Himmel, Wolfgang

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","w14590"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","56"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Swiss Medical Weekly"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","148"],["dc.contributor.author","Grimmsmann, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Harden, Markus"],["dc.contributor.author","Fiß, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Himmel, Wolfgang"],["dc.date.accessioned","2021-08-26T14:46:01Z"],["dc.date.available","2021-08-26T14:46:01Z"],["dc.date.issued","2018"],["dc.description.abstract","Hospitalisation influences drug therapy in ambulatory care and this influence is generally negatively perceived. The few studies that have explored changes in benzodiazepine or sleep medication use as a function of hospitalisation failed to precisely determine the hospital's role in initiating, continuing and discontinuing these drugs on a valid basis. The aim of the study was to ascertain the overall influence of hospitalisation on the prescription of benzodiazepines and Z-drugs in outpatient care with a special focus on the role of different hospital departments and drug classes."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.4414/smw.2018.14590"],["dc.identifier.pmid","29442341"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/88876"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.relation.eissn","1424-3997"],["dc.relation.issn","1424-7860"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.title","The influence of hospitalisation on the initiation, continuation and discontinuation of benzodiazepines and Z-drugs - an observational study"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","295"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","3"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","301"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","70"],["dc.contributor.author","Grimmsmann, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Himmel, Wolfgang"],["dc.creator.author","Grimmsmann T"],["dc.creator.author","Himmel W"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T09:43:28Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T09:43:28Z"],["dc.date.issued","2014"],["dc.description.abstract","To study drug persistence for antihypertensive treatment considering typical patient behaviour including extended drug holidays or irregular repeat prescriptions. We used prescription data from a German statutory health insurance to follow up patients for 4 years. Medication persistence was defined as the continued use of a specific drug class, therapy persistence as the continued use of any antihypertensive drug. We applied 2 different interval criteria within which a repeat prescription had to be issued: 180 and 360 days. A total of 9,513 patients started an antihypertensive therapy between 2006 and 2008. Applying the 180-day (360-day) interval criterion, 28 % (66 %) of the patients starting therapy with a beta-blocker were still medication-persistent after 4 years. The rates were similar for angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs; 30 % and 69 % respectively) or angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (28 % and 61 % respectively). Looking at therapy persistence, these rates were 44 % (79 %) when an ACE inhibitor was the initial drug, 46 % (82 %) for ARBs. On average, even of those who were defined as therapeutically persistent with the 360 days criterion, half received a repeat prescription within 96 days, three quarters within 131 days-with a median supply of 1.2 units per day and 1.25 defined daily doses. By applying more patient-orientated criteria, we found that many patients were therapy-persistent and received a prescription at the appropriate time. Therapy persistence was nearly independent of the initial agent; thus, drug persistence may not be an argument in favour of choosing a certain drug as a first-line option."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1007/s00228-013-1607-4"],["dc.identifier.isi","000330994200007"],["dc.identifier.pmid","24276412"],["dc.identifier.scopus","2-s2.0-84894462179"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/34194"],["dc.identifier.url","http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/24276412"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.relation.issn","1432-1041"],["dc.relation.issn","0031-6970"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.title","Persistence of antihypertensive drug use in German primary care: a follow-up study based on pharmacy claims data"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","107"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","1"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","115"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","77"],["dc.contributor.author","Grimmsmann, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Himmel, Wolfgang"],["dc.date.accessioned","2021-04-14T08:24:49Z"],["dc.date.available","2021-04-14T08:24:49Z"],["dc.date.issued","2020"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1007/s00228-020-02948-3"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/81432"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI Import GROB-399"],["dc.relatedmaterial.material","https://www.sueddeutsche.de/wissen/adhs-medikamente-kinder-ritalin-1.5132811!amp"],["dc.relation.eissn","1432-1041"],["dc.relation.issn","0031-6970"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.title","The 10-year trend in drug prescriptions for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in Germany"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","847"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","8"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","854"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","67"],["dc.contributor.author","Grimmsmann, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Himmel, Wolfgang"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T08:53:40Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T08:53:40Z"],["dc.date.issued","2011"],["dc.description.abstract","Purpose