Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32391163›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences2020

A descriptive study of pain treatment and its follow-up in primary care of elderly patients after orthopaedic care.

Gabriella Caleres, Patrik Midlöv, Åsa Bondesson, Sara Modig

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pharmaceutical health care and sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Gabriella Caleres1Department of Clinical Sciences in Malmö/Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Box 50332, 202 13 Malmö, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-5296-3656
Patrik Midlöv1Department of Clinical Sciences in Malmö/Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Box 50332, 202 13 Malmö, Sweden.
Åsa Bondesson1Department of Clinical Sciences in Malmö/Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Box 50332, 202 13 Malmö, Sweden.
Sara Modig1Department of Clinical Sciences in Malmö/Center for Primary Health Care Research, Lund University, Box 50332, 202 13 Malmö, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPain treatment post orthopaedic care in the elderly is complicated and requires careful follow-up. Current guidelines state all patients prescribed opioids should have a plan for gradual reduction, with the treatment progressively reduced and ended if any pain remains after more than three months. How this works in primary care remains to be explored.The aim was to describe pain treatment and its follow-up in primary care of elderly patients after orthopaedic care.

methodsIn this descriptive study, medical case histories were collected for patients ≥ 75 years, which were enrolled at two rural primary care units in southern Sweden, and were discharged from orthopaedic care. Pain medication follow-up plans were noted, as well as current pain medication at discharge as well as two, six and twelve weeks later.

resultsWe included a total of 49 community-dwelling patients with medication aid from nurses in municipality care and nursing home residents, ≥ 75 years, discharged from orthopaedic care. The proportion of patients prescribed paracetamol increased from 28/49 (57%) prior to admission, to 38/44 (82%) after 12 weeks. The proportion of patients prescribed opioids increased from 5/49 (10%) to 18/44 (41%). Primary care pain medication follow-up plans were noted for 16/49 patients (33%).

conclusionsMany patients still used pain medication 12 weeks after discharge, and follow-up plans were quite uncommon, which may reflect upon lacking follow-up of these patients in primary care.

Indexed as

AcetaminophenAgedAnalgesicsOpioidsPain managementPrimary health care

Identifiers

PMID32391163
PMCPMC7199332

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.