Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

بررسی حوادث جانبی مرتبط با مصرف میان‌مدت و طولانی‌مدت اوپیوئیدها برای درد مزمن غیر‐سرطانی: بررسی اجمالی مرورهای کاکرین

Collapse all Expand all

References

منابع مرورهای واردشده

Alviar 2011

Alviar MJ, Hale T, Dungca M. Pharmacologic interventions for treating phantom limb pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 12. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006380.pub2]

Cepeda 2006

Cepeda MS, Camargo F, Zea C, Valencia L. Tramadol for osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005522.pub2]

Chaparro 2012

Chaparro LE, Wiffen PJ, Moore RA, Gilron I. Combination pharmacotherapy for the treatment of neuropathic pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 7. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008943.pub2]

Chaparro 2013

Chaparro LE, Furlan AD, Deshpande A, Mailis‐Gagnon A, Atlas S, Turk DC. Opioids compared to placebo or other treatments for chronic low‐back pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 8. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004959.pub4]

da Costa 2014

da Costa BR, Nuesch E, Kasteler R, Husni E, Welch V, Rutjes AWS, et al. Oral or transdermal opioids for osteoarthritis of the knee or hip. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014, Issue 9. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003115.pub4]

Derry 2015

Derry S, Wiffen PJ, Aldington D, Moore RA. Nortriptyline for neuropathic pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011209.pub2]

Derry 2016

Derry S, Stannard C, Cole P, Wiffen PJ, Knaggs R, Aldington D, et al. Fentanyl for neuropathic pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2016, Issue 10. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011605.pub2]

Enthoven 2016

Enthoven WT, Roelofs PD, Deyo RA, van Tulder MW, Koes BW. Non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs for chronic low back pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2016, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012087]

Gaskell 2016

Gaskell H, Derry S, Stannard C, Moore RA. Oxycodone for neuropathic pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2016, Issue 7. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010692.pub3]

Haroutiunian 2012

Haroutiunian S, McNicol ED, Lipman AG. Methadone for chronic non‐cancer pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 11. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008025.pub2]

McNicol 2013

McNicol ED, Midbari A, Eisenberg E. Opioids for neuropathic pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 8. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006146.pub2]

Noble 2010

Noble M, Treadwell JR, Tregear SJ, Coates VH, Wiffen PJ, Akafomo C, et al. Long‐term opioid management for chronic noncancer pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006605.pub2]

Rubinstein 2011

Rubinstein SM, van Middelkoop M, Assendelft WJJ, de Boer MR, van Tulder MW. Spinal manipulative therapy for chronic low‐back pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008112.pub2]

Santos 2015

Santos J, Alarcão J, Fareleira F, Vaz‐Carneiro A, Costa J. Tapentadol for chronic musculoskeletal pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015, Issue 5. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009923.pub2]

Stannard 2016

Stannard C, Gaskell H, Derry S, Aldington D, Cole P, Cooper TE, et al. Hydromorphone for neuropathic pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2016, Issue 5. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011604.pub2]

Whittle 2011

Whittle SL, Richards BL, Husni E, Buchbinder R. Opioid therapy for treating rheumatoid arthritis pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 11. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003113.pub3]

منابع مرورهای خارج‌شده

Challapalli 2005

Challapalli V, Tremont‐Lukats IW, McNicol ED, Lau J, Carr DB. Systemic administration of local anesthetic agents to relieve neuropathic pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2005, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003345.pub2]

Duehmke 2006

Duehmke RM, Hollingshead J, Cornblath DR. Tramadol for neuropathic pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003726.pub3]

Gaskell 2014

Gaskell H, Moore RA, Derry S, Stannard C. Oxycodone for neuropathic pain and fibromyalgia in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014, Issue 6. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010692.pub2]

Moore 2015a

Moore RA, Derry S, Aldington D, Cole P, Wiffen PJ. Amitriptyline for neuropathic pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015, Issue 7. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008242.pub3]

Mujakperuo 2010

Mujakperuo HR, Watson M, Morrison R, Macfarlane TV. Pharmacological interventions for pain in patients with temporomandibular disorders. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 10. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004715.pub2]

Ramiro 2011

Ramiro S, Radner H, van der Heijde D, van Tubergen A, Buchbinder R, Aletaha D, et al. Combination therapy for pain management in inflammatory arthritis (rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis, other spondyloarthritis). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 10. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008886.pub2]

Rubinstein 2012

Rubinstein SM, Terwee CB, Assendelft WJJ, de Boer MR, van Tulder MW. Spinal manipulative therapy for acute low‐back pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 9. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008880.pub2]

Seidel 2013

Seidel S, Aigner M, Ossege M, Pernicka E, Wildner B, Sycha T. Antipsychotics for acute and chronic pain in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 8. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004844.pub3]

Afilalo 2010

Afilalo M, Etropolski MS, Kuperwasser B, Kelly K, Okamoto A, Van Hove I, et al. Efficacy and safety of tapentadol extended release compared with oxycodone controlled release for the management of moderate to severe chronic pain related to osteoarthritis of the knee. A randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐ and active‐controlled phase III study. Clinical Drug Investigation 2010;30(8):489‐505. [DOI: 10.2165/11533440‐000000000‐00000]

AMDG 2015

The Washington State Agency Medical Directors’ Group (AMDG). Interagency guideline on prescribing opioids for pain. www.agencymeddirectors.wa.gov/Files/2015AMDGOpioidGuideline.pdf (accessed 10 May 2017).

APA 2013

American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th Edition. Arlington: American Psychiatric Association, 2013.

