ArticleFamily practice2025
Exploring opioid management challenges in chronic non-cancer pain: findings from a mixed-methods study among general practitioners in Germany.
Article in Family practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Opioid Therapy Discontinuation in General Practice: Associations with Adjunct Therapies and Somatoform Pain Disorders.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2026Article
- Towards Sex- and Gender-Sensitive Pain Management: Participatory Development of the GESCO Intervention for Chronic Non-Cancer Pain and Long-Term Opioid Therapy in Primary Care.Journal of pain research · 2026Article
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
backgroundPrescribing high-potency opioids for chronic non-cancer pain has increased in Germany, despite limited evidence of long-term efficacy. General practitioners write approximately 87% of all opioid prescriptions. The guideline "Long-term use of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain" (LONTS) provides recommendations for responsible opioid management, but its uptake in primary care remains unclear.
objectiveThis study investigates how general practitioners apply LONTS guideline recommendations and identifies barriers to implementation.
methodsA mixed-methods study was conducted, including an online questionnaire to detect deviations from LONTS recommendations, followed by semi-structured telephone interviews to explore barriers for guideline adherence.
resultsA total of 131 questionnaires and 21 interviews with general practitioners were analyzed. 45% of questionnaire participants were unfamiliar with the LONTS guideline. Four key gaps were identified: (i) Nearly 40% of general practitioners rarely or never set individualized treatment goals for chronic pain patients; (ii) 49% preferred combining long-acting opioids at fixed intervals with short-acting opioids on demand; (iii) 17% used short-acting opioid monotherapy, considered a treatment error; (iv) 44% did not discuss opioid reduction or discontinuation after 6 months of effective pain relief. Qualitative analysis identified key barriers: lack of integration into daily routines, anticipating patients' fear of pain recurrence, and preference for personal experience over evidence.
conclusionGeneral practitioners in Germany may struggle to implement LONTS recommendations for opioid use in chronic non-cancer pain. Targeted strategies are needed to promote and improve the adoption of these guidelines in primary care.
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.