| Title |
What Are We Treating with Chronic Opioid Therapy?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Rheumatology Reports, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11926-012-0311-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniel Krashin, Mark Sullivan, Jane Ballantyne |
| Abstract |
The recent increase in the number of patients taking opioids chronically for pain has not yielded the expected benefits in reduction of symptoms and improved function. Chronic pain patients typically respond well initially to opioid medications, but regular use is associated with adverse psychological and physical effects. Patients with significant psychiatric comorbidity and substance use issues are more likely to stay on opioids and to receive higher doses. In the common rheumatological conditions of fibromyalgia and osteoarthritis, opioid treatment is of limited benefit because of lack of efficacy and prominent side effects. Chronic opioid therapy may be more usefully regarded as a form of comfort care, reserved for those patients who have exhausted other treatments and prospects of recovery. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 62 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 19% |
| Unknown | 15 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 36% |
| Psychology | 6 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 16 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 February 2013.
All research outputs
#14,617,109
of 22,694,633 outputs
Outputs from Current Rheumatology Reports
#459
of 706 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,748
of 282,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Rheumatology Reports
#6
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,694,633 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 706 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 282,282 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.