SynthesisEuropean journal of pain (London, England)2025
Healthcare Practitioner and Other Professionals' Perspectives on Gabapentinoid Misuse and Dependence: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies.
Synthesis in European journal of pain (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Healthcare Practitioner and Other Professionals' Perspectives on Gabapentinoid Misuse and Dependence: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Prevalence and Patterns of Non-Medical Gabapentinoid Use in a General Population Sample: Findings From the Australian National Drug Strategy Household Survey.Drug and alcohol review · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveThe global rise in gabapentinoid prescriptions for chronic pain has been striking. However, this trend has been accompanied by growing concerns about misuse and dependence. This qualitative systematic review aimed to synthesise the perspectives of healthcare practitioners and other professionals on these emerging challenges. DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT: Six databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO) were searched to May 2025. Eligible studies used qualitative or mixed methods to explore professional views on gabapentinoid misuse or dependence. Studies focusing solely on patient perspectives or therapeutic use were excluded. Methodological quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Data were analysed using thematic synthesis, and confidence in the findings was evaluated using GRADE-CERQual.
resultsAfter screening 1584 records, 19 original studies were included. Most were conducted in substance use treatment and law enforcement settings, where professionals frequently encounter vulnerable populations and more severe patterns of misuse than in general clinical care. Reported drivers of misuse included polydrug use, opioid substitution, psychological distress and poor access to non-pharmacological care. Signs of misuse included early refills, dose escalation and reluctance to taper. Professionals described ethical tensions in prescribing and dispensing and proposed harm reduction strategies, including prescriber education, regulatory reform, expanded treatment access and public awareness.
conclusionsGabapentinoid misuse is shaped by clinical, social and structural factors. Tackling these challenges requires systemic responses that go beyond individual prescribers. Lessons from opioid policy responses should inform balanced, compassionate and evidence-informed strategies to reduce harm and improve care. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: This is the first systematic review to synthesise professional perspectives on gabapentinoid misuse and dependence, drawing on studies from Europe, North America, the Middle East and Africa. Integrating insights from healthcare, law enforcement and policy settings, it reveals the structural drivers behind rising misuse-including opioid regulation, socioeconomic hardship and limited access to alternatives-and highlights gaps in clinical guidance. The findings offer actionable, cross-sector strategies to support safer prescribing, informed policy and more effective harm reduction.
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.