ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Western Pacific2025
Cost savings of reducing opioid prescribing for the treatment of people with low back pain in general practice: a modelling study.
Article in The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Contrary to clinical guidelines, opioids are frequently prescribed early in the management of LBP in primary care, leading to potential harm and downstream healthcare costs. The objective of this study was to model the one-year impacts of strategies that reduce opioid prescribing for low back pain (LBP) in primary care on healthcare costs and overdose deaths Australia-wide and explore the potential for such strategies to be cost-neutral. Methods: Two decision tree models were developed: the healthcare actions model, which tracked post-diagnosis care pathways, and the opioid overdose model, which modelled overdoses and consequent healthcare costs and deaths, following opioid prescribing. These models were developed using data from the electronic medical records of 65,612 LBP patients from general practices in Victoria, Australia and from published literature. Healthcare costs and change in overdose deaths associated with strategies delivering 0-100% relative reduction in opioid prescribing for LBP in primary care were estimated with a one-year time horizon. The relative reduction in opioid prescription needed for a strategy to be cost-neutral was also calculated. Findings: A relative 20% reduction in opioid prescribing was estimated to save $5.41 million due to changes to downstream care, save $2.24 million due to avoided opioid overdoses and prevent 81 overdose deaths nationally, over one year. A relative reduction in opioid prescribing of 1.2% and 10.3% would be needed to recoup the costs of a strategy costing $500,000 and $4 million, respectively, over one year. Interpretation: The study highlights the short-term health and economic benefits of reducing opioid prescribing for LBP and suggests that a low to medium intensity strategy could be cost-neutral or cost-saving. Funding: This study was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia.
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.