ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2025
Trends in analgesia prescribing in primary care in Ireland and England between 2014 and 2022: A repeated cross-sectional study.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical care patterns in the 10-years prior to primary total hip replacement: a matched population-based case-control analysis in England.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- Trends in analgesia prescribing in primary care in Ireland and England between 2014 and 2022: A repeated cross-sectional study.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Article
- Patterns of Analgesic Prescribing and High-Risk Prescribing in Primary Care in Ireland 2014-2022-A Repeated Cross-Sectional Study.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2025Article
- Impact of eliciting treatment priorities on analgesic prescribing in older patients with high levels of polypharmacy.Family practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsAnalgesic medicines are an important component of pain management, with different medicines carrying different risks and benefits. The aim of this study was to examine trends in analgesic prescribing in Ireland and England between 2014 and 2022.
methodsMonthly data on medicines prescribed and dispensed in primary care were used. For Ireland, data comprised medicines prescribed through the means-tested General Medical Services (GMS), covering approximately 32% of the population, while for England, data consisted of medicines prescribed through all general practices. Outcomes included rates of dispensings, costs and standard doses (including oral morphine equivalents [OMEs] for opioids) per 1000 population, summarized per year for each drug class and drug.
resultsIn Ireland, the rate of analgesia dispensings increased between 2014 and 2022 for most drugs. Opioid dispensings increased from 979 to 1220 per 1000 population (+25%), while paracetamol increased from 1295 to 1824 (+41%). Systemic NSAIDs decreased from 781 to 734 (-6%). In England, most analgesia dispensing rates decreased, with opioids decreasing from 721 to 585 per 1000 population (-19%), paracetamol from 734 to 484 (-34%) and systemic NSAIDs from 259 to 167 (-35%).
conclusionsSubstantially different dispensing patterns were found in Ireland and England, with dispensing rates in Ireland generally higher and increasing between 2014 and 2022 and rates in England generally lower and decreasing. This discrepancy is likely largely driven by the older age and lower socioeconomic status of GMS patients; however, further research to understand the drivers for this high volume of use is required.
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.