Banta‐Green 2009

Banta‐Green CJ, Merrill JO, Doyle SR, Boudreau DM, Calsyn DA. Opioid use behaviors, mental health and pain: development of a typology of chronic pain patients. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 2009;104(1‐2):34‐42. [DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2009.03.021]

Bohnert 2012

Bohnert AS, Ilgen MA, Ignacio RV, McCarthy JF, Valenstein M, Blow FC. Risk of death from accidental overdose associated with psychiatric and substance use disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry 2012;169(1):64‐70. [DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2011.10101476]

Borg 2014

Borg L, Buonora M, Butelman ER, Ducat E, Ray BM, Kreek MJ. The pharmacology of opioids. In: Ries RK, Fiellin DA, Miller SC, Saitz R editor(s). The ASAM Principles of Addiction Medicine. 5th Edition. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health, 2014:135‐50.

Boscarino 2010

Boscarino JA, Rukstalis M, Hoffman SN, Han JJ, Erlich PM, Gerhard GS, et al. Risk factors for drug dependence among out‐patients on opioid therapy in a large US health‐care system. Addiction 2010;105(10):1776‐82. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1360‐0443.2010.03052.x]

Breivik 2008

Breivik H, Borchgrevink PC, Allen SM, Rosseland LA, Romundstad, Hals EB, et al. Assessment of pain. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2008;101(1):17‐24. [DOI: 10.1093/bja/aen103]

Busse 2017

Busse JW, Craigie S, Juurlink DN, Buckley DN, Wang L, Couban RJ, et al. Guideline for opioid therapy and chronic noncancer pain. CMAJ 2017;189(18):E659‐66. [DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.170363]

Chapman 2010

Chapman CR, Lipschitz DL, Angst MS, Chou R, Denisco RC, Donaldson GW, et al. Opioid pharmacotherapy for chronic non‐cancer pain in the United States: a research guideline for developing an evidence‐base. Journal of Pain 2010;11(9):807‐29. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2010.02.019]

Cook 1995

Cook RJ, Sackett DL. The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect. BMJ 1995;310(6977):452‐4. [DOI: 10.1136/bmj.310.6977.452]

Dowell 2016

Dowell D, Haegerich TM, Chou R. CDC Guidelines for prescribing opioids for chronic pain ‐ United States, 2016. JAMA 2016;15:1624‐45. [DOI: 10.1001/jama.2016.1464]

Dunn 2010

Dunn, KM, Saunders KW, Rutter CM, Banta‐Green CJ, Merrill JO, Sullivan MD, et al. Opioid prescriptions for chronic pain and overdose: a cohort study. Annals of Internal Medicine 2010;152(2):85‐92. [DOI: 10.1059/0003‐4819‐152‐2‐201001190‐00006]

Els 2017

Els C, Hagtvedt R, Kunyk D, Sonnenberg B, Lappi VG, Straube S. High‐dose opioids for chronic non‐cancer pain: an overview of Cochrane reviews. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2016, Issue 7. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012299]

EMRPCC 2016

Eastern Metropolitan Region Palliative Care Consortium (EMRPCC). Opioid conversion ratios: Guide to palliative care practice. www.emrpcc.org.au/wp‐content/uploads/2016/05/Opioid‐Conversions‐May‐3‐2016‐final.pdf (accessed 12 May 2017).

FDA 2016

U.S. Food, Drug Administration. What is a serious adverse event?. www.fda.gov/safety/medwatch/howtoreport/ucm053087.htm (accessed 9 August 2017).

Fentanyl monograph 2017

Lexi‐Comp, Inc. Fentanyl. In: Lexi‐Drugs http://online.lexi.com/lco/action/home/switch (accessed 12 May 2017).

Fleming 2007

Fleming MF, Balousek SL, Klessig CL, Mundt MP, Brown DD. Substance use disorders in a primary care sample receiving daily opioid therapy. Journal of Pain 2007;8(7):573‐82. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2007.02.432]

Franklin 2014

Franklin GM. Opioids for chronic noncancer pain: a position paper of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology 2014;83(14):1277‐84. [DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000000839]

Gimbel 2003

Gimbel JS, Richards P, Portenoy RK. Controlled‐release oxycodone for pain in diabetic neuropathy: a randomized controlled trial. Neurology 2003;60(6):927–34. [DOI: 10.1212/01.WNL.0000057720.36503.2C]

Gomes 2011

Gomes T, Mamdani MM, DhallaI A, Paterson JM, Juurlink DN. Opioid dose and drug‐related mortality in patients with nonmalignant pain. Archives of Internal Medicine 2011;171(7):686‐91. [DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2011.117]

Gomes 2014

Gomes T, Mamdani MM, Paterson JM, Dhalla IA, Juurlink DN. Trends in high‐dose opioid prescribing in Canada. Canadian Family Physician 2014;60(9):826‐32. [DOI: 10.1001/archinternmed.2011.117]

Hagen 1995

Hagen N, Flynne P, Hays H, MacDonald N. Guidelines for managing chronic non‐malignant pain. Canadian Family Physician 1995;41:49‐53. [PUBMED: PMC2145959]

Hegmann 2014a

Hegmann KT, Weiss MS, Bowden K, Branco F, DuBrueler K, Els C, et al. ACOEM practice guidelines: opioids and safety‐sensitive work. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2014;56(7):e46‐53. [DOI: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000000237]

Hegmann 2014b

Hegmann KT, Weiss MS, Bowden K, Branco F, DuBrueler K, Els C, et al. ACOEM practice guidelines: opioids for treatment of acute, subacute, chronic, and postoperative pain. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2014;56(12):e143‐59. [DOI: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000000352]

Higgins 2011

Higgins JPT, Green S, editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. The Cochrane Collaboration, Available from handbook.cochrane.org.

Howlett 2017

Howlett K. Opioid panel chair admits conflict‐of‐interest lapse. www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/opioid‐panel‐chair‐admits‐conflict‐of‐interest‐lapse/article35073017/ 19 May 2017.

