data on psychotropic drug use at baseline and on mortality follow-up were considered as study population (N = 1,563). Associations between the use of opioids, antipsychotics, antidepressants and benzodiazepines and all-cause mortality were examined by Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for sociodemographics (sex, age, community size, region, socioeconomic status), life style (smoking, sports, risky alcohol drinking) and health conditions (obesity, disability, history of cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, any cancers, any mental disorders) at baseline.

Results

After a median follow-up of 11.4 years, 21, 18, 23 and 26 deaths were documented among those who used at baseline opioids (n = 39), antipsychotics (n = 30), antidepressants (n = 53) and benzodiazepines (n = 54) with an unadjusted mortality rate (MR) of 57.7, 59.1, 44.6 and 53.7 per 1000 person-years, respectively. Meanwhile, 400 deaths were documented among 1,406 nonusers of any of the above mentioned psychotropic drugs with a MR of 26.7 per 1000 person-years. The age and sex adjusted mortality rate ratios in comparison with nonusers were 2.20 (95% confidence intervals 1.42–3.41), 1.66(1.03–2.70), 1.56(1.06–2.28), and 1.57(1.07–2.31) for the use of opioids, antipsychotics, antidepressants and benzodiazepines, respectively. In the fully adjusted Cox models, use of opioids (hazardous ratio 2.04, 95% confidence intervals 1.07–3.89), antipsychotics (2.15, 1.11–4.15) and benzodiazepines (1.76, 1.09–2.82), but not antidepressants, were significantly associated with an increased risk of mortality.

Conclusions

Use of opioids, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines is significantly associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality among community-dwelling older adults in Germany. Clinicians should be careful in prescribing these psychotropic drugs to older adults while patients already under psychotropic therapy should well balance the risks and benefits of drug use. Further studies with a larger sample size and information on specific indications for psychotropic drug use and mental comorbidities are required to confirm the findings of the present study.

Use of benzodiazepines and cardiovascular mortality in a cohort of women aged over 50 years

PURPOSE

To assess the association between use of benzodiazepines (including the Z-drugs zopiclone and zolpidem) and cardiovascular mortality in women aged over 50 years.

METHODS

We used data from the E3N cohort. Data self-reported in biennial questionnaires was matched with drug reimbursement and vital status/causes of death data. In Cox models, exposure to benzodiazepines was fitted using time-varying variables, the reference category being women with no benzodiazepine delivery since January 2004.

RESULTS

Among 85,353 women born 1925-1950 and followed between 2004 and 2011, 506 cardiovascular deaths occurred. Exposure to benzodiazepines was associated with increased cardiovascular mortality when hazard ratios (HRs) were adjusted only for age (HR_{ever use} 1.65; 95% CI 1.39, 1.97), but not when further adjusted for antidepressant use (HR_{ever use} 1.15; 95% CI 0.94, 1.40), nor in the multivariable model (HR_{ever use} 0.93; 95% CI 0.75, 1.16). Exposure to hypnotic benzodiazepines remained associated with increased cardiovascular mortality (HR_{ever use} 1.23; 95% CI 1.01, 1.51), but with no consistent trend across duration/dose or time since last use, while exposure to anxiolytic benzodiazepines was not (HR_{ever use} 0.83; 95% CI 0.67, 1.02).

CONCLUSION

In our study, adjustment for antidepressant use strongly attenuated any benzodiazepine-cardiovascular mortality association. Whether the modest association observed with hypnotic benzodiazepines is due to residual confounding deserves further investigation.

Trajectories in hypnotic use and approaching death: a register linked case-control study

PURPOSE

Whether the association between hypnotic and increased mortality risk is created by causation or confounding, has been long debated. We further examined the possibility of confounding by indication with a comprehensive approach.

METHODS

The National FINRISK Study cohorts of 1997, 2002, and 2007 (25,436 participants aged 25-74) were followed up until July 2012. There were 1822 deaths, and at least one gender, baseline age and cohort matched 'control' was found for 1728 'cases' yielding a final analytical sample of 3955 individuals. An index age, equivalent to the age at death of their respective cases' was set for each control. Hypnotic drug purchases were followed from the Finnish nationwide register during a 36-month run-up period before the date of death/index date. The prevalence and incidence of hypnotic purchases were compared between cases and matched controls. Moreover, latent developmental trajectories of purchases were modelled and their relations with specific and all-cause death risks were analysed.

RESULTS

An increasing difference between cases and controls was observed as regards the use of hypnotic drugs. During the last 30 months before the date of death/index date, the rate ratio of incident purchases between cases and controls was 2.37 (95% CL, 1.79-3.12) among older and 3.61 (95% CL, 2.37-5.89) among younger individuals. The developmental trajectories of hypnotic drug purchases were differently and by interpretation plausibly associated with specific mortality risks.

