Efficacy of temazepam in frequent users: a series of N-of-1 trials.

BACKGROUND Benzodiazepines are frequently prescribed for sleep disturbances. However, benzodiazepines are associated with side effects, and may be ineffective when used for a prolonged period of time. OBJECTIVES To investigate for individual patients whether placebo was as effective as temazepam, or whether 10 mg was as effective as 20 mg temazepam, and whether these results influenced their future temazepam use. METHODS A series of randomized double-blind N-of-1 trials were conducted in general practices in The Netherlands for patients who were using temazepam regularly. Each patient received five pairs of treatments consisting of one week of temazepam (10 or 20 mg) and one week of the control intervention (placebo or 10 mg temazepam). Per pair, the sequence of treatments was randomized. Main outcome measures were: time to fall asleep, and the individual main complaint. RESULTS Twelve out of 15 patients completed their trial. In three patients there was no difference, in five a large difference, and in four a small difference in favour of temazepam. At follow-up, seven patients had stopped or reduced their temazepam use. CONCLUSION The results regarding the efficacy of temazepam varied across patients. N-of-1 trials seem to be valuable in patients who are motivated to stop or reduce their temazepam use. They clearly demonstrate the efficacy of temazepam, and may give patients additional confidence to discontinue regular hypnotic use. The value of N-of-1 trials for patients who are less motivated is unclear, as the size of treatment effect does not seem to influence future hypnotic use.

[1]  E. Larson,et al.  Randomized clinical trials in single patients during a 2-year period. , 1993, JAMA.

[2]  G H Guyatt,et al.  The n-of-1 randomized controlled trial: clinical usefulness. Our three-year experience. , 1990, Annals of internal medicine.

[3]  J. Mucklow,et al.  Benzodiazepine withdrawal in general practice. , 1982, The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[4]  L. March,et al.  n of 1 trials comparing a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug with paracetamol in osteoarthritis , 1994, BMJ.

[5]  A Donner,et al.  Randomised study of n of 1 trials versus standard practice , 1996, BMJ.

[6]  F. Zitman,et al.  [Long-term use of benzodiazepines]. , 2001, Nederlands tijdschrift voor geneeskunde.

[7]  J. Holden,et al.  Benzodiazepine prescribing and withdrawal for 3234 patients in 15 general practices. , 1994, Family practice.

[8]  R. Thomas,et al.  Benzodiazepine use and motor vehicle accidents. Systematic review of reported association. , 1998, Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien.

[9]  Wolfgang H. H. Kruse Problems and Pitfalls in the Use of Benzodiazepines in the Elderly , 1990, Drug safety.

[10]  M. Lader Limitations on the use of benzodiazepines in anxiety and insomnia: are they justified? , 1999, European Neuropsychopharmacology.

[11]  W A Ray,et al.  Psychoactive drugs and the risk of injurious motor vehicle crashes in elderly drivers. , 1992, American journal of epidemiology.

[12]  M. Cormack,et al.  Evaluation of an easy, cost-effective strategy for cutting benzodiazepine use in general practice. , 1994, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[13]  G. Guyatt,et al.  A clinician's guide for conducting randomized trials in individual patients. , 1988, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[14]  M. Dewey,et al.  The effect of minimal interventions by general practitioners on long-term benzodiazepine use. , 1989, The Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[15]  F Sturmans,et al.  Benzodiazepines and the risk of falling leading to femur fractures. Dosage more important than elimination half-life. , 1995, Archives of internal medicine.

[16]  J. Morrison Audit and follow-up of chronic benzodiazepine tranquillizer use in one general practice. , 1990, Family practice.

[17]  M. Campbell Commentary: Statistical aspects , 2004 .

[18]  J A Lewis,et al.  Trials to assess equivalence: the importance of rigorous methods , 1996, BMJ.

[19]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Clinical usefulness of n-of-1 randomized controlled trials in patients with nonreversible chronic airflow limitation. , 1991, The American review of respiratory disease.