Huffman 2015

Huffman KL, Shella ER, Sweis G, Griffith SD, Scheman J, Covington EC. Nonopioid substance use disorders and opioid dose predict therapeutic opioid addiction. Journal of Pain 2015;16(2):126‐34. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2014.10.011]

Häuser 2014

Häuser W, Bock F, Engeser P, Tölle T, Willweber‐Strumpf A, Petzke F. Clinical practice guideline: long‐term opioid use in non‐cancer pain. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International 2014;111:732‐40. [DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2014.0732]

Jungquist 2012

Jungquist CR, Flannery M, Perlis ML, Grace JT. Relationship of chronic pain and opioid use with respiratory disturbance during sleep. Pain Management Nursing 2012;13(2):70‐9. [DOI: 10.1016/j.pmn.2010.04.003]

Katz 2015

Katz JA, Swerdloff MA, Brass SD, Argoff CE, Markman J, Backonja M, et al. Opioids for chronic noncancer pain: a position paper of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology 2015;84(14):1503‐5. [DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000001485]

Kidner 2009

Kidner CL, Mayer TG, Gatchel RJ. Higher opioid doses predict poorer functional outcome in patients with chronic disabling occupational musculoskeletal disorders. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 2009;91(4):919‐27. [DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.H.00286]

Kosten 2002

Kosten TR, George TP. The neurobiology of opioid dependence: implications for treatment. Science & Practice Perspectives 2002;1(1):13‐20. [DOI: 10.1151/spp021113]

Kraut 2015

Kraut A, Shafer LA, Raymond CB. Proportion of opioid use due to compensated workers' compensation claims in Manitoba, Canada. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 2015;58(1):33‐9. [DOI: 10.1002/ajim.22374]

Leong 2009

Leong M, Murnion B, Haber PS. Examination of opioid prescribing in Australia from 1992 to 2007. Internal Medicine Journal 2009;39(10):676‐81. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1445‐5994.2009.01982.x]

Leung 2017

Leung PT, Macdonald EM, Stanbrook MB, Dhalla IA, Juurlink DN. A 1980 letter on the risk of opioid addiction. New England Journal of Medicine 2017;376(22):2194‐5. [DOI: 10.1056/NEJMc1700150]

Manchikanti 2012a

Manchikanti L, Helm S, Fellows B, Janata JW, Pampati V, Grider JS, et al. Opioid epidemic in the United States. Pain Physician 2012;15(3 Suppl):ES9‐38. [PUBMED: 22786464]

Manchikanti 2012b

Manchikanti L, Abdi S, Atluri S, Balog CC, Benyamin RM, Boswell MV, et al. American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP) guidelines for responsible opioid prescribing in chronic non‐cancer pain: part 2 ‐ guidance. Pain Physician 2012;15(3 Suppl):S67‐116. [PUBMED: 22786449]

McCance‐Katz 2010

McCance‐Katz EF, Sullivan LE, Nallani S. Drug interactions of clinical importance among the opioids, methadone and buprenorphine, and other frequently prescribed medications: a review. American Journal on Addictions 2010;19(1):4‐16. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1521‐0391.2009.00005.x.]

McQuay 2012

McQuay HJ, Derry S, Eccleston C, Wiffen PJ, Moore RA. Evidence for analgesic effect in acute pain ‐ 50 years on. Pain 2012;153(7):1364‐7. [DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2012.01.024]

Merskey 1994

Merskey H, Lindblom U, Mumford JM, Nathan PW, Sunderland S. Part III: pain terms, a current list with definitions and notes on usage. In: Merskey H, Bogduk N editor(s). Classification of Chronic Pain. 2nd Edition. Seattle: International Association for the Study of Pain Press, 1994:209‐14.

Moore 2005

Moore RA, McQuay HJ. Prevalence of opioid adverse events in chronic non‐malignant pain: systematic review of randomised trials of oral opioids. Arthritis Research & Therapy 2005;7(5):R1046. [DOI: 10.1186/ar1782]

Moore 2010

Moore RA, Eccleston C, Derry S, Wiffen P, Bell RF, Straube S, et al. "Evidence" in chronic pain ‐ establishing best practice in the reporting of systematic reviews. Pain 2010;150(3):386‐9. [DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2010.05.011]

Moore 2014

Moore AR, Derry S, Taylor RS, Straube S, Phillips CJ. The costs and consequences of adequately managed chronic non‐cancer pain and chronic neuropathic pain. Pain Practice 2014;14(1):79‐94. [DOI: 10.1111/papr.12050]

Moore 2015b

Moore RA, Derry S, Aldington D, Wiffen PJ. Adverse events associated with single dose oral analgesics for acute postoperative pain in adults ‐ an overview of Cochrane reviews. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015, Issue 10. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011407.pub2]

NHS Wales

NHS Wales. Opiate conversion doses. www.wales.nhs.uk/sites3/Documents/814/OpiateConversionDoses%5BFinal%5DNov2010.pdf (accessed 12 May 2017).

NOUGG 2010

National Opioid Use Guideline Group (NOUGG). Canadian guideline for safe and effective use of opioids for chronic non‐cancer pain. nationalpaincentre.mcmaster.ca/opioid/documents.html (accessed 12 May 2017).

Nuckols 2014

Nuckols TK, Anderson L, Popescu I, Diamant AL, Doyle B, Di Capua P, et al. Opioid prescribing: a systematic review and critical appraisal of guidelines for chronic pain. Annals of Internal Medicine 2014;160(1):38‐47. [DOI: 10.7326/0003‐4819‐160‐1‐201401070‐00732]

O'Donnell 2009

O'Donnell JB, Ekman EF, Spalding WM, Bhadra P, McCabe D, Berger MF. The effectiveness of a weak opioid medication versus a cyclo‐oxygenase‐2 (COX‐2) selective non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drug in treating flare‐up of chronic low‐back pain: results from two randomized, double‐blind, 6‐week studies. Journal of International Medical Research 2009;37(6):1789‐802. [DOI: 10.1177/147323000903700615]

OARRS 2016

State of Ohio Board of Pharmacy. Ohio Automated Rx Reporting System. www.ohiopmp.gov/Portal/MED_Calculator.aspx (accessed 12 May 2017).

