ArticleAtencion primaria
[Quasi-experimental study of an intervention on the pharmacological management of non-oncological chronic pain in Primary Care].
Article in Atencion primaria. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Appropriateness of strong opioid prescribing chronic non-cancer pain in primary care: a cross-sectional study].Atencion primaria · 2026Article
- Opioid Pain Medication Prescription for Chronic Pain in Primary Care Centers: The Roles of Pain Acceptance, Pain Intensity, Depressive Symptoms, Pain Catastrophizing, Sex, and Age.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo analyse the impact of a formative / informative intervention on the treatment of non-oncological chronic pain in Primary Care.
designQuasi-experimental study before-after, and follow-up of the patient cohort. LOCATION: 64 Primary Care teams/centres (770 physicians).
participantsPatients≥14 years without an oncological diagnosis on: 1) fentanyl citrate, 2) major opioids and≥2 anxiolytics-hypnotics, 3) long-term major and minor opioids, 4) transdermal lidocaine, out of indication.
interventionDissemination of recommendations for the treatment of non-oncological chronic pain and the reporting of the incidents of their patients to each doctor. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Number of incidents in 2 cross sections (June 2017 and June 2018). Number of incidents in June 2017, which were maintained in June 2018 (prospective cohort).
resultsOf the 2,465 incidents detected in 2017, there was a 21.1% reduction after the intervention. The reduction was higher (61.8%, p<.001) in the prospective cohort. In absolute values, the most important reduction was in incidences of lidocaine patches outside of indication (1,032 incidences). The approved indication was found in less than 8% of the treated patients.
conclusionsThe intervention reduced the number of patients with incidences, and this reduction was higher in the prospective cohort, confirming the efficacy of sending information about patients with incidences to their physicians. The incorporation of new treatments during the follow-up year was significant, so these interventions should be perpetuated over time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.