Why Z-drugs are used even if doctors and nurses feel unable to judge their benefits and risks—a hospital survey

Abstract

Abstract Background Many patients receive Z-drugs for hospital-associated sleep problems, in spite of well-known risks. The aim of this study was to learn more about the attractiveness of Z-drugs, seen from the doctors’ and nurses’ perspective. Methods Using a standardized questionnaire, doctors (63/116) and nurses (73/243) in a German general hospital were surveyed about the risks and benefits of Z-drugs, compared with benzodiazepines. Result “Reduced time to get to sleep” was perceived by doctors (51%) and nurses (53%) to be a strong benefit of Z-drugs; “confusion” and “falls” were perceived by ca. 10% of doctors and ca. 15% of nurses to be a frequent problem. Compared with benzodiazepines, respondents more often answered “unable to judge” for Z-drugs; e.g. for doctors, 18% (benzodiazepines) vs. 45% (Z-drugs) were unable to judge “improved daytime functioning” and 12% (benzodiazepines) vs. 37% (Z-drugs) were unable to judge “falls.” Conclusion Z-drugs seem to be attractive because experiential knowledge overemphasizes their benefits and fails to take risks such as drug-related falls and confusion into account. Difficulties to judge a drug’s risk-benefit ratio do not prevent doctors and nurses from using them. Interventions for reducing Z-drug usage should incorporate local quality assurance data about relevant patient risks.