Portenoy 1986

Portenoy R, Foley K. Chronic use of opioid analgesics in non‐malignant pain: report of 38 cases. Pain 1986;25(2):171‐86. [DOI: 10.1016/0304‐3959(86)90091‐6]

Porter 1980

Porter J, Jick H. Addiction rare in patients treated with narcotics. New England Journal of Medicine 1980;302(2):123. [DOI: 10.1056/nejm198001103020221]

Rachinger‐Adam 2011

Rachinger‐Adam B, Conzen P, Azad SC. Pharmacology of peripheral opioid receptors. Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology 2011;24(4):408‐13. [DOI: 10.1097/aco.0b013e32834873e5]

Radbruch 2013

Radbruch L, Glaeske G, Grond S, Munchberg F, Scherbaum N, Storz E, et al. Topical review on the abuse and misuse potential of tramadol and tilidine in Germany. Substance Abuse 2013;34(3):313‐20. [DOI: 10.1080/08897077.2012.735216]

Rass 2014

Rass O, Schacht RL, Marvel CL, Mintzer MZ. Opioids. In: Allen DN, Woods SP editor(s). Neuropsychological Aspects of Substance Use Disorders: Evidence‐Based Perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014:231‐53.

Schulteis 1996

Schulteis G, Koob GF. Reinforcement processes in opiate addiction: a homeostatic model. Neurochemical Research 1996;21(11):1437‐54. [DOI: 10.1007/bf02532385]

Shafer 2015

Shafer LA, Raymond C, Ekuma O, Kraut A. The impact of opioid prescription dose and duration during a workers compensation claim, on post‐claim continued opioid use: a retrospective population‐based study. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 2015;58(6):650‐7. [DOI: 10.1002/ajim.22453]

Shea 2007

Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2007;7:1‐10. [DOI: 10.1186/1471‐2288‐7‐10]

University of Alberta 2017

University of Alberta multidisciplinary pain centre. Opioid conversion guide. https://www.ualberta.ca/medicine/institutes‐centres‐groups/multidisciplinary‐pain‐clinic/for‐healthcare‐professionals/opioid‐conversion‐guide (accessed 19 October 2017).

Van Griensven

Van Griensven H, Strong J, Unruh A. Pain: a Textbook for Health Professionals. 2nd Edition. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 2014. [ISBN: 9780702034787]

Vargas‐Schaffer 2010

Vargas‐Schaffer G. Is the WHO analgesic ladder still valid?. Canadian Family Physician 2010;56(6):514‐7.

Vowles 2015

Vowles KE, McEntee ML, Julnes PS, Frohe T, Ney JP, van der Goes DN. Rates of opioid misuse, abuse, and addiction in chronic pain: a systematic review and data synthesis. Pain 2015;156(4):569‐76. [DOI: 10.1097/01.j.pain.0000460357.01998.f1]

Vuong 2010

Vuong C, Van Uum SHM, O'Dell LE, Lutfy K, Friedman TC. The effects of opioids and opioid analogs on animal and human endocrine systems. Endocrine Reviews 2010;31(1):98‐132. [DOI: 10.1210/er.2009‐0009]

Walker 2007

Walker JM, Farney RJ, Rhondeau SM, Boyle KM, Valentine K, Cloward TV, et al. Chronic opioid use is a risk factor for the development of central sleep apnea and ataxic breathing. Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine 2007;3(5):455‐61. [PUBMED: PMC1978331]

WHO 1996

World Health Organization. Cancer Pain Relief: With a Guide to Opioid Availability. 2nd Edition. Geneva: WHO, 1996. [ISBN: 9241544821]

Windmill 2013

Windmill J, Fisher E, Eccleston C, Derry S, Stannard C, Knaggs R, et al. Interventions for the reduction of prescribed opioid use in chronic non‐cancer pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 9. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010323.pub2]

Zenz 1992

Zenz M, Strumpf M, Tryba M. Long‐term oral opioid therapy in patients with chronic non‐malignant pain. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 1992;7(2):69‐77. [PUBMED: 1573287]

Zin 2014

Zin CS, Chen LC, Knaggs RD. Changes in trends and pattern of strong opioid prescribing in primary care. European Journal of Pain 2014;18(9):1343‐51. [DOI: 10.1002/j.1532‐2149.2014.496.x]

Zutler 2011

Zutler M, Holty JE. Opioids, sleep, and sleep‐disordered breathing. Current Pharmaceutical Design 2011;17(15):1443‐9. [PUBMED: 21476955]

Study selection.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 1

Study selection.

Analysis 1.1: Opioids versus placebo, any adverse event.CI: confidence interval
 df: degrees of freedom
 M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
 P: probability
 Z: Z score (standard score)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 2

Analysis 1.1: Opioids versus placebo, any adverse event.

CI: confidence interval
df: degrees of freedom
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
P: probability
Z: Z score (standard score)

Analysis 1.2: Opioids versus placebo, any serious adverse event.CI: confidence interval
 df: degrees of freedom
 M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
 P: probability
 Z: Z score (standard score)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 3

Analysis 1.2: Opioids versus placebo, any serious adverse event.

CI: confidence interval
df: degrees of freedom
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
P: probability
Z: Z score (standard score)

Analysis 1.3: Opioids versus placebo, withdrawals due to adverse events.CI: confidence interval
 df: degrees of freedom
 M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
 P: probability
 Z: Z score (standard score)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 4

Analysis 1.3: Opioids versus placebo, withdrawals due to adverse events.

