ArticleFamily practice2025
Impact of eliciting treatment priorities on analgesic prescribing in older patients with high levels of polypharmacy.
Article in Family practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMultimorbidity guidelines recommend tailoring care to patients' priorities. The Supporting Prescribing in Multimorbidity in Primary Care (SPPiRE) trial focused on optimizing medicines use in older adults with significant polypharmacy and tailoring prescribing and deprescribing to individual priorities. This study aimed to compare self-reported and general practitioner (GP)-recorded patient priorities and examine the impact of prioritizing pain on analgesic prescribing.
methodsThis secondary cohort analysis of the SPPIRE trial and process evaluation assessed baseline participant-identified priorities and intervention group GP-recorded priorities during medication reviews with agreement assessed using Cohen's kappa. Analgesic prescribing patterns and daily morphine milligram equivalents changes during the study period were summarized. The impact of pain (self-reported, GP-recorded, and severe or extreme pain on the baseline EQ5D) on opioid intensification was analysed using multi-level models accounting for GP practice clustering and intervention effects.
resultsA total of 403 patients (mean age 76.5 years) were included; 178 (44.2%) reported pain as a priority at baseline. Agreement between self-reported and GP-recorded pain was poor (kappa 0.118, P = 0.05). Most analgesic prescriptions decreased during the study, except for potent opioids, which increased in both trial arms. All three pain variables were associated with increased odds of opioid intensification at follow-up.
conclusionIn this older population of patients with significant polypharmacy, identifying pain as a priority was associated with an increased likelihood of opioid intensification, despite guidelines advising against their use for chronic pain. This study highlights the challenges faced by GPs treating pain in older adults with multimorbidity.
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.