CONCLUSIONS

In most cases the association between hypnotics and mortality risk is created by symptomatic treatment when death is approaching.

Benzodiazepines and risk of all cause mortality in adults: cohort study

Objectives To evaluate the risk of all cause mortality associated with initiating compared with not initiating benzodiazepines in adults, and to address potential treatment barriers and confounding related to the use of a non-active comparator group.Design Retrospective cohort study.Setting Large de-identified US commercial healthcare database (Optum Clinformatics Datamart).Participants 1:1 high dimensional propensity score matched cohort of benzodiazepine initiators, and randomly selected benzodiazepine non-initiators with a medical visit within 14 days of the start of benzodiazepine treatment (n=1 252 988), between July 2004 and December 2013. To address treatment barriers and confounding, patients were required to have filled one or more prescriptions for any medication in the 90 days and 91-180 days before the index date (ie, the date of starting benzodiazepine treatment for initiators and the date of the selected medical visit for benzodiazepine non-initiators) and the high dimensional propensity score was estimated on the basis of more than 300 covariates.Main outcome measure All cause mortality, determined by linkage with the Social Security Administration Death Master File.Results Over a six month follow-up period, 5061 and 4691 deaths occurred among high dimensional propensity score matched benzodiazepine initiators versus non-initiators (9.3 v 9.4 events per 1000 person years; hazard ratio 1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.04). A 4% (95% confidence interval 1% to 8%) to 9% (2% to 7%) increase in mortality risk was observed associated with the start of benzodiazepine treatment for follow-ups of 12 and 48 months and in subgroups of younger patients and patients initiating short acting agents. In secondary analyses comparing 1:1 high dimensional propensity score matched patients initiating benzodiazepines with an active comparator, ie, patients starting treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants, benzodiazepine use was associated with a 9% (95% confidence interval 3% to 16%) increased risk.Conclusions This large population based cohort study suggests either no increase or at most a minor increase in risk of all cause mortality associated with benzodiazepine initiation. If a detrimental effect exists, it is likely to be much smaller than previously stated and to have uncertain clinical relevance. Residual confounding likely explains at least part of the small increase in mortality risk observed in selected analyses.

Benzodiazepine, z-drug and pregabalin prescriptions and mortality among patients in opioid maintenance treatment-A nation-wide register-based open cohort study

BACKGROUND

Use of sedatives may increase risk of death in opioid users. The aim of the study was to assess whether prescription of sedatives may be associated with mortality in patients in opioid maintenance treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective register-based open cohort study included nation-wide register data including all individuals who were dispensed methadone or buprenorphine as opioid maintenance treatment for opioid dependence between July, 2005 and December, 2012 (N=4501). Outcome variables were overdose mortality and non-overdose mortality, respectively. Extended Cox regression analyses examined associations between type of sedative prescriptions and death, controlling for sex, age, previous overdoses and suicide attempts, psychiatric in-patient treatment and opioid maintenance treatment status. Opioid maintenance was assumed to last for 90days (or 30days in a sensitivity analysis) after the last methadone or buprenorphine prescription.

RESULTS

Benzodiazepine prescriptions were associated with non-overdose death (HR: 2.02, 95% CI: 1.29-3.18) but not significantly associated with overdose death (1.49, 0.97-2.29). Z-drug (1.60, 1.07-2.39) and pregabalin prescriptions (2.82, 1.79-4.43) were associated with overdose death. In the sensitivity analysis, all categories of sedatives, including benzodiazepines, were significantly associated with overdose death.

CONCLUSIONS

Caution is advised when prescribing sedative drugs, including benzodiazepines, z-drugs and pregabalin, to patients in opioid maintenance treatment.

Mortality Risk of Hypnotics: Strengths and Limits of Evidence

Sleeping pills, more formally defined as hypnotics, are sedatives used to induce and maintain sleep. In a review of publications for the past 30 years, descriptive epidemiologic studies were identified that examined the mortality risk of hypnotics and related sedative-anxiolytics. Of the 34 studies estimating risk ratios, odds ratios, or hazard ratios, excess mortality associated with hypnotics was significant (p < 0.05) in 24 studies including all 14 of the largest, contrasted with no studies at all suggesting that hypnotics ever prolong life. The studies had many limitations: possibly tending to overestimate risk, such as possible confounding by indication with other risk factors; confusing hypnotics with drugs having other indications; possible genetic confounders; and too much heterogeneity of studies for meta-analyses. There were balancing limitations possibly tending towards underestimates of risk such as limited power, excessive follow-up intervals with possible follow-up mixing of participants taking hypnotics with controls, missing dosage data for most studies, and over-adjustment of confounders. Epidemiologic association in itself is not adequate proof of causality, but there is proof that hypnotics cause death in overdoses; there is thorough understanding of how hypnotics euthanize animals and execute humans; and there is proof that hypnotics cause potentially lethal morbidities such as depression, infection, poor driving, suppressed respiration, and possibly cancer. Combining these proofs with consistent evidence of association, the great weight of evidence is that hypnotics cause huge risks of decreasing a patient's duration of survival.