CI: confidence interval
df: degrees of freedom
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
P: probability
Z: Z score (standard score)

Analysis 2.1: Opioids versus placebo, constipation.CI: confidence interval
 df: degrees of freedom
 M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
 P: probability
 Z: Z score (standard score)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 5

Analysis 2.1: Opioids versus placebo, constipation.

CI: confidence interval
df: degrees of freedom
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
P: probability
Z: Z score (standard score)

Analysis 2.6: Opioids versus placebo, dizziness.CI: confidence interval
 df: degrees of freedom
 M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
 P: probability
 Z: Z score (standard score)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 6

Analysis 2.6: Opioids versus placebo, dizziness.

CI: confidence interval
df: degrees of freedom
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
P: probability
Z: Z score (standard score)

Analysis 2.7: Opioids versus placebo, drowsiness.CI: confidence interval
 df: degrees of freedom
 M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
 P: probability
 Z: Z score (standard score)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 7

Analysis 2.7: Opioids versus placebo, drowsiness.

CI: confidence interval
df: degrees of freedom
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
P: probability
Z: Z score (standard score)

Analysis 2.8: Opioids versus placebo, fatigue.CI: confidence interval
 df: degrees of freedom
 M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
 P: probability
 Z: Z score (standard score)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 8

Analysis 2.8: Opioids versus placebo, fatigue.

CI: confidence interval
df: degrees of freedom
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
P: probability
Z: Z score (standard score)

Analysis 2.10: Opioids versus placebo, hot flushes.CI: confidence interval
 df: degrees of freedom
 M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
 P: probability
 Z: Z score (standard score)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 9

Analysis 2.10: Opioids versus placebo, hot flushes.

CI: confidence interval
df: degrees of freedom
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
P: probability
Z: Z score (standard score)

Analysis 2.11: Opioids versus placebo, increased sweating.CI: confidence interval
 df: degrees of freedom
 M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
 P: probability
 Z: Z score (standard score)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 10

Analysis 2.11: Opioids versus placebo, increased sweating.

CI: confidence interval
df: degrees of freedom
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
P: probability
Z: Z score (standard score)

Analysis 2.12: Opioids versus placebo, nausea.CI: confidence interval
 df: degrees of freedom
 M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
 P: probability
 Z: Z score (standard score)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 11

Analysis 2.12: Opioids versus placebo, nausea.

CI: confidence interval
df: degrees of freedom
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
P: probability
Z: Z score (standard score)

Analysis 2.13: opioids versus placebo, pruritus.CI: confidence interval
 df: degrees of freedom
 M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
 P: probability
 Z: Z score (standard score)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 12

Analysis 2.13: opioids versus placebo, pruritus.

CI: confidence interval
df: degrees of freedom
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
P: probability
Z: Z score (standard score)

Analysis 2.15: Opioids versus placebo, vomiting.CI: confidence interval
 df: degrees of freedom
 M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
 P: probability
 Z: Z score (standard score)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 13

Analysis 2.15: Opioids versus placebo, vomiting.

CI: confidence interval
df: degrees of freedom
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
P: probability
Z: Z score (standard score)

Analysis 3.1: Opioids versus active pharmacological comparator, any adverse event.CI: confidence interval
 df: degrees of freedom
 M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
 P: probability
 Z: Z score (standard score)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 14

Analysis 3.1: Opioids versus active pharmacological comparator, any adverse event.

CI: confidence interval
df: degrees of freedom
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
P: probability
Z: Z score (standard score)

Analysis 3.2: Opioids versus active pharmacological comparator, any serious adverse event.CI: confidence interval
 df: degrees of freedom
 M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
 P: probability
 Z: Z score (standard score)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 15

Analysis 3.2: Opioids versus active pharmacological comparator, any serious adverse event.

CI: confidence interval
df: degrees of freedom
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
P: probability
Z: Z score (standard score)

Analysis 3.3: Opioids versus active pharmacological comparator, withdrawals due to adverse events.CI: confidence interval
 df: degrees of freedom
 M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
 P: probability
 Z: Z score (standard score)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 16

Analysis 3.3: Opioids versus active pharmacological comparator, withdrawals due to adverse events.

CI: confidence interval
df: degrees of freedom
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
P: probability
Z: Z score (standard score)

Analysis 4.1: Opioids versus active non‐pharmacological comparator, any adverse event.CI: confidence interval
 df: degrees of freedom
 M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
 P: probability
 Z: Z score (standard score)
Figures and Tables -
Figure 17

Analysis 4.1: Opioids versus active non‐pharmacological comparator, any adverse event.

CI: confidence interval
df: degrees of freedom
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis
P: probability
Z: Z score (standard score)

Table 1. Reasons for exclusion

Review

Reason for exclusion

Challapalli 2005

Trials either included cancer pain, did not use opioids, or were not at least 2 weeks in duration.

Duehmke 2006

Did not exclude cancer pain

Gaskell 2014

Review update published as Gaskell 2016.

Moore 2015a

No opioids studied.

Mujakperuo 2010

No opioids studied.

Ramiro 2011

Trials with opioids were less than 2 weeks in duration.

Rubinstein 2012

No opioids studied.

Seidel 2013

Trials with opioids were for acute pain.

