The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Efficacy, Tolerability, and Dose-Dependent Effects of Opioid Analgesics for Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Opioid analgesics are commonly used for low back pain, however, to our knowledge there has been no systematic evaluation of the effect of opioid dose and use of enrichment study design on estimates of treatment effect. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate efficacy and tolerability of opioids in the management of back pain; and investigate the effect of opioid dose and use of an enrichment study design on treatment effect. DATA SOURCES: Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and PsycINFO (inception to September 2015) with citation tracking from eligible randomized clinical trials (RCTs). STUDY SELECTION: Placebo-controlled RCTs in any language. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Data were pooled using a random effects model with strength of evidence assessed using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was pain. Pain and disability outcomes were converted to a common 0 to 100 scale, with effects greater than 20 points considered clinically important. RESULTS: Of 20 included RCTs of opioid analgesics (with a total of 7925 participants), 13 trials (3419 participants) evaluated short-term effects on chronic low back pain, and no placebo-controlled trials enrolled patients with acute low back pain. In half of these 13 trials, at least 50% of participants withdrew owing to adverse events or lack of efficacy. There was moderate-quality evidence that opioid analgesics reduce pain in the short term; mean difference (MD), -10.1 (95% CI, -12.8 to -7.4). Meta-regression revealed a 12.0 point greater pain relief for every 1 log unit increase in morphine equivalent dose (P = .046). Clinically important pain relief was not observed within the dose range evaluated (40.0-240.0-mg morphine equivalents per day). There was no significant effect of enrichment study design. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: For people with chronic low back pain who tolerate the medicine, opioid analgesics provide modest short-term pain relief but the effect is not likely to be clinically important within guideline recommended doses. Evidence on long-term efficacy is lacking. The efficacy of opioid analgesics in acute low back pain is unknown.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
(2004) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7454.1490 · Cited by 8,477
Vos, T., Flaxman, A. D., Naghavi, M., Lozano, R., Michaud, C., Ezzati, M., Shibuya, K., Salomon, J. A., Abdalla, S., Aboyans, V., et al. (2012) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(12)61729-2 · Cited by 8,291
Reliability of the PEDro Scale for Rating Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials
Maher, C. G., Sherrington, C., Herbert, R. D., Moseley, A. M., & Elkins, M. (2003) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.1093/ptj/83.8.713 · Cited by 4,808
Self-citationDworkin, R. H., Turk, D. C., Wyrwich, K. W., Beaton, D., Cleeland, C. S., Farrar, J. T., Haythornthwaite, J. A., Jensen, M. P., Kerns, R. D., Ader, D. N., et al. (2008) · The Journal of Pain · doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2007.09.005 · Cited by 3,471
Hjermstad, M. J., Fayers, P. M., Haugen, D. F., Caraceni, A., Hanks, G. W., Loge, J. H., Fainsinger, R., Aass, N., & Kaasa, S. (2011) · Journal of Pain and Symptom Management · doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2010.08.016 · Cited by 2,697
Ostelo, R. W. J. G., Deyo, R. A., Stratford, P., Waddell, G., Croft, P., Von Korff, M., Bouter, L. M., & de Vet, H. C. (2008) · Spine · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e31815e3a10 · Cited by 2,009
Chou, R., Turner, J. A., Devine, E. B., Hansen, R. N., Sullivan, S. D., Blazina, I., Dana, T., Bougatsos, C., & Deyo, R. A. (2015) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m14-2559 · Cited by 1,606
Armijo‐Olivo, S., Stiles, C. R., Hagen, N. A., Biondo, P. D., & Cummings, G. G. (2012) · Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01516.x · Cited by 1,539
2015 Updated Method Guideline for Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Back and Neck Group
Furlan, A. D., Malmivaara, A., Chou, R., Maher, C. G., Deyo, R. A., Schoene, M., Bronfort, G., & van Tulder, M. W. (2015) · Spine · doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000001061 · Cited by 704
Self-citationHypogonadism in men consuming sustained-action oral opioids
Daniell, H. W. (2002) · The Journal of Pain · doi:10.1054/jpai.2002.126790 · Cited by 401
Macedo, L. G., Elkins, M. R., Maher, C. G., Moseley, A. M., Herbert, R. D., & Sherrington, C. (2010) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.10.005 · Cited by 362
Self-citation
Cited by
Maher, C., Underwood, M., & Buchbinder, R. (2017) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(16)30970-9 · Cited by 2,535
Self-citationPrevention and treatment of low back pain: evidence, challenges, and promising directions
Foster, N. E., Anema, J. R., Cherkin, D., Chou, R., Cohen, S. P., Gross, D. P., Ferreira, P. H., Fritz, J. M., Koes, B. W., Peul, W., et al. (2018) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(18)30489-6 · Cited by 2,398
Self-citationOliveira, C. B., Maher, C. G., Pinto, R. Z., Traeger, A. C., Lin, C.-W. C., Chenot, J.-F., van Tulder, M., & Koes, B. W. (2018) · European Spine Journal · doi:10.1007/s00586-018-5673-2 · Cited by 1,584
Self-citationKnezevic, N. N., Candido, K. D., Vlaeyen, J. W. S., Van Zundert, J., & Cohen, S. P. (2021) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(21)00733-9 · Cited by 1,345
Krebs, E. E., Gravely, A., Nugent, S., Jensen, A. C., DeRonne, B., Goldsmith, E. S., Kroenke, K., Bair, M. J., & Noorbaloochi, S. (2018) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2018.0899 · Cited by 983
Metadata
- Authors
- Abdel Shaheed, C., Maher, C. G., Williams, K. A., Day, R., & McLachlan, A. J.
- Venue
- JAMA Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2016-07-01
- Volume
- 176
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 958
- ISSN
- 2168-6106 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2395265211
- Cited by
- 342
- References
- 11
- FWCI
- 38.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.