Defined daily doses (DDD) are used for the measurement of drug utilisation. The aim of the study was to analyse whether differences between DDD and prescribed daily doses (PDD) exist for relevant drug classes such as antihypertensive drugs and, if so, whether they primarily depend on drug classes or patient-related factors. Methods Using the data of a large German statutory health insurance scheme, we analysed continuous prescriptions for the following antihypertensive drug classes: thiazide diuretics, beta-blockers, dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs). We summed the doses of all dispensed drugs per person during a defined time frame. We calculated the PDD (= total dose divided by the number of days) and expressed them as the PDD: DDD ratio (= amount of DDD per day and person). Results During the study period, 149,704 patients continuously received an antihypertensive medication. The average PDD: DDD ratio ranged from 0.84 (beta-blockers) to 1.88 (ARBs) and 2.17 (ACEIs). The average prescribed dosage of each drug class remained unchanged, even if the patients had previously received another antihypertensive drug with another PDD: DDD ratio. For example, if patients were switched from a beta-blocker to an ACEI, the PDD:DDD ratio increased, on average, from 0.79 to 2.17. Vice versa, the ratio decreased for patients with a drug change from an ACEI to a beta-blocker from 2.06 to 0.75. Conclusions Even large differences between DDD and PDD seem to be a matter of drug classes and not primarily of patient characteristics."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1007/s00228-011-1014-7"],["dc.identifier.isi","000293789800011"],["dc.identifier.pmid","21544512"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/7522"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/22475"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.relation.issn","0031-6970"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.rights","Goescholar"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.title","Discrepancies between prescribed and defined daily doses: a matter of patients or drug classes?"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","e011650"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","11"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","BMJ Open"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","6"],["dc.contributor.author","Grimmsmann, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Himmel, Wolfgang"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T10:19:39Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T10:19:39Z"],["dc.date.issued","2016"],["dc.description.abstract","Objectives: The aim of the study was to compare therapy persistence among patients who started with one of three drug regimens: a monotherapy, or combination therapy either as a fixed combination (ie, 'single pill') or as a free combination (ie, two separate antihypertensive agents). Design: In a secondary data analysis, we used descriptive statistics and multivariate logistic regression to measure the effect of the three therapy regimens on therapy persistence over 4 years. Setting: Prescription data from a large German statutory health insurance provider. Participants: All patients who started with a new antihypertensive therapy in 2007 or 2008 (n=8032) were included and followed for 4 years. Primary outcome measure: Therapy persistence, defined as receiving a refill prescription no later than within 180 days. Results: The persistence rates after 4 years were nearly identical among patients who started with a monotherapy (40.3%) or a fixed combination of two drugs (39.8%). However, significantly more patients who started with free-drug combinations remained therapy persistent (56.4%), resulting in an OR of 2.00 (95% CI 1.6 to 2.5; p<0.0001) for free combinations versus fixed combinations. This trend was observed in all age groups and for men and women. At the end of the study period, the number of different antihypertensive agents was still similar between patients who started with a fixed combination (2.41) and patients who started with a free combination (2.28). Conclusions: While single-pill combinations make it easier to take different drugs at once, the risk is high that these several substances are stopped at once. Therapy persistence was significantly better for patients who started with a free-drug combination without taking much fewer different antihypertensive drugs as those with a fixed combination."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011650"],["dc.identifier.isi","000391303400065"],["dc.identifier.pmid","27881519"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/14236"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/41707"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.relation.issn","2044-6055"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.rights","CC BY-NC 4.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0"],["dc.title","Comparison of therapy persistence for fixed versus free combination antihypertensives: a retrospective cohort study"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","e011908"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","8"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","BMJ Open"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","6"],["dc.contributor.author","Heinemann, Stephanie"],["dc.contributor.author","Weiss, Vivien"],["dc.contributor.author","Straube, Kati"],["dc.contributor.author","Nau, Roland"],["dc.contributor.author","Grimmsmann, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Himmel, Wolfgang"],["dc.contributor.author","Hummers-Pradier, Eva"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T10:20:03Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T10:20:03Z"],["dc.date.issued","2016"],["dc.description.abstract","Introduction: Hypnotics and sedatives, especially benzodiazepines and Z-drugs, are frequently prescribed for longer periods than recommended-in spite of potential risks for patients. Any intervention to improve this situation has to take into account the interplay between different