Misuse of drugs and prebscribed medications has become a common trend in the current world. Most of the drugs that are given as a prescription in hospitals and chemists have various compounds with sedative effects on the user. As such, people who have been on certain drugs for a long period develop a dependence or sedentary use, which is harmful to the health of a human being. Additionally, most of the chemists and drug selling stores do not bother to ask for a doctor’s prescription note when people go to purchase medications over the counter (Darker et al., 2015). The pharmacists place salespeople at the stores, which make it hard to determine who is fit to receive the medication offered at the drug selling stores.
The systemic research review focuses on the importance of psychosocial interventions for people with the harmful use of benzodiazepines (BZD). BZD is a drug that is prescribed to patients suffering from anxiety, insomnia, and panic disorders. The conditions are on the rise considering the kind of lifestyles that is embraced in the 21st century. The expectations of life rose over the last few years, thus increasing cases of anxiety among the people. Economic constraints and the social responsibilities of people in the society put a lot of pressure on the young generation hence increased cases of insomnia and anxiety disorders. Many people often see the use of drugs as a quick fix to the issues arising from poor lifestyle. BZD has been an effective drug in the treatment of the conditions mentioned above, but the use of the drug for a long time can bring about dependency problems. Insomnia and anxiety disorders can easily be confused with the normal stress and allow people to continue using the drugs for the wrong reasons (Darker et al., 2015). As such, the medical practitioners need to find a solution to help patients who have used the drug for so long to avoid dependence. The problem is relevant because it only affects the health of the person using the drug, but also makes the cost of care quite high.
The studies used to create the review are quite credible. Although many researchers have not focused on the specific topic, many papers have been printed on the importance of psychosocial interventions in dealing with drug addiction. Medical practitioners prefer to use medications to curb or deal with any health condition. However, some situations exceed medical requirements; therefore can only be solved via social and psychological intervention. The combination of both medical and psychosocial approaches in handling people with the sedative use of BZD produces better results than the use of either of either the approaches. The studies involved in this review have quality evidence to back their claims. The designs that most of the studies involved in the review used gave them the ability to acquire the right and useful information on the topic (Mehdi, 2012). As such, the conclusions from these studies are effective in making an informed decision for both physicians and psychologists.
The studies presented in the review collected first-hand information from the key people who are involved in the problem at hand. Patients and nurses aired their opinions on the various practices. The use of the key people affected by the problem improved the quality of the findings and placed the findings of the studies at a higher level. Most of the research used controls and trials to measure the effects of using both methods of intervention for people with the harmful use of BZD drugs. Nurses indicated that counseling and other psychosocial aspects helps in the treatment whole appreciating the use of an alternative drug that has fewer effects on the patients. The use of control groups helped to determine the level of impacts that the use of psychosocial interventions has on the patients and the healthcare practice. The factors that the most of the studies tested or rather the variables of the studies were similar in a way allowing the review team to conduct a comparative experiment. All the studies involved in the review used a large number of participants thus making the information credible (CME, 2005). In addition, the use of a large number of participants eliminates bias that arises from a generalization of irrelevant information.
The researchers interviewed both the caregivers and the patients. The use of both parties involved in the intervention makes the information and the evidence credible. Additionally, the control groups were clearly defined to avoid personal opinions and mix-up of results. The use of well-defined control groups in research improves the quality of evidence thus making the finds useful in the nursing field. On the other hand, all the research used in the review used both experimental and non-experimental designs of the study to eliminate any chance of mistakes (Jones, Mogali, & Comer, 2012). As such, the findings are not based on the opinion of the researcher or any particular individual thus making the evidence of high quality.
The research findings of the studies used in the review are presented in a clear way, allowing the reader to make informed choices. The materials chosen for the review have been used for evidence-based practice in nursing thus indicating their clarity. The issue of drug use, especially drug dependency among patients is a critical matter in the nursing practice. As such, researchers in this area present their information in the simplest ways possible to ensure that the findings are useful in the nursing practice. Additionally, the Cochrane database has the base research analysts in the field of nursing. Therefore, the materials were highly critiqued before being included in the study (Darker et al., 2015). Only materials that used the ideal number of participants and clear control groups were included in the review.
The studies used in the review had organized their information in a systematic way to allow nurses and other readers to understand the content of the material with ease. Being the first review of the Cochrane database on this topic, the materials went through many scrutinies to establish their credibility hence the relevance of the materials used. The use of patients as well as nurses in data collection for the studies ensured reliability and clarity of information. Researchers were able to compare the nurses and the patients’ words and opinions thus presenting clear information on the topic. For instance, it was clear in all the studies that psychosocial interventions improve the conditions of people with a harmful dependency on BZD but the right medication to replace BZD is yet to be found. All the studies focused on the short-term solutions to the problem at hand. In addition, the medical world lacks an ideal replacement of the BZD drug for anxiety, insomnia, and panic disorder patients (Maremmani, 2013).
The general findings of the studies are quite clear and easy to comprehend. Psychology plays a vital role in the medical world. Psychologists like nurses spend a lot of time with the patients, and they focus on more than just curing the physical body. The emotional aspect of the human body determines in a great way the success of the physical body healing process. Additionally, the BZD drug is used to treat conditions that are associated with social aspects of life such as lifestyle and habits. As such, psychosocial interventions together with the medical treatment go a long way in achieving the intended results (Jones et al., 2012). Most of the studies used in the review achieved similar results thus making it easy for the Cochrane database analyst to make the right conclusions. The findings were organized in a systematic way to avoid any confusion during the nursing practice.
The data collected from the patients and the nurses were quite instrumental in making the conclusions of the study. The views of nurses and patients vary in the effectiveness of various practices. Some patients would advocate for the use of medication to deal with the BZD addiction, but their views were geared by their dependence on the drugs. In such cases, the view of the nurses on the topic helped to achieve an ideal conclusion, which is helpful in the nursing practice. All the research findings gave credit to the psychosocial intervention for patients with the harmful use of BZD drugs. However, many studies used in the review did not ascertain the best medicine substitute that nurses and physicians should use to replace BZD (Darker et al., 2015).
The systemic review conclusion indicates appreciation the contribution of psychosocial interventions in handling people with the harmful use of BZD. However, the studies used in the intervention indicated that the tested psychosocial interventions only work for a short period. Most of the known approaches only work for a period of three months after which an individual is bound to fall back to the misuse of the medications. For instance, the review concluded that CBT and the use of tried GP are the best psychosocial approaches that the nurses can employ in handling the sedentary use of BZD drugs. The use of BZD drugs causes sedative and hypnotic effects on their users. Additionally, continual use makes it hard for the individual to survive without the drug even with the best available interventions (Darker et al., 2015). The alternative drug that nurses use has fewer effects on sedative effects, but they also hinder the full recovery of the individuals. Therefore, the conclusion of the review does not provide an ideal solution to the problem.
The review was the first that the Cochrane database conducted on the problem, which made it hard to come up with ideal solutions. However, the conclusions of the study helped to point to a gap that needs clinical attention. Drug addiction among people with the insomnia, anxiety, and panic conditions is a common phenomenon that requires attention. As such, the systemic review’s conclusion forms a base upon which future researchers should build. The conclusion, further, allows nurses and psychologists to understand the conditions that their patients go through and the efficacy of the drugs provided (Mehdi, 2012). On the other hand, only a few studies have been done on the effect of BZD on patients. Additionally, even fewer studies have been conducted on the efficacy of psychosocial interventions for people with the harmful use of BZD drug hence the lack of enough evidence to ascertain the best intervention mechanisms.
CME Institute. (2005). Benzodiazepines: revisiting clinical issues in treating anxiety disorders. Prim care Companion J Clin Psychiatry, 7 (1), 23-32.
Darker, C., Sweeney, B., Barry, J., Farrell, M. &Donnelly, E. (2015). Psychosocial interventions to reduce sedative use, abuse, and dependence. Cochrane database.
Jones, J., Mogali, S. & Comer, S. (2012). Polydrug abuse: a review of opioid and benzodiazepine combined use. Drug alcohol dependence, 125 (1-2), 8-18.
Maremmani, A. (2013). Clonazepam as an agonist substitution treatment for benzodiazepine dependence: a case report. Case reports in Psychiatry, 1 (1), 1-17.
Mehdi, T. (2012). Benzodiazepines revisited. BJMP, 5 (1), 501.