The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Office visits and analgesic prescriptions for musculoskeletal pain in US: 1980 vs. 2000
Abstract
The treatment of pain has received increasing attention over the past decade promoted by national guidelines, the 'pain as the 5th vital sign' campaign and direct-to-consumer advertising. We examined national trends in office visits and analgesic treatment for musculoskeletal pain in the office setting, comparing data from 1980 and 2000. We analysed the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS)--a nationally representative survey of visits to office-based physicians--using data from 1980-81 (n=89,000 visits) and 1999-2000 (n=45,000 visits). During this time, NSAID prescriptions increased for both acute (19 vs. 33%, RR=1.74; 95% CI, 1.52-1.95) and chronic (25 vs. 29%, RR=1.16; 95% CI, 0.97-1.35) musculoskeletal pain visits. In 2000, one-third of the NSAID prescriptions were for COX II agents. Opioids increased for acute pain (8 vs. 11%, RR=1.38; 95% CI, 0.92-1.83) and doubled for chronic pain (8 vs. 16%, RR=2.0; 95% CI, 1.52-2.48). The use of more potent opioids (hydrocodone, oxycodone, morphine) for chronic musculoskeletal pain increased from 2 to 9% of visits (RR=4.5; 95% CI, 2.18-6.87). This corresponds to 5.9 million visits where potent opioids were prescribed in 2000--an increase of 4.6 million visits from 1980 (assuming the total number of outpatient visits was constant at the 2000 level). In spite of the increased attention to pain treatment, there has not been an increase in office visits for musculoskeletal pain complaints. The threshold for prescribing NSAIDS and opioids, however, has dropped.
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
Morley, S., Eccleston, C., & Williams, A. (1999) · Pain · doi:10.1016/s0304-3959(98)00255-3 · Cited by 1,597
Long-term opioid therapy: Assessment of consequences and risks
Savage, S. R. (1996) · Journal of Pain and Symptom Management · doi:10.1016/0885-3924(95)00202-2 · Cited by 176
Cited by
Zhang, W., Moskowitz, R. W., Nuki, G., Abramson, S., Altman, R. D., Arden, N., Bierma-Zeinstra, S., Brandt, K. D., Croft, P., Doherty, M., et al. (2008) · Osteoarthritis and Cartilage · doi:10.1016/j.joca.2007.12.013 · Cited by 2,796
Clinical Guidelines for the Use of Chronic Opioid Therapy in Chronic Noncancer Pain
Chou, R., Fanciullo, G. J., Fine, P. G., Adler, J. A., Ballantyne, J. C., Davies, P., Donovan, M. I., Fishbain, D. A., Foley, K. M., Fudin, J., et al. (2009) · The Journal of Pain · doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2008.10.008 · Cited by 2,192
Opioid Prescriptions for Chronic Pain and Overdose: A Cohort Study
Dunn, K. M., Saunders, K. W., Rutter, C. M., Banta-Green, C. J., Merrill, J. O., Sullivan, M. D., Weisner, C. M., Silverberg, M. J., Campbell, C. I., Psaty, B. M., et al. (2010) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-152-2-201001190-00006 · Cited by 1,255
Opioid Epidemic in the United States
Manchikanti, L. (2012) · Pain Physician · doi:10.36076/ppj.2012/15/es9 · Cited by 1,180
Overtreating chronic back pain: time to back off?
Deyo, R. A., Mirza, S. K., Turner, J. A., & Martin, B. I. (2009) · The Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine · doi:10.3122/jabfm.2009.01.080102 · Cited by 796
Metadata
- Authors
- Caudill-Slosberg, M. A., Schwartz, L. M., & Woloshin, S.
- Venue
- Pain
- Published
- 2004-06
- Volume
- 109
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 514-519
- ISSN
- 0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2000328742
- Cited by
- 374
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 11.81
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Office visits and analgesic prescriptions for musculoskeletal pain in US: 1980 vs. 2000. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.pain.2004.03.006
- The paper
- Caudill-Slosberg, M. A., Schwartz, L. M., & Woloshin, S. (2004). Office visits and analgesic prescriptions for musculoskeletal pain in US: 1980 vs. 2000. Pain. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2004.03.006
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.