actors, interests and needs. The ultimate goal of this study is to develop-together with the professionals involved-ideas for reducing the use of hypnotics and sedatives and then to implement and evaluate adequate interventions in the hospital and at the primary and secondary care interface. Methods and analysis: The study will take place in a regional hospital in northern Germany and in some general practices in this region. We will collect data from doctors, nurses, patients and a major social health insurer to define the problem from multiple perspectives. These data will be explored and discussed with relevant stakeholders to develop interventions. The interventions will be implemented and, in a final step, evaluated. Both quantitative and qualitative data, including surveys, interviews, chart reviews and secondary analysis of social health insurance data, will be collected to obtain a full understanding of the frequency and the reasons for using hypnotics and sedatives. Ethics and dissemination: Approval has been granted from the ethics review committee of the University Medical Center Gottingen, Germany. Results will be disseminated to researchers, clinicians and policy makers in peer-reviewed journal articles and conference publications. One or more dissemination events will be held locally during continuous professional development events for local professionals, including (but not confined to) the study participants."],["dc.description.sponsorship","German Federal Ministry of Health; [FKZ-IIA5-2513DSM228]"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011908"],["dc.identifier.isi","000382336700064"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/13757"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/41801"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.relation.issn","2044-6055"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.rights","CC BY-NC 4.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0"],["dc.title","Understanding and reducing the prescription of hypnotics and sedatives at the interface of hospital care and general practice: a protocol for a mixed-methods study"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","783"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","8"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","790"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","63"],["dc.contributor.author","Grimmsmann, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Schwabe, Ulrike"],["dc.contributor.author","Himmel, Wolfgang"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T10:59:53Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T10:59:53Z"],["dc.date.issued","2007"],["dc.description.abstract","Objective To explore the influence of hospitalisation on the prescription of drugs in the primary care sector using prescription data of a major statutory health insurance (SHI) organisation, with a special focus on the so-called \"Me-Too\" drugs - in particular, 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl (HMG) CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Methods A comprehensive outpatient drug prescription analysis was conducted on members of a SHI who had been hospitalised during the first 3 months of 2004. The number and costs of all prescriptions of 2426 patients during a 3-month period before admission and after discharge, respectively, were compared using Wilcoxon's signed rank test. Data are shown in absolute and relative numbers as well as relative risks (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results The total number of prescriptions before hospitalisation and after discharge remained nearly the same, while the number of different active substances prescribed per patient decreased by 4%. However, overall costs increased after discharge by 15% due to the higher cost per prescription. Changes in medication affected nearly every patient (98.1%), and 60% had at least five changes. Of the substances prescribed to an individual before admission, 57% were cancelled after discharge, and 55% of all substances prescribed after discharge were novel prescriptions. Significantly more patients received a PPI or statin after hospitalisation (RR for a PPI: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.12 -1.45; RR for a statin: 1.16; 95% CI: 1.02-1.32). The increase in PPI medication was due to a 58% increase in the number of patients receiving pantoprazole, a \"Me-Too\" drug. Conclusion Hospitalisation exerts a marked influence on drug therapy in ambulatory care, with a significant increase in the prescription of novel, on-patent drugs instead of less expensive alternatives."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1007/s00228-007-0325-1"],["dc.identifier.isi","000247969600008"],["dc.identifier.pmid","17549465"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/50800"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.relation.issn","0031-6970"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.title","The influence of hospitalisation on drug prescription in primary care - a large-scale follow-up study"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","1206"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","12"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","1213"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","18"],["dc.contributor.author","Grimmsmann, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Himmel, Wolfgang"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T11:21:44Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T11:21:44Z"],["dc.date.issued","2009"],["dc.description.abstract","Purpose To ascertain the rate and range of continuous polypharmacy in German general practices and compare practice characteristics and prescribing profiles in practices with a high rate of polypharmacy patients (HPP) and a low rate of polypharmacy patients (LPP), respectively. Methods This observational study used a database composed of prescription data from a large German statutory health insurance. We defined polypharmacy as the continuous prescription of five or more drugs and calculated the percentage of