Figures and Tables -
Table 1. Reasons for exclusion
Table 2. Number of trials in reviews with quantitative data

Review

Total number of trials

Number of eligible trials

Number of trials also in other reviews

Number of de‐duplicated trials

Cepeda 2006

11

8

0

8

Chaparro 2012

21

5

4

5

Chaparro 2013

15

10

2

9

da Costa 2014

22

19

2

18

Derry 2015

6

1

1

0

Derry 2016

1

1

0

1

Enthoven 2016

13

1

0

1

Gaskell 2016

5

5

4

1

Haroutiunian 2012

3

2

2

2

McNicol 2013

31

13

10

6

Noble 2010

26

6

1

6

Rubinstein 2011

3

1

0

1

Santos 2015

4

4

2

2

Stannard 2016

1

1

0

1

Whittle 2011

11

2

2

2

Totals

173

79

29

63

Figures and Tables -
Table 2. Number of trials in reviews with quantitative data
Table 3. Outcome matrix: opioids versus placebo for reviews contributing quantitative outcomes

Events reported

Cepeda 2006

Chaparro 2012

Chaparro 2013

da Costa 2014

Derry 2016

Gaskell 2016

Haroutiunian 2012

McNicol 2013

Noble 2010

Santos 2015

Stannard 2016

Whittle 2011

Totals

Any adverse event

X

X

X

X

X

X

6

Any serious adverse event

X

X

X

X

X

X

6

Withdrawals due to adverse events

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

10

Deaths

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

9

Anorexia

X

1

Constipation

X

X

X

X

4

Diarrhoea

X

1

Dizziness

X

X

X

X

X

5

Drowsiness or somnolence

X

X

X

X

4

Fatigue

X

1

Gastrointestinal (unspecified)

X

1

Headache

X

1

Hot flushes

X

1

Increased sweating

X

1

Infection

X

X

2

Nausea

X

X

X

X

4

Nervous system (unspecified)

X

1

Pruritus

X

1

Sinusitis

X

1

Vomiting

X

X

X

3

Xerostomia

X

1

An "X" indicates that the outcome was reported (whether or not any participants experienced it).

In Cepeda 2006, "serious adverse events" were defined as adverse events that resulted in withdrawals. These data are therefore included in both categories for the review in question.

Figures and Tables -
Table 3. Outcome matrix: opioids versus placebo for reviews contributing quantitative outcomes
Table 4. Outcome matrix: opioids versus active comparator

Events reported

Cepeda 2006

Chaparro 2012

Enthoven 2016

Haroutiunian 2012

McNicol 2013

Rubinstein 2011

Totals

Any adverse event

X

X

2

Any serious adverse event

X

1

Withdrawals due to adverse events

X

X

X

X

4

Constipation

X

X

2

Dizziness

X

1

Drowsiness or somnolence

X

1

Nausea

X

1

Vomiting

X

1

An "X" indicates that the outcome was reported (whether or not any participants experienced it).

Figures and Tables -
Table 4. Outcome matrix: opioids versus active comparator
Table 5. Characteristics of reviews

Review

Date assessed as up‐to‐date

Condition(s) studied

Participant characteristics

Inclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria

Duration of treatment in eligible studies

Alviar 2011

Oct‐11

Phantom limb pain

Participants of any age with established phantom limb pain

Pharmacologic agents given singly or in combination

Stump/residual limb pain alone, or postamputation pain that was not phantom pain, or phantom pain mixed with other neuropathic pains; pharmacologic interventions aimed at preventing phantom limb pain

10 weeks

(no quantitative data reported on outcomes of interest)

Cepeda 2006

May‐06

Osteoarthritis

Adults with primary or secondary osteoarthritis of the hip or knee

Tramadol or tramadol plus paracetamol used

Other types of arthritis; non‐osteoarthritic joint pain or back pain

14 to 91 days

Chaparro 2012

Apr‐12

Neuropathic pain

Adults with neuropathic pain

Compared combinations of 2 or more drugs against placebo or another comparator

Studies with a neuraxial approach or that included injection therapies, transcutaneous electrical stimulation, or vitamins

5 to 36 weeks

(includes a cross‐over trial of 9 weeks with 4 conditions)

Chaparro 2013

Apr‐13

CLBP

Adults with persistent pain in the low back for at least 12 weeks

Any opioid prescribed in an outpatient setting for 1 month or longer

Participants with cancer, infections, inflammatory arthritic conditions, compression fractures, or studies where less than 50% of participants had CLBP

4 to 15 weeks

da Costa 2014

Aug‐12

Osteoarthritis

Adults with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip

Any type of opioid except tramadol

Trials with inflammatory arthritis exclusively or with less than 75% of participants having osteoarthritis of the knee or hip

2 to 30 weeks

Derry 2015

Jan‐15

Neuropathic pain

Adults with a chronic neuropathic pain condition

Nortriptyline at any dose, by any route, compared to placebo or any active comparator

Nortriptyline given in combination with other drugs, without separate reporting

28 weeks

(no unique data was reported)

Derry 2016

Jun‐16

Neuropathic pain

Adults with postherpetic neuralgia, complex regional pain syndrome, or chronic postoperative pain

Fentanyl at any dose, by any route

Treatment of < 2 weeks

94 to 113 days

Enthoven 2016

Jun‐15

CLBP

Adults with non‐specific CLBP for at least 12 weeks

1 or more types of NSAIDs used

Trials of NSAIDs no longer available on the market; participants with sciatica or with specific low back pain caused by pathological entities, e.g. infection, neoplasm, metastases, osteoporosis, rheumatoid arthritis, or fractures

6 weeks

Gaskell 2016

Dec‐15

Chronic neuropathic pain

Adults with painful diabetic neuropathy or postherpetic neuralgia

Any dose or formulation of oxycodone

Fewer than 10 participants per treatment arm, or less than 2 weeks of treatment

12 weeks

Haroutiunian 2012

Apr‐12

CNCP

Adults having any type of CNCP

Methadone by any route in randomised or quasi‐randomised studies

Studies with fewer than 10 participants

40 to 119 days

McNicol 2013

Aug‐13

Neuropathic pain

Adults with central or peripheral neuropathic pain of any aetiology

Opioid agonists used in an RCT

Partial opioid agonists or agonist‐antagonists used

6 to 16 weeks (includes a 6‐ and 8‐week cross‐over trial with 2 conditions)

