Cited by 63Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationPain Management and Opioid UsePain Mechanisms and Treatments

Management of chronic pain in primary care

Smith, Blair H, Torrance, Nicola·2011·Current Opinion in Supportive & Palliative Care

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To examine recent and current evidence available to guide the management of chronic pain in primary care. RECENT FINDINGS: The growing profile of chronic pain has facilitated some important consensus and guideline statements. Pharmacological management, based on available evidence and consensus, is essential in managing chronic pain in primary care, as part of a holistic approach, and with regular review. Studies of primary care management of chronic pain face considerable challenges, with assessment and interventions that are complex, and involving multidisciplinary approaches. Recent research evidence points to the effectiveness and feasibility of multidisciplinary interventions, with appropriate assessment and training. Specifically, a self-management programme, 'collaborative care', a cognitive-behavioural approach, and the Alexander technique show evidence of effectiveness in primary care, the latter two also proving cost-effective. SUMMARY: Most chronic pain presents and is managed in primary care; yet, most evidence for its management is difficult to apply in the primary care setting. Despite growing evidence for the management of chronic pain generally, management in primary care must be largely guided by consensus, experience, and judicious extrapolation from research in other contexts or conditions. A need for increased and on-going education and resources is apparent, as is the need for more research based in primary care.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/spc.0b013e328345a3ec

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The assessment and management of chronic pain in general practice is challenging because of its complex multimodal nature (including physical, psychological and social factors) and restrictions imposed by available time and resources.

    “The assessment and management of chronic pain in general practice is challenging because of its complex multimodal nature (including physical, psychological and social factors) and restrictions imposed by available time and resources [23].”
  • PMPs are effective in both primary and secondary care.

    “PMPs are effective in both primary and secondary care [23].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Smith, B. H., & Torrance, N.
Affiliations
University of Aberdeen (GB)
Corresponding author
Smith, Blair H
Venue
Current Opinion in Supportive & Palliative Care
Published
2011-06
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
137-142
ISSN
1751-4258 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2061274649
Cited by
63
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Discovery Research Portal (University of Dundee) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Pfizer UK
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
Keywords
chronic pain, primary care, pharmacological management, multidisciplinary intervention, collaborative care, self-management program, cognitive behavioral therapy, Alexander Technique, pain assessment, cost-effectiveness, clinical guidelines
MeSH terms
Analgesics, Opioid, Antidepressive Agents, Chronic Disease, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Holistic Health, Humans, Pain, Primary Health Care, Quality of Life, Self Care, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Sickness Impact Profile, Pain Management

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