Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32377861›Full record

SynthesisSchmerz (Berlin, Germany)2020

[Recommendations of the second update of the LONTS guidelines : Long-term opioid therapy for chronic noncancer pain].

Winfried Häuser, Frietjof Bock, Michael Hüppe, Monika Nothacker, Heike Norda, Lukas Radbruch, Marcus Schiltenwolf, Matthias Schuler, Thomas Tölle, Annika Viniol and 2 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Schmerz (Berlin, Germany), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 51 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Winfried HäuserMedizinisches Versorgungszentrum für Schmerzmedizin und seelische Gesundheit, Saarbrücken St. Johann, Großherzog-Friedrich-Straße 44-46, 66111, Saarbrücken, Deutschland. whaeuser@klinikum-saarbruecken.de.
Frietjof BockOrthopädie am grünen Turm Ravensburg, Ravensburg, Deutschland.
Michael HüppeKlinik für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin, Universität zu Lübeck, Lübeck, Deutschland.
Monika NothackerAWMF-Institut für Wissensmanagement Berlin, Berlin, Deutschland.
Heike NordaSchmerzLOS, Lübeck, Deutschland.
Lukas RadbruchKlinik für Palliativmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Bonn, Bonn, Deutschland.
Marcus SchiltenwolfKonservative Orthopädie/Schmerztherapie, Ambulanz und Tagesklinik, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Matthias SchulerKlinik für Geriatrie und Intensivmedizin, Diakonissenkrankenhaus Mannheim, Mannheim, Deutschland.
Thomas TölleKlinik für Neurologie, Technische Universität München, München, Deutschland.
Annika ViniolAbteilung für Allgemeinmedizin, Präventive und Rehabilitative Medizin, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Marburg, Deutschland.
Frank PetzkeSchmerzmedizin, Klinik für Anästhesiologie, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Göttingen, Deutschland.
Koautoren für die Konsensusgruppe der 2. Aktualisierung der S3-Leitlinie LONTS

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe second scheduled update of the German S3 guidelines on long-term opioid therapy for chronic noncancer pain (CNCP), the LONTS (AWMF registration number 145/003), was started in December 2018.

methodsThe guidelines were developed by 28 scientific societies and 2 patient self-help organizations under the coordination of the German Pain Society. A systematic literature search in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and Scopus databases (up until December 2018) was performed. The systematic reviews with meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials with opioids for CNCP from the previous versions of the guideline were updated. Levels of evidence were assigned according to the classification system of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. The strength of the recommendations was established by formal multistep procedures in order to reach a consensus according to the Association of the Medical Scientific Societies in Germany (AWMF) regulations. The guidelines were reviewed by four external pain physicians. Public comments were possible for 4 weeks.

resultsOpioid-based analgesics are a drug-based treatment option for short-term (4-12 weeks), intermediate-term (13-25 weeks) and long-term (≥26 weeks) therapy of chronic osteoarthritis, diabetic polyneuropathy, postherpetic neuralgia and low back pain. Contraindications are primary headaches as well as functional somatic syndromes and mental disorders with the (cardinal) symptom pain. Based on a clinical consensus the guidelines list other medical conditions for which a therapy with opioids can be considered on an individual basis. Long-term therapy of CNCP with opioids is associated with relevant risks.

conclusionA responsible administration of opioids requires consideration of possible indications and contraindications as well as regular assessment of efficacy and adverse effects. Opioids remain a treatment option for CNCP if nonpharmacological therapies are not effective and/or other drugs are not effective, are not tolerated or are contraindicated.

Indexed as

Analgesics, OpioidChronic PainEvidence-Based MedicineGermanyHumansSocieties, MedicalAnalgesics, OpioidChronic noncancer painGuidelinesMeta-analysesOpioidsSystematic review

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.