ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2020
Evaluation of a primary care-based opioid and pain review service: a mixed-methods evaluation in two GP practices in England.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Efficacy of interventions to reduce long term opioid treatment for chronic non-cancer pain: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2022Pooled it
- Factors associated with the prescribing of high-dose opioids in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Outcomes of an opioid reduction tool among patients with chronic noncancer pain in primary care.Family practice · 2026Article
- Difficulties with prescribed opioids: a cross-sectional survey of primary care patients in England, United Kingdom.Pain reports · 2025Article
- A scoping review of outpatient interventions to support the reduction of prescription opioid medication for chronic non cancer pain.Journal of clinical nursing · 2022Article
- Averting a UK opioid crisis: getting the public health messages 'right'.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2022Article
- Opioids in the United Kingdom: safety and surveillance during COVID-19.Current opinion in psychiatry · 2021Review
- Acceptability of a primary care-based opioid and pain review service: a mixed-methods evaluation in England.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020Article
- The opioid problem in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOpioid prescribing to treat chronic non-cancer pain has rapidly increased, despite a lack of evidence for long-term safety and effectiveness. A pain review service was developed to work with patients taking opioids long-term to explore opioid use, encourage non-drug-based alternatives, and, where appropriate, support dose reduction.
aimTo evaluate the service and its potential impact on opioid use, health and wellbeing outcomes, and quality of life (QoL). DESIGN AND
settingMixed-methods evaluation of a one-to-one service based in two GP practices in South Gloucestershire, England, which took place from September 2016 to December 2017.
methodQuantitative data were collected on baseline demographics; data on opioid use, misuse, and dose, health, wellbeing, QoL, and pain and interference with life measures were collected at baseline and follow-up. Twenty-five semi-structured interviews (
resultsOf 59 patients who were invited, 34 (57.6%) enrolled in the service. The median prescribed opioid dose reduced from 90 mg (average daily morphine equivalent; interquartile range [IQR] 60 to 240) at baseline to 72 mg (IQR 30 to 160) at follow-up (
conclusionThe service was well received, and health and wellbeing outcomes suggest a potential benefit. Following further service development, a randomised controlled trial to test this type of care pathway is warranted.
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.