Changes in opioid and other analgesic use 1995–2010: Repeated cross‐sectional analysis of dispensed prescribing for a large geographical population in<scp>S</scp>cotland

Ruscitto, Andrea; Smith, Blair H.; Guthrie, Bruce

doi:10.1002/ejp.520

Cited by 103 publications

(138 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

107

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the past two decades, the use of opioid analgesics also significantly increased in Europe (DCAMC, 2012, Ruscitto et al, 2014, Zin et al, 2014, Schubert et al, 2013, Bandieri et al, 2009, Garcia del et al, 2008, Poulsen et al, 2013, Fredheim et al, 2010, Hawton et al, 2012, NHS, 2011,but it is unlikely that in the UK and elsewhere in Europe the non-medical use of prescription opioids will become as prevalent as in the U.S. (Fischer et al, 2014, Weisberg et al, 2014. In the U.S. opioids are widely available as they are often given by family and friends or can be obtained by "doctor shopping" or purchased from semi-legal and illegal pain clinics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ranking the harm of non-medically used prescription opioids in the UK

Amsterdam

Phillips

Henderson

et al. 2015

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Running head: ranking prescription opioidsKey words: opioids, MCDA, risk assessment, ranking, prescription drugs, harm,street heroin Both forms of heroin scored very high: overall harm score of 99 for injected heroin and 72 for smoked heroin on a scale of 0-100. The main feature that distinguishes both forms of street heroin use is that their harm to others is more than five times that of the other eleven opioids. The overall harm score of fentanyl (including injection of fentanyl extracted from patches) and diamorphine (medically prescribed form of heroin) was 54 and 51, respectively, whereas that of orally used opioids ranged from 32 (pethidine) to 11 (codeine-containing pharmaceuticals).Injected street heroin, fentanyl and diamorphine emerged as most harmful to users, with the latter two very low in harm to others.Pethidine, methadone, morphine and oxycodone are also low in harm to others, while moderate in harm to users.We conclude that the overall harms of non-medically used prescription opioids are less than half that of injected street heroin.These data may give a basis for precautionary regulatory measures that should be considered if the rising trend in non-medical use of prescription opioids were to become evident in the UK.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ranking the harm of non-medically used prescription opioids in the UK

Amsterdam

Phillips

Henderson

et al. 2015

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, coprescription of SSRI antidepressants (recommended as first line for depression) and tramadol (recommended as second line for painful conditions) is likely to be common because tramadol is commonly used for pain in the UK and 27.1% of people with depression also have painful conditions. 13,92 However, the risk of serious or fatal serotonin syndrome appears to be low (although this is poorly quantified 93 ) and a GDG would have to make a judgement about whether or not the interaction requires specific mention to inform clinicians and patients to be aware of the signs and symptoms of serotonin syndrome should they occur. The key implication is that we believe that interactions and risks should be systematically assessed and explicit decisions made about whether or not they require discussion, like the requirement for treatment benefits to be systematically and explicitly assessed.…”

Section: Use Of Economic Evidence In National Institute For Health Anmentioning

confidence: 99%

Better guidelines for better care: accounting for multimorbidity in clinical guidelines – structured examination of exemplar guidelines and health economic modelling

Guthrie

Thompson

Dumbreck

et al. 2017

Health Serv Deliv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health Services and Delivery ResearchISSN 2050-4349 (Print) ISSN 2050-4357 (Online) This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (www.publicationethics.org/).Editorial contact: journals.library@nihr.ac.ukThe full HS&DR archive is freely available to view online at www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hsdr. Print-on-demand copies can be purchased from the report pages of the NIHR Journals Library website: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk Criteria for inclusion in the Health Services and Delivery Research journalReports are published in Health Services and Delivery Research (HS&DR) if (1) they have resulted from work for the HS&DR programme or programmes which preceded the HS&DR programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the reviewers and editors. HS&DR programmeThe Health Services and Delivery Research (HS&DR) programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was established to fund a broad range of research. It combines the strengths and contributions of two previous NIHR research programmes: the Health Services Research (HSR) programme and the Service Delivery and Organisation (SDO) programme, which were merged in January 2012.The HS&DR programme aims to produce rigorous and relevant evidence on the quality, access and organisation of health services including costs and outcomes, as well as research on implementation. The programme will enhance the strategic focus on research that matters to the NHS and is keen to support ambitious evaluative research to improve health services.For more information about the HS&DR programme please visit the website: http://www.nets.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hsdr This reportThe research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by the HS&DR programme or one of its preceding programmes as project number 11/2003/27. The contractual start date was in October 2012. The final report began editorial review in July 2015 and was accepted for publication in November 2015. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The HS&DR editors and production house have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors' report and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the final report document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this report.This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HS&DR programme or the Department of Health. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the views and opinions expressed by the interviewees are those of the interviewees and do not necessarily reflect those of the authors, those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HS&DR programme or the Department of Hea...

show abstract

“…Analgesics are among the most frequently used drugs, with studies suggesting increasing use of non-prescription (OTC) [1,2] and prescription analgesics [3][4][5] in Western countries. The long-term effectiveness/efficacy of analgesics remains for the most part unproven [6][7][8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%