Multimorbidity and use of hypnotic and anxiolytic drugs: cross-sectional and follow-up study in primary healthcare in Iceland

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of multimorbidity is increasing worldwide, presumably leading to an increased use of medicines. During the last decades the use of hypnotic and anxiolytic benzodiazepine derivatives and related drugs has increased dramatically. These drugs are frequently prescribed for people with a sleep disorder often merely designated as "insomnia" in the medical records and lacking a clear connection with the roots of the patients' problems. Our aim was to analyse the prevalence of multimorbidity in primary healthcare in Iceland, while concurrently investigating a possible association with the prevalence and incidence of hypnotic/anxiolytic prescriptions, short-term versus chronic use.

METHODS

Data were retrieved from a comprehensive database of medical records from primary healthcare in Iceland to find multimorbid patients and prescriptions for hypnotics and anxiolytics, linking diagnoses (ICD-10) and prescriptions (2009-2012) to examine a possible association. Nearly 222,000 patients, 83 % being local residents in the capital area, who contacted 16 healthcare centres served in total by 140 general practitioners, were set as a reference to find the prevalence of multimorbidity as well as the prevalence and incidence of hypnotic/anxiolytic prescriptions.

RESULTS

The prevalence of multimorbidity in the primary care population was 35 %, lowest in the young, increasing with age up to the 80+ group where it dropped somewhat. The prevalence of hypnotic/anxiolytic prescriptions was 13.9 %. The incidence rate was 19.4 per 1000 persons per year in 2011, and 85 % of the patients prescribed hypnotics/anxiolytics were multimorbid. Compared to patients without multimorbidity, multimorbid patients were far more likely to be prescribed a hypnotic and/or an anxiolytic, OR = 14.9 (95 % CI = 14.4-15.4).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with multiple chronic conditions are common in the primary care setting, and prevalence and incidence of hypnotic/anxiolytic prescriptions are high. Solely explaining use of these drugs by linear thinking, i.e. that "insomnia" leads to their prescription is probably simplistic, since the majority of patients prescribed these drugs are multimorbid having several chronic conditions which could lead to sleeping problems. However, multimorbidity as such is not an indication for hypnotics, and doctors should be urged to greater caution in their prescribing, bearing in mind non-pharmacological therapy options.

Multimorbidity and use of hypnotic and anxiolytic drugs: cross-sectional and follow-up study in primary healthcare in Iceland

Background

The prevalence of multimorbidity is increasing worldwide, presumably leading to an increased use of medicines. During the last decades the use of hypnotic and anxiolytic benzodiazepine derivatives and related drugs has increased dramatically. These drugs are frequently prescribed for people with a sleep disorder often merely designated as “insomnia” in the medical records and lacking a clear connection with the roots of the patients’ problems. Our aim was to analyse the prevalence of multimorbidity in primary healthcare in Iceland, while concurrently investigating a possible association with the prevalence and incidence of hypnotic/anxiolytic prescriptions, short-term versus chronic use.

Methods

Data were retrieved from a comprehensive database of medical records from primary healthcare in Iceland to find multimorbid patients and prescriptions for hypnotics and anxiolytics, linking diagnoses (ICD-10) and prescriptions (2009–2012) to examine a possible association. Nearly 222,000 patients, 83 % being local residents in the capital area, who contacted 16 healthcare centres served in total by 140 general practitioners, were set as a reference to find the prevalence of multimorbidity as well as the prevalence and incidence of hypnotic/anxiolytic prescriptions.

Results

The prevalence of multimorbidity in the primary care population was 35 %, lowest in the young, increasing with age up to the 80+ group where it dropped somewhat. The prevalence of hypnotic/anxiolytic prescriptions was 13.9 %. The incidence rate was 19.4 per 1000 persons per year in 2011, and 85 % of the patients prescribed hypnotics/anxiolytics were multimorbid. Compared to patients without multimorbidity, multimorbid patients were far more likely to be prescribed a hypnotic and/or an anxiolytic, OR = 14.9 (95 % CI = 14.4–15.4).