Noble 2010

May‐09

CNCP

Adults with chronic pain for at least 3 months

Treament for at least 6 months

Fewer than 10 participants

2 weeks to 13 months

Rubinstein 2011

Dec‐09

CLBP

Adults with CLBP, with or without radiating pain

Mean duration of CLBP > 12 weeks

Single‐treatment studies; studies examining specific pathologies (e.g. sciatica)

6 weeks

Santos 2015

Mar‐14

CNCP

Adults with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip, CLBP

Tapentadol ER in doses of 100 to 500 mg/day

Pain for less than 3 months or that was not moderate to severe

15 to 52 weeks

Stannard 2016

Nov‐15

Neuropathic pain

Adults with 1 or more chronic neuropathic pain conditions

Hydromorphone at any dose, by any route

Treatment of < 2 weeks

14 to 16 weeks

Whittle 2011

May‐10

Rheumatoid arthritis pain

Adults with rheumatoid arthritis

Opioids of any formulation at any dose, by any route

Studies of opioid therapy for rheumatoid arthritis in the immediate postoperative setting

6 to 10 weeks

CLBP: chronic low back pain
CNCP: chronic non‐cancer pain
NSAIDs: non‐steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs
RCT: randomised controlled trial
Tapentadol ER: tapentadol extended‐release

Figures and Tables -
Table 5. Characteristics of reviews
Table 6. Opioids in included reviews reporting unique quantitative data

Drug

Formulations

Dosing Schedule

Dose (lowest)

Dose (highest)

MEq (lowest)

MEq (highest)

Cepeda 2006

Chaparro 2012

Chaparro 2013

da Costa 2014

Derry 2016

Enthoven 2016

Gaskell 2016

Haroutiunian 2012

McNicol 2013

Noble 2010

Rubinstein 2011

Santos 2015

Stannard 2016

Whittle 2011

Buprenorphine

Transdermal patch (µg/h)

5 µg/h

40 µg/h

12

96

X

X

Codeine

Contin

Twice a day, 3 times a day

32

200

4.8

30

X

X

Dextropropoxyphene

3 times a day

300

30

X

Dihydrocodeine

LA

Every 12 hours

30

240

3

24

X

X

Fentanyl

Transdermal patch (µg/h)

12.5 µg/h

250 µg/h

45

944

X

X

X

Hydromorphone

ER, OROS

Once a day

4

64

16

256

X

X

Levorphanol

3 times a day

0.45

15.75

4.95

173.5

X

Methadone

Twice a day

5

80

15

240

X

X

Morphine

Avinza, Contin, CR, ER, LA, SR

Twice a day, once a day, every 12 hours, as needed

15

300

15

300

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Oxycodone

CR, ER, LA, MR, PR, immediate‐release, liquid

Twice a day, 3 times a day to 6 times a day

10

160

15

240

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Oxycodone and naloxone

PR

X

Oxycodone and naltrexone

4 times a day

10

40

15

60

X

Oxymorphone

ER

Twice a day, every 12 hours

10

140

30

420

X

X

Tapentadol

ER, immediate‐release

Twice a day, 3 times a day to 6 times a day

100

500

40

200

X

X

X

Tilidine and naloxone

4

12

10

30

X

Tramadol

ER, LP, Retard

Twice a day, as needed, 3 times a day, 4 times a day, once a day, every 12 hours

37.5

400

3.75

40

X

X

X

X

X

Dose is given in milligrams, except for transdermal opioids, which are given in micrograms.

CR: controlled‐release
ER: extended‐release
LA: long‐acting
LP: sustained‐release (libération prolongée)
MEq: the equivalent number of milligrams of morphine per 24‐hour period
MR: modified‐release
OROS: extended‐release (registered trademark)

PR: Prolonged release
Retard: prolonged‐release
SR: sustained‐release

Figures and Tables -
Table 6. Opioids in included reviews reporting unique quantitative data
Table 7. Opioid dose conversions

Opioid

Source

Equivalent dose of oral morphine, in mg, per 1 mg of the converted opioid

Buprenorphine (transdermal)

EMRPCC 2016

100

Codeine

OARRS 2016

0.15

Dextropropoxyphene

Van Griensven

0.1

Dihydrocodeine

NHS Wales

0.1

Fentanyl (transdermal)

Fentanyl monograph 2017

158*

Hydromorphone

OARRS 2016

4

Levorphanol

University of Alberta 2017

7.5

Methadone

OARRS 2016

3

Oxycodone

OARRS 2016

1.5

Oxymorphone

OARRS 2016

3

Tapentadol

OARRS 2016

0.4

Tilidine

Radbruch 2013

0.2

Tramadol

OARRS 2016

0.1

Transdermally delivered opioid doses (buprenorphine and fentanyl) are usually expressed as an hourly rate of delivery, but were converted to the dose per 24 hours before being converted into morphine equivalents.

*Calculated as the mean conversion factor from data in Fentanyl monograph 2017.

