AIRR - ANZCA Institutional Research Repository
Skip navigation
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/11055/811
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHolliday SMen_US
dc.contributor.authorHayes Cen_US
dc.contributor.authorDunlop AJen_US
dc.contributor.authorMorgan Sen_US
dc.contributor.authorTapley Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorHenderson KMen_US
dc.contributor.authorvan Driel MLen_US
dc.contributor.authorHolliday EGen_US
dc.contributor.authorBall JIen_US
dc.contributor.authorDavey Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorSpike NAen_US
dc.contributor.authorMcArthur LAen_US
dc.contributor.authorMagin PJen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-14T02:05:07Z-
dc.date.available2018-12-14T02:05:07Z-
dc.date.issued2017-02-
dc.identifier.citation158(2):278-288en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11055/811-
dc.description.abstractWe aimed to evaluate the effect of pain education on opioid prescribing by early-career general practitioners. A brief training workshop was delivered to general practice registrars of a single regional training provider. The workshop significantly reduced "hypothetical" opioid prescribing (in response to paper-based vignettes) in an earlier evaluation. The effect of the training on "actual" prescribing was evaluated using a nonequivalent control group design nested within the Registrar Clinical Encounters in Training (ReCEnT) cohort study: 4 other regional training providers were controls. In ReCEnT, registrars record detailed data (including prescribing) during 60 consecutive consultations, on 3 occasions. Analysis was at the level of individual problem managed, with the primary outcome factor being prescription of an opioid analgesic and the secondary outcome being opioid initiation. Between 2010 and 2015, 168,528 problems were recorded by 849 registrars. Of these, 71% were recorded by registrars in the nontraining group. Eighty-two percentages were before training. Opioid analgesics were prescribed in 4382 (2.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.40-2.63) problems, with 1665 of these (0.97%, 95% CI: 0.91-1.04) representing a new prescription. There was no relationship between the training and total prescribing after training (interaction odds ratio: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.75-1.35; P value 0.96). There was some evidence of a reduction in initial opioid prescriptions in the training group (interaction odds ratio: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.48-1.16; P value 0.19). This brief training package failed to increase overall opioid cessation. The inconsistency of these actual prescribing results with "hypothetical" prescribing behavior suggests that reducing opioid prescribing in chronic noncancer pain requires more than changing knowledge and attitudes.en_US
dc.subjectOpioidsen_US
dc.subjectAustraliaen_US
dc.subjectChronic Painen_US
dc.subjectdrug therapyen_US
dc.subjectstandardsen_US
dc.subjectdrug prescriptionsen_US
dc.titleDoes brief chronic pain management education change opioid prescribing rates? A pragmatic trial in Australian early-career general practitioners.en_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.type.contentTexten_US
dc.identifier.journaltitlePainen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000755en_US
dc.type.studyortrialCohort Studyen_US
local.message.claim2023-05-01T22:25:08.523+1000|||rp00071|||submit_approve|||dc_contributor_author|||None*
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
Appears in Collections:Scholarly and Clinical
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

74
checked on Sep 27, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.