Cited by 57Opioid Use Disorder TreatmentPain Management and Opioid UseMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation

Efficacy of interventions to reduce long term opioid treatment for chronic non-cancer pain: systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Avery, Nicholas, McNeilage, Amy G, Stanaway, Fiona, Ashton-James, Claire E, Blyth, Fiona M, Martin, Rebecca, Gholamrezaei, Ali, Glare, Paul·2022·BMJ

Abstract

Abstract Objective To review interventions to reduce long term opioid treatment in people with chronic non-cancer pain, considering efficacy on dose reduction and discontinuation, pain, function, quality of life, withdrawal symptoms, substance use, and adverse events. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies of interventions. Data sources Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library searched from inception to July 2021. Reference lists and previous reviews were also searched and experts were contacted. Eligibility criteria for study selection Original research in English. Case reports and cross sectional studies were excluded. Data extraction and synthesis Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, and used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tools for randomised and non-randomised studies (RoB 2 and ROBINS-I). Authors grouped interventions into five categories (pain self-management, complementary and alternative medicine, pharmacological and biomedical devices and interventions, opioid replacement treatment, and deprescription methods), estimated pooled effects using random effects meta-analytical models, and appraised the certainty of evidence using GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation). Results Of 166 studies meeting inclusion criteria, 130 (78%) were considered at critical risk of bias and were excluded from the evidence synthesis. Of the 36 included studies, few had comparable treatment arms and sample sizes were generally small. Consequently, the certainty of the evidence was low or very low for more than 90% (41/44) of GRADE outcomes, including for all non-opioid patient outcomes. Despite these limitations, evidence of moderate certainty indicated that interventions to support prescribers’ adherence to guidelines increased the likelihood of patients discontinuing opioid treatment (adjusted odds ratio 1.5, 95% confidence interval 1.0 to 2.1), and that these prescriber interventions as well as pain self-management programmes reduced opioid dose more than controls (intervention v control, mean difference –6.8 mg (standard error 1.6) daily oral morphine equivalent, P<0.001; pain programme v control, −14.31 mg daily oral morphine equivalent, 95% confidence interval −21.57 to −7.05). Conclusions Evidence on the reduction of long term opioid treatment for chronic pain continues to be constrained by poor study methodology. Of particular concern is the lack of evidence relating to possible harms. Agreed standards for designing and reporting studies on the reduction of opioid treatment are urgently needed. Review registration PROSPERO CRD42020140943.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj-2021-066375

Cites

217 of 217 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Most longitudinal studies have found that patients on opioid agonists are not able to successfully complete tapering attempts.

    “Nevertheless, most longitudinal studies have found that patients on opioid agonists are not able to successfully complete tapering attempts.6–8”

    From Tapering and withdrawing opioids: guidance informed by fundamental principles to minimise withdrawal symptoms (2025) · cites this paper as [8]

    The Results (Narrative synthesis; page unavailable) report that a buprenorphine/naloxone tapering trial failed to retain any of its six tapering participants. That supports difficulty completing a taper in one trial, but the review does not establish that most longitudinal studies found patients on opioid agonists unable to complete tapering. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 218 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [21]Peterson K Anderson J Ferguson L Mackey K. Evidence brief: The comparative effectiveness of selected complementary and integrative health (CIH) interventions for preventing or reducing opioid use in adults with chronic neck, low back, and large joint pain. In: VA Evidence Synthesis Program Evidence Briefs. Department of Veterans Affairs, 2016. 28102991
  2. [33]Ryan R, Synnot A, Hill S. Describing results. Cochrane Consumers and Communication Group. 2016. https://cccrg.cochrane.org/author-resources. PMC7465879 32878617
  3. [42]National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Health and Medicine Division; Board on Health Sciences Policy; Committee on Pain Management and Regulatory Strategies to Address Prescription Opioid Abuse; Phillips JK, Ford MA, Bonnie RJ, eds. Pain Management and the Opioid Epidemic: Balancing Societal and Individual Benefits and Risks of Prescription Opioid Use. 5: Evidence on strategies for addressing the opioid epidemic. Pain management and the opioid epidemic: balancing societal and individual benefits and risks of prescription opioid use. US National Academies Press, 2017. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK458653/. 29023083
  4. [200]Walker MJ Webster LR. Opioid-induced hyperalgesia and monotherapy intrathecal ziconotide: experience with four cases. J Pain Manag 2013; 6: 257.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Avery, N., McNeilage, A. G., Stanaway, F., Ashton-James, C. E., Blyth, F. M., Martin, R., Gholamrezaei, A., & Glare, P.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • Royal North Shore Hospital (AU)
Corresponding author
Glare, Paul
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2022-04-04
Volume
377
Pages
e066375
ISSN
1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4224236297
Cited by
56
References
218
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 6
FWCI
2.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ernest Heine Family Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Keywords
chronic non-cancer pain, opioid dose reduction, opioid discontinuation, opioid substitution therapy, complementary and alternative medicine, guideline adherence, withdrawal symptoms, quality of life, morphine milligram equivalents, patient-reported outcomes, substance use, adverse events
MeSH terms
Analgesics, Opioid, Cross-Sectional Studies, Humans, Quality of Life, Chronic Pain, 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