Conclusions

Patients with multiple chronic conditions are common in the primary care setting, and prevalence and incidence of hypnotic/anxiolytic prescriptions are high. Solely explaining use of these drugs by linear thinking, i.e. that “insomnia” leads to their prescription is probably simplistic, since the majority of patients prescribed these drugs are multimorbid having several chronic conditions which could lead to sleeping problems. However, multimorbidity as such is not an indication for hypnotics, and doctors should be urged to greater caution in their prescribing, bearing in mind non-pharmacological therapy options.

Hypnotic drug risks of mortality, infection, depression, and cancer: but lack of benefit

This is a review of hypnotic drug risks and benefits, reassessing and updating advice presented to the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (United States FDA). Almost every month, new information appears about the risks of hypnotics (sleeping pills). The most important risks of hypnotics include excess mortality, especially overdose deaths, quiet deaths at night, infections, cancer, depression and suicide, automobile crashes, falls, and other accidents, and hypnotic-withdrawal insomnia. Short-term use of one-two prescriptions is associated with greater risk per dose than long-term use. Hypnotics have usually been prescribed without approved indication, most often with specific contraindications, but even when indicated, there is little or no benefit. The recommended doses objectively increase sleep little if at all, daytime performance is often made worse, not better, and the lack of general health benefits is commonly misrepresented in advertising. Treatments such as the cognitive behavioral treatment of insomnia and bright light treatment of circadian rhythm disorders offer safer and more effective alternative approaches to insomnia.

Hypnotic drug risks of mortality, infection, depression, and cancer: but lack of benefit

This is a review of hypnotic drug risks and benefits, reassessing and updating advice presented to the Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (United States FDA). Almost every month, new information appears about the risks of hypnotics (sleeping pills). This review includes new information on the growing USA overdose epidemic, eight new epidemiologic studies of hypnotics' mortality not available for previous compilations, and new emphasis on risks of short-term hypnotic prescription. The most important risks of hypnotics include excess mortality, especially overdose deaths, quiet deaths at night, infections, cancer, depression and suicide, automobile crashes, falls, and other accidents, and hypnotic-withdrawal insomnia. The short-term use of one-two prescriptions is associated with greater risk per dose than long-term use. Hypnotics are usually prescribed without approved indication, most often with specific contraindications, but even when indicated, there is little or no benefit. The recommended doses objectively increase sleep little if at all, daytime performance is often made worse, not better, and the lack of general health benefits is commonly misrepresented in advertising. Treatments such as the cognitive behavioral treatment of insomnia and bright light treatment of circadian rhythm disorders might offer safer and more effective alternative approaches to insomnia.

Hypnotic drug risks of mortality, infection, depression, and cancer: but lack of benefit

This is a review of hypnotic drug risks and benefits. Almost every month, new information appears about the risks of hypnotics (sleeping pills). The most important risks of hypnotics include excess mortality (especially overdose deaths, quiet deaths at night, and suicides), infections, cancer, depression, automobile crashes, falls, other accidents, and hypnotic-withdrawal insomnia. Short-term use of one-two prescriptions is associated with even greater risk per dose than long-term use. Hypnotics have usually been prescribed without approved indication, most often with specific contraindications, but even when indicated, there is little or no benefit. The recommended doses objectively increase sleep little if at all, daytime performance is often made worse (not better) and the lack of general health benefits is commonly misrepresented in advertising. Treatments such as the cognitive behavioral treatment of insomnia and bright light treatment of circadian rhythm disorders offer safer and more effective alternative approaches to insomnia.

The Use of Hypnotics and Mortality--A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Sleep disorders, especially chronic insomnia, have become major health problem worldwide and, as a result, the use of hypnotics is steadily increasing. However, few studies with a large sample size and long-term observation have been conducted to investigate the relationship between specific hypnotics and mortality.

Methods

We conducted this retrospective cohort study using data from the National Health Insurance Research Database in Taiwan. Information from claims data including basic characteristics, the use of hypnotics, and survival from 2000 to 2009 for 1,320,322 individuals were included. The use of hypnotics was divided into groups using the defined daily dose and the cumulative length of use. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated from a Cox proportional hazards model, with two different matching techniques to examine the associations.

Results

Compared to the non-users, both users of benzodiazepines (HR = 1.81; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.78–1.85) and mixed users (HR = 1.44; 95% CI = 1.42–1.47) had a higher risk of death, whereas the users of other non-benzodiazepines users showed no differences. Zolpidem users (HR = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.71–0.75) exhibited a lower risk of mortality in the adjusted models. This pattern remained similar in both matching techniques. Secondary analysis indicated that zolpidem users had a reduced risk of major cause-specific mortality except cancer, and that this protective effect was dose-responsive, with those using for more than 1 year having the lowest risk.

Conclusions

The effects of different types of hypnotics on mortality were diverse in this large cohort with long-term follow-up based on representative claims data in Taiwan. The use of zolpidem was associated with a reduced risk of mortality.