ArticleBJGP open2022
A qualitative interview study of GPs' experiences of prescribing opioid medication for chronic pain.
Article in BJGP open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of adverse childhood experiences on analgesia-related outcomes: a systematic review.British journal of anaesthesia · 2025Pooled it
- Exploration of the barriers, enablers and experiences of opioid management for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) in the general practice setting within the United Kingdom: A meta-synthesis.British journal of pain · 2025Article
- What is cancer pain? Investigating attitudes of patients, carers, and health professionals: A cross-sectional survey.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2025Article
- The prescribing of opioids for chronic non-cancer pain in the menopausal and postmenopausal population: a drug utilisation study in the UK.BJGP open · 2025Article
- Article
- Review of Opioid Abuse-Deterrent Formulations: Impact and Barriers to Access.Journal of pain research · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrescribing of opioid medication has increased over the past 20 years. Most occurs in primary care for chronic pain. There is little evidence that these drugs are effective for this indication. There are concerns about the continuing prescribing of opioids, particularly in the long term and at high doses.
aimTo explore GPs' experiences of prescribing opioids, problems encountered, and factors militating against good prescribing practice. DESIGN &
settingQualitative interviews with GPs who prescribe opioids in primary care in North East Wales.
methodSemi-structured interviews with 20 GPs were transcribed and subjected to thematic analysis utilising the framework approach.
resultsParticipating GPs identified a range of problems associated with prescribed opioids. They were concerned about limited effectiveness of the drugs and what they perceived as addiction resulting from their use. They identified healthcare system factors that were obstacles to good prescribing practice such as lack of continuity of care, poor access to secondary care pain management support, and, most importantly, constant time pressure. They reported adverse effects on relationships with patients. Unrealistic expectations that pain could be eliminated resulted in pressure to prescribe stronger drugs and increased doses. It led to difficulties in establishing and maintaining trust and in persuading patients to agree to, and to carry out, dose reductions.
conclusionThemes emerging from this study suggest that GPs lack appropriate control of opioid prescribing. There is a need to develop methods to help patients and GPs to work together to manage chronic pain safely.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.