polypharmacy patients for each practice to identify HPP and LPP. Results A total of 136 521 patients in 730 general practices received continuous medication. About 10% of these patients (14 293/136 521) received five or more different drugs. HPP had, on average, 15.1% polypharmacy patients compared to 4.2% in LPP. The total number of patients attending either a HPP or LPP was comparable (437 vs. 416; p = 0.102), but HPP had a higher number of patients with prescriptions (76.9% vs. 70.8%; p < 0.0001). The patients' age distribution was similar (68.0 in LPP vs. 68.8 in RPP) and there were slightly more female, patients in LPP. Doctors in HPP prescribed proton pump inhibitors and NSAIDs more frequently than doctors in LPP, but there was no difference in the prescription of me-too drugs. Conclusion The absolute differences in age and gender distribution between HPP and LPP were modest. Prescribing quality, as measured by the rate of me-too drug prescriptions, was similar across all practices. Therefore, differences in the rate of polypharmacy in general practice cannot sufficiently be explained by these factors. Copyright (C) 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1002/pds.1841"],["dc.identifier.isi","000272824200011"],["dc.identifier.pmid","19795368"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/55845"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.relation.issn","1053-8569"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.title","Polypharmacy in primary care practices: an analysis using a large health insurance database"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","380"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","21"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Deutsches Ärzteblatt international"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","381"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","119"],["dc.contributor.author","Grimmsmann, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Kostev, Karel"],["dc.contributor.author","Himmel, Wolfgang"],["dc.creator.author","Grimmsmann T"],["dc.creator.author","Kostev K"],["dc.creator.author","Himmel W"],["dc.date.accessioned","2022-11-01T10:17:15Z"],["dc.date.available","2022-11-01T10:17:15Z"],["dc.date.issued","2022"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.3238/arztebl.m2022.0151"],["dc.identifier.pmid","36045552"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/116768"],["dc.identifier.url","https://publications.goettingen-research-online.de/handle/2/117160"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI-Import GROB-605"],["dc.relatedmaterial.fulltext","https://www.aerzteblatt.de/int/archive/article/225274"],["dc.relation.doi","10.3238/arztebl.m2022.0151"],["dc.relation.eissn","1866-0452"],["dc.relation.issn","1866-0452"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.subject.gro","Benzodiazepines, Z-drugs, Drug Prescriptions"],["dc.title","The role of private prescriptions in benzodiazepine and Z-drug use—a secondary analysis of office-based prescription data"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","pds.5536"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety"],["dc.contributor.author","Grimmsmann, Thomas"],["dc.contributor.author","Himmel, Wolfgang"],["dc.creator.author","Thomas Grimmsmann"],["dc.creator.author","Wolfgang Himmel"],["dc.date.accessioned","2022-11-29T10:11:01Z"],["dc.date.available","2022-11-29T10:11:01Z"],["dc.date.issued","2022"],["dc.description.abstract","Purpose: To analyse (1) how often patients insured under the statutory health insurance (SHI) scheme received repeated prescriptions for benzodiazepines or Z-drugs as private prescriptions and (2) how often doctors switched from SHI prescriptions to private prescriptions and vice versa when issuing repeat prescriptions.\r\n\r\nMethods: On basis of anonymized prescriptions from 874 ambulatory practices in Germany, we analysed the percentage of private prescriptions for Z-drugs, benzodiazepines/anxiolytics, and benzodiazepines/hypnotics and sedatives over 6 years (2014 to 2020).\r\n\r\nResults: Of 2 200 446 prescriptions for a benzodiazepine or Z-drug, 38% were private prescriptions. In case of Z-drugs, the rate of private prescriptions was 44.1% for single prescriptions and 48.9% for refills. The difference was smaller for anxiolytics (23.3% vs. 26.0%) and, for benzodiazepine/hypnotics and sedatives, the proportion of private prescriptions for refills was even lower than for single prescriptions. In case of Z-drugs, the proportion of private prescriptions was, on average, 42.7% for the first prescription of a series of repeat prescriptions and 49.6% for the tenth prescription. The increase was smaller for anxiolytics and negligible for benzodiazepine/hypnotics and sedatives. Doctors stayed with their initial decision in more than three quarters of repeat prescriptions, be it a SHI or private prescription.\r\n\r\nConclusion: While we observed a large number of private prescriptions for benzodiazepines and Z-drugs, the proportion was only slightly higher for refills than for single prescriptions. Doctors do not seem to issue private prescriptions as a strategy to mask especially long-term use of these substances.\r\n\r\nKeywords: ambulatory care; cohort studies; drug prescriptions; hypnotics and sedatives; physicians' practice patterns."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1002/pds.5536"],["dc.identifier.pmid","36039726"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/117863"],["dc.identifier.url","https://publications.goettingen-research-online.de/handle/2/113690"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI-Import GROB-597"],["dc.relation.doi","10.1002/pds.5536"],["dc.relation.eissn","1099-1557"],["dc.relation.issn","1053-8569"],["dc.relation.issn","1099-1557"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Allgemeinmedizin"],["dc.rights.uri","http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor"],["dc.title","Role of private prescriptions in the long‐term use of benzodiazepines and Z‐drugs: a patient‐related follow‐up study"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]