Figures and Tables -
Table 7. Opioid dose conversions
Table 8. Any adverse event with opioids (from studies with or without comparators)

Review

Events

Total

Event rate (%)

Average

95% CI

Cepeda 2006

481

1613

29.8

27.6 to 32.1

da Costa 2014

2145

2725

78.7

77.2 to 80.3

Enthoven 2016

454

785

57.8

54.4 to 61.3

Gaskell 2016

40

48

83.3

72.8 to 93.9

Rubinstein 2011

1

17

5.9

‐5.3 to 17.1

Santos 2015

766

894

85.7

83.4 to 88

Stannard 2016

21

43

48.8

33.9 to 63.8

Total events

3908

6622

59.0

57.8 to 60.2

CI: confidence interval

Figures and Tables -
Table 8. Any adverse event with opioids (from studies with or without comparators)
Table 9. Any serious adverse event with opioids (from studies with or without comparators)

Review

Events

Total

Event rate (%)

Average

95% CI

Cepeda 2006

196

899

21.8

19.1 to 24.5

da Costa 2014

9

355

2.5

0.9 to 4.2

Gaskell 2016

4

48

8.3

0.5 to 16.2

Santos 2015

73

1767

4.1

3.2 to 5.1

Stannard 2016

6

134

4.5

1 to 8

Total events

288

3203

9.0

8 to 10

CI: confidence interval

Figures and Tables -
Table 9. Any serious adverse event with opioids (from studies with or without comparators)
Table 10. Withdrawals due to adverse events with opioids (from studies with or without comparators)

Review

Events

Total

Event rate (%)

Average

95% CI

Cepeda 2006

196

899

21.8

19.1 to 24.5

Chaparro 2012

63

526

12.0

9.2 to 14.8

da Costa 2014

1169

4398

26.6

25.3 to 27.9

Enthoven 2016

132

785

16.8

14.2 to 19.5

Gaskell 2016

3

48

6.3

0 to 13.1

Haroutiunian 2012

11

90

12.2

5.5 to 19

McNicol 2013

19

177

10.7

6.2 to 15.3

Noble 2010

620

1830

33.9

31.7 to 36.1

Santos 2015

480

1770

27.1

24.9 to 29.3

Stannard 2016

3

43

7.0

7 to 7

Whittle 2011

3

11

27.3

27.3 to 27.3

Total events

2699

10,577

25.5

25.5 to 25.5

Figures and Tables -
Table 10. Withdrawals due to adverse events with opioids (from studies with or without comparators)
Table 11. Results of AMSTAR quality assessment

AMSTAR criteria

Alviar 2011

Cepeda 2006

Chaparro 2012

Chaparro 2013

da Costa 2014

Derry 2015

Derry 2016

Enthoven 2016

Gaskell 2016

Haroutiunian 2012

McNicol 2013

Noble 2010

Rubinstein 2011

Santos 2015

Stannard 2016

Whittle 2011

1. A priori design

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2. Duplicate selection and extraction

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

3. Comprehensive literature search

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

4. Published and unpublished, no language restrictions

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

5. List of studies provided

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

6. Characteristics of studies provided

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

7. Scientific quality assessed

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

8. Scientific quality used in formulating conclusions

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

9. Methods used to combine appropriate

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

10. Conflict of interest stated

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Total score/10

10

10

9

9

10

10

10

9

10

10

9

9

10

10

10

10

AMSTAR: Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews

Figures and Tables -
Table 11. Results of AMSTAR quality assessment
Table 12. GRADE quality judgement: opioids versus placebo

Participants

(reviews)

Risk of bias

Inconsistency

Indirectness

Imprecision

Other considerations

Overall quality of evidence

Any adverse event

1583
(1 review)

Serious

Not serious

Not serious

Not serious

None

+++◯
MODERATE

Any serious adverse event

108
(1 review)

Serious

Not serious

Not serious

Not serious

None

+++◯

MODERATE

Withdrawals due to adverse events

2375
(4 reviews)

Serious

Not serious

Not serious

Not serious

None

+++◯
MODERATE

Figures and Tables -
Table 12. GRADE quality judgement: opioids versus placebo
Table 13. GRADE quality judgement: opioids versus placebo, specific adverse events

Participants

(reviews)

Risk of bias

Inconsistency

Indirectness

Imprecision

Other considerations

Overall quality of evidence

Constipation

4255

(4 reviews)

Serious

Not serious

Serious

Not serious

Strong association

+++◯
MODERATE

Dizziness

4130

(4 reviews)

Serious

Not serious

Serious

Not serious

Strong association

+++◯
MODERATE

Drowsiness or somnolence

3856

(3 reviews)

Serious

Not serious

Serious

Not serious

Strong association

+++◯
MODERATE

Fatigue

1589

(1 review)

Serious

Not serious

Very serious

Not serious

None

+◯◯◯
VERY LOW

Hot flushes

593

(1 review)

Serious

Not serious

Very serious

Not serious

None

+◯◯◯
VERY LOW

Increased sweating

1350

(1 review)

Serious

Not serious

Very serious

Not serious

Very strong association

+++◯
MODERATE

Nausea

4346

(3 reviews)

Serious

Not serious

Serious

Not serious

Strong association

+++◯
MODERATE

Pruritus

2865

(1 review)

Serious

Not serious

Very serious

Not serious

None

+◯◯◯
VERY LOW

Vomiting

3368

(2 reviews)

Serious

Not serious

Very serious

Not serious

Strong association

++◯◯
LOW

Figures and Tables -
Table 13. GRADE quality judgement: opioids versus placebo, specific adverse events
Table 14. GRADE quality judgement: opioids versus active pharmacological comparator

Participants

(reviews)

Risk of bias

Inconsistency

Indirectness

Imprecision

Other considerations

Overall quality of evidence

Any adverse event

1583
(1 review)

Serious

Not serious

Not serious

Not serious

None

+++◯
MODERATE

Any serious adverse event

108
(1 review)

Serious

Not serious

Not serious

Very serious

None

+◯◯◯
VERY LOW

Withdrawals due to adverse events

2375
(4 reviews)

Serious

Not serious

Not serious

Not serious

None

+++◯
MODERATE

Figures and Tables -
Table 14. GRADE quality judgement: opioids versus active pharmacological comparator
Table 15. GRADE quality judgement: opioids versus non‐pharmacological intervention

Participants

(reviews)

Risk of bias

Inconsistency

Indirectness

Imprecision

Other considerