Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26362559›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2015

Understanding long-term opioid prescribing for non-cancer pain in primary care: a qualitative study.

Carolyn McCrorie, S José Closs, Allan House, Duncan Petty, Lucy Ziegler, Liz Glidewell, Robert West, Robbie Foy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Patients' perspectives about the role of primary healthcare providers in long-term opioid therapy: a qualitative study in Dutch primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Private prescribing of controlled opioids in England, 2014-2021: a retrospective observational study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2024
    Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Carolyn McCrorieLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, Charles Thackrah Building, University of Leeds, 101 Clarendon Road, Leeds, LS2 9LJ, UK. pscm@leeds.ac.uk.
S José ClossSchool of Healthcare, Baines Wing, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.
Allan HouseLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, Charles Thackrah Building, University of Leeds, 101 Clarendon Road, Leeds, LS2 9LJ, UK.
Duncan PettyBradford School of Pharmacy, University of Bradford, Richmond Rd, Bradford, Yorkshire, BD7 1DP, UK.
Lucy ZieglerLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, Charles Thackrah Building, University of Leeds, 101 Clarendon Road, Leeds, LS2 9LJ, UK.
Liz GlidewellLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, Charles Thackrah Building, University of Leeds, 101 Clarendon Road, Leeds, LS2 9LJ, UK.
Robert WestLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, Charles Thackrah Building, University of Leeds, 101 Clarendon Road, Leeds, LS2 9LJ, UK.
Robbie FoyLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, Charles Thackrah Building, University of Leeds, 101 Clarendon Road, Leeds, LS2 9LJ, UK.

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-1010-23041
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe place of opioids in the management of chronic, non-cancer pain is limited. Even so their use is escalating, leading to concerns that patients are prescribed strong opioids inappropriately and alternatives to medication are under-used. We aimed to understand the processes which bring about and perpetuate long-term prescribing of opioids for chronic, non-cancer pain.

methodsWe held semi-structured interviews with patients and focus groups with general practitioners (GPs). Participants included 23 patients currently prescribed long-term opioids and 15 GPs from Leeds and Bradford, United Kingdom (UK). We used a grounded approach to the analysis of transcripts.

resultsPatients are driven by the needs for pain relief, explanation, and improvement or maintenance of quality of life. GPs' responses are shaped by how UK general practice is organised, available therapeutic choices and their expertise in managing chronic pain, especially when facing diagnostic uncertainty or when their own approach is at odds with the patient's wishes. Four features of the resulting transaction between patients and doctors influence prescribing: lack of clarity of strategy, including the risk of any plans being subverted by urgent demands; lack of certainty about locus of control in decision-making, especially in relation to prescribing; continuity in the doctor-patient relationship; and mutuality and trust.

conclusionsProblematic prescribing occurs when patients experience repeated consultations that do not meet their needs and GPs feel unable to negotiate alternative approaches to treatment. Therapeutic short-termism is perpetuated by inconsistent clinical encounters and the absence of mutually-agreed formulations of underlying problems and plans of action. Apart from commissioning improved access to appropriate specialist services, general practices should also consider how they manage problematic opioid prescribing and be prepared to set boundaries with patients.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnalgesics, OpioidChronic PainFemaleFocus GroupsGeneral PractitionersHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedPain ManagementPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchAnalgesics, Opioid

Identifiers

PMID26362559
PMCPMC4567803

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.