Despite current guidelines, benzodiazepines are still considered by many clinicians to remain good treatment options, in both the acute and the chronic phase of the treatment of anxiety disorders, partially because of their rapid onset of action and their efficacy with a favourable side effect profile, and also because of the sometimes only incomplete therapeutic response and the emergence of side effects of alternative medications. Having experienced good initial symptom relief with benzodiazepine treatment, patients may also be reluctant to taper it down. Clinicians should, however, bear in mind the frequent physiological dependence associated with these substances, and suggest both pharmacological and psychological treatment alternatives before opting for a long-term benzodiazepine treatment, which may remain necessary in certain clinical conditions.

Background: Benzodiazepines are not all the same concerning their risk of high-dose use. Methods: We studied benzodiazepine use from the Luxembourg national records of all insured. We calculated the 12-year prevalence from 1995 to 2007. Benzodiazepine users were divided into 3 groups, short-term with no longer than 3-month intake, intermediate with multiple administration with at least a 1-year interruption, and continuous who never stopped. A high-dose user (HDU) was defined as a patient who received a higher dose than the yearly maximum usual therapeutic dose. Results: An average of 16.0% of the adult insured population received at least 1 benzodiazepine annually, 42.9% were older than 50, 55.9% were women, and 5.4% were HDUs. We found that 32.6% were short-term users, 49.0% intermediate and 18.4% continuous. Compared to diazepam, hypnotics had higher risks for high-dose use in at least 1 age group at first-benzodiazepine intake, the risks being greater in elderly subjects and women, the highest risks being with triazolam (adjusted odds ratio = 215.85; 95% confidence interval = 133.75-348.35) in the 69- to 105-year-old group at first-benzodiazepine intake. Anxiolytics had a low risk except for alprazolam and prazepam in the 69- to 105-year-old group at first-benzodiazepine intake, clonazepam and clobazam had the lowest risk in 18- to 43-year-olds at first-benzodiazepine intake. Alprazolam had dispensed volumes increased by threefold over the 12-year period. Conclusion: All hypnotics had higher risks for high-dose use compared to diazepam in continuous users. Two anxiolytics, clonazepam and clobazam, had the lowest risks. Hypnotics and the triazolobenzodiazepines alprazolam and triazolam were most problematic. Elderly subjects and women are at greater risks.

Objectives A clear definition of what we understand of high‐dose misuse or of a ‘markedly increased dose’ (as stated by the DSM‐5) is important and past definitions may be inadequate. The aim of this review is to describe the different definitions used and to test these definitions for their accuracy. Methods A narrative PubMed literature review was conducted based on articles published between 1 January 1990 and 31 December 2020 describing benzodiazepines (in MeSH Terms or MeSH Major Topic) and high‐dose (or high‐dosage). Specific definitions were applied to a population sample to show how definitions affect high‐dose benzodiazepine prevalence. Results Multiples of an equivalent‐diazepam dose or of the World Health Organization ‘defined daily dosage’ were used more frequently than the overstep of the recommended maximum therapeutic dosage as a cut‐off point. Conclusion High‐dose use is rare but the prevalence in the general population varies among studies, mainly due to different definitions, making both clinical and epidemiological comparisons between studies difficult. Defining a high‐dose user as a person who takes at least a higher dose than the maximum usual therapeutic dose over a defined period of time therefore appears to be clinically more consistent.

No abstract

No abstract

S55. Personality disorders: new issues in diagnosis, etiology and therapy 85s data indicate that emotions may deteriorate inhibitory functioning in BPD supporting a close interaction between emotional dysregulation and disinhibited behavior. Conclusion: Experimental research enriches our understanding of personality disorders and their biological underpinnings.

No abstract

No abstract