32
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Safety of benzodiazepines and opioids in very severe respiratory disease: national prospective study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective To evaluate the safety of benzodiazepines and opioids in patients with very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

          Design Population based longitudinal consecutive cohort study.

          Setting Centres prescribing long term oxygen therapy in Sweden.

          Patients 2249 patients starting long term oxygen therapy for COPD in Sweden between 2005 and 2009 in the national Swedevox Register.

          Main outcome measures Effects of benzodiazepines and opioids on rates of admission to hospital and mortality, adjusted for age, sex, arterial blood gases, body mass index (BMI), performance status, previous admissions, comorbidities, and concurrent drugs.

          Results 1681 (76%) patients were admitted to hospital, and 1129 (50%) died under observation. No patient was lost to follow-up. Benzodiazepines and opioids were not associated with increased admission: hazard ratio 0.98 (95% confidence interval, 0.87 to 1.10) and 0.98 (0.86 to 1.10), respectively. Benzodiazepines were associated with increased mortality (1.21, 1.05 to 1.39) with a dose response trend. Opioids also had a dose response relation with mortality: lower dose opioids (≤30 mg oral morphine equivalents a day) were not associated with increased mortality (1.03, 0.84 to 1.26) in contrast with higher dose opioids (1.21, 1.02 to 1.44). Concurrent benzodiazepines and opioids in lower doses were not associated with increased admissions (0.86, 0.53 to 1.42) or mortality (1.25, 0.78 to 1.99). Associations were not modified by being naive to the drugs or by hypercapnia.

          Conclusions Lower dose opioids are not associated with increased admissions or deaths in patients with COPD and might be safe for symptom reduction in severe respiratory disease.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Medication-related falls in the elderly: causative factors and preventive strategies.

          People are living to older age. Falls constitute a leading cause of injuries, hospitalization and deaths among the elderly. Older people fall more often for a variety of reasons: alterations in physiology and physical functioning, and the use (and misuse) of medications needed to manage their multiple conditions. Pharmacological factors that place the elderly at greater risk of drug-related side effects include changes in body composition, serum albumin, total body water, and hepatic and renal functioning. Drug use is one of the most modifiable risk factors for falls and falls-related injuries. Fall-risk increasing drugs (FRIDs) include drugs for cardiovascular diseases (such as digoxin, type 1a anti-arrhythmics and diuretics), benzodiazepines, antidepressants, antiepileptics, antipsychotics, antiparkinsonian drugs, opioids and urological spasmolytics. Psychotropic and benzodiazepine drug use is most consistently associated with falls. Despite the promise of a more favourable side-effect profile, evidence shows that atypical antipsychotic medications and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants do not reduce the risk of falls and hip fractures. Despite multiple efforts with regards to managing medication-associated falls, there is no clear evidence for an effective intervention. Stopping or lowering the dose of psychotropic drugs and benzodiazepines does work, but ensuring a patient remains off these drugs is a challenge. Computer-assisted alerts coupled with electronic prescribing tools are a promising approach to lowering the risk of falls as the use of information technologies expands within healthcare.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A most stubborn bias: no adjustment method fully resolves confounding by indication in observational studies.

            To evaluate the effectiveness of methods that control for confounding by indication, we compared breast cancer recurrence rates among women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy with those who did not. In a medical record review-based study of breast cancer treatment in older women (n=1798) diagnosed between 1990 and 1994, our crude analysis suggested that adjuvant chemotherapy was positively associated with recurrence (hazard ratio [HR]=2.6; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.9, 3.5). We expected a protective effect, so postulated that the crude association was confounded by indications for chemotherapy. We attempted to adjust for this confounding by restriction, multivariable regression, propensity scores (PSs), and instrumental variable (IV) methods. After restricting to women at high risk for recurrence (n=946), chemotherapy was not associated with recurrence (HR=1.1; 95% CI=0.7, 1.6) using multivariable regression. PS adjustment yielded similar results (HR=1.3; 95% CI=0.8, 2.0). The IV-like method yielded a protective estimate (HR=0.9; 95% CI=0.2, 4.3); however, imbalances of measured factors across levels of the IV suggested residual confounding. Conventional methods do not control for unmeasured factors, which often remain important when addressing confounding by indication. PS and IV analysis methods can be useful under specific situations, but neither method adequately controlled confounding by indication in this study.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Randomised, double blind, placebo controlled crossover trial of sustained release morphine for the management of refractory dyspnoea.

              To determine the efficacy of oral morphine in relieving the sensation of breathlessness in patients in whom the underlying aetiology is maximally treated. Randomised, double blind, placebo controlled crossover study. Four outpatient clinics at a hospital in South Australia. 48 participants who had not previously been treated with opioids (mean age 76, SD 5) with predominantly chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (42, 88%) were randomised to four days of 20 mg oral morphine with sustained release followed by four days of identically formulated placebo, or vice versa. Laxatives were provided as needed. Dyspnoea in the morning and evening as shown on a 100 mm visual analogue scale, quality of sleep, wellbeing, performance on physical exertion, and side effects as measured at the end of the four day treatment period. 38 participants completed the study; three withdrew because of definite and two because of possible side effects of morphine (nausea, vomiting, and sedation). Participants reported significantly different dyspnoea scores when treated with morphine: an improvement of 6.6 mm (95% confidence interval 1.6 mm to 11.6 mm) in the morning and of 9.5 mm (3.0 mm to 16.1 mm) in the evening (P = 0.011 and P = 0.006, respectively). During the period in which they were taking morphine participants also reported better sleep (P = 0.039). More participants reported distressing constipation while taking morphine (9 v 1, P = 0.021) in spite of using laxatives. All other side effects were not significantly worse with morphine, although the study was not powered to address side effects. Sustained release, oral morphine at low dosage provides significant symptomatic improvement in refractory dyspnoea in the community setting.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: medical doctor, research fellow
                Role: biostatistician
                Role: associate professor
                Role: professor
                Journal
                BMJ
                BMJ
                bmj
                BMJ : British Medical Journal
                BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
                0959-8138
                1756-1833
                2014
                2014
                30 January 2014
                : 348
                : g445
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Clinical Sciences, Division of Respiratory Medicine and Allergology, Lund University, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden
                [2 ]Department of Medicine, Blekinge Hospital, SE-37185 Karlskrona, Sweden
                [3 ]Uppsala Clinical Research Center, Uppsala University Hospital, SE-752 37 Uppsala, Sweden
                [4 ]Division of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, USA
                [5 ]Discipline, Palliative and Supportive Services, Flinders University, SA-5041 Adelaide, Australia
                Author notes
                Correspondence to: M Ekström, Department of Medicine, Blekinge Hospital, SE-37185, Karlskrona, Sweden pmekstrom@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                eksm015543
                10.1136/bmj.g445
                3906915
                24482539
                e3822031-99c3-4ef2-a710-75db77a88242
                © Ekström et al 2014

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/.

                History
                : 17 January 2014
                Categories
                Research

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article