Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35606022›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open respiratory research2022

Patients' and their caregivers' experiences with regular, low-dose, sustained-release morphine for chronic breathlessness associated with COPD: a qualitative study.

Diana Ferreira, Slavica Kochovska, Aaron Honson, Jane Phillips, David Currow

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open respiratory research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Opioids for the palliation of symptoms in people with serious respiratory illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Diana FerreiraFaculty of Science, Medicine and Health, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia diana.mbhf@gmail.com.
Slavica KochovskaFaculty of Science, Medicine and Health, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.
Aaron HonsonPalliative Care Clinical Studies Collaborative (PaCCSC), Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Jane PhillipsSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
David CurrowFaculty of Science, Medicine and Health, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1988-1250
University of Wollongong · AUFlinders University · AUQueensland University of Technology · AUUniversity of Technology Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRegular, low-dose, sustained-release morphine is effective in reducing chronic breathlessness in people with advanced disease, particularly in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Despite experiencing a reduction in breathlessness, some patients choose not to continue long-term treatment.

aimThis study aimed to explore patients' and caregivers' experiences with regular, low-dose, sustained-release morphine for chronic breathlessness associated with COPD.

methodsA qualitative study embedded in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of regular low-dose, sustained-release morphine for chronic breathlessness for people with COPD and modified Medical Research Council breathlessness scale 3-4. After completing the RCT or withdrawing, patients and their caregivers were invited to participate in interviews in their homes focused on their experiences with the trial medication while still blinded to the arm to which they had been allocated. Data analysis used a constant comparative method informed by the principles of grounded theory.

resultsThirteen patients and nine caregivers participated. Four themes were identified: (1) Receptivity and knowledge; (2) Function as a priority; (3) Harmful and helpful side effects; and (4) Therapy-centred aspects. The concept of 'net effect' emerged from the interplay between themes, subthemes and the decision to continue taking sustained-release morphine during the trial and after trial completion.

conclusionClinicians' support and preconceived ideas about morphine influence the decision to commence sustained-release morphine. The hope for functional improvement is the great driver influencing positively the decision to take sustained-release morphine in the long term. The degree of symptom reduction, improved function, side-effects' severity and caregivers' availability creates a net effect driving patients' decisions to continue or discontinue the medication.

Indexed as

MorphinePulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveCaregiversDelayed-Action PreparationsDouble-Blind MethodDyspneaHumansDelayed-Action PreparationsMorphinepalliative care

Identifiers

PMID35606022
PMCPMC9125765
OpenAlexW4281286212

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.