↓ Skip to main content

Understanding long-term opioid prescribing for non-cancer pain in primary care: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Primary Care, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
121 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Understanding long-term opioid prescribing for non-cancer pain in primary care: a qualitative study
Published in
BMC Primary Care, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12875-015-0335-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carolyn McCrorie, S. José Closs, Allan House, Duncan Petty, Lucy Ziegler, Liz Glidewell, Robert West, Robbie Foy

Abstract

The place of opioids in the management of chronic, non-cancer pain is limited. Even so their use is escalating, leading to concerns that patients are prescribed strong opioids inappropriately and alternatives to medication are under-used. We aimed to understand the processes which bring about and perpetuate long-term prescribing of opioids for chronic, non-cancer pain. We held semi-structured interviews with patients and focus groups with general practitioners (GPs). Participants included 23 patients currently prescribed long-term opioids and 15 GPs from Leeds and Bradford, United Kingdom (UK). We used a grounded approach to the analysis of transcripts. Patients are driven by the needs for pain relief, explanation, and improvement or maintenance of quality of life. GPs' responses are shaped by how UK general practice is organised, available therapeutic choices and their expertise in managing chronic pain, especially when facing diagnostic uncertainty or when their own approach is at odds with the patient's wishes. Four features of the resulting transaction between patients and doctors influence prescribing: lack of clarity of strategy, including the risk of any plans being subverted by urgent demands; lack of certainty about locus of control in decision-making, especially in relation to prescribing; continuity in the doctor-patient relationship; and mutuality and trust. Problematic prescribing occurs when patients experience repeated consultations that do not meet their needs and GPs feel unable to negotiate alternative approaches to treatment. Therapeutic short-termism is perpetuated by inconsistent clinical encounters and the absence of mutually-agreed formulations of underlying problems and plans of action. Apart from commissioning improved access to appropriate specialist services, general practices should also consider how they manage problematic opioid prescribing and be prepared to set boundaries with patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 118 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 20 17%
Researcher 18 15%
Student > Master 16 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 10%
Other 10 8%
Other 19 16%
Unknown 26 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 18%
Social Sciences 10 8%
Psychology 9 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 2%
Other 15 12%
Unknown 30 25%
Attention Score in Context

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 18 May 2016.
All research outputs
#15,170,530
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1,381
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,598
of 280,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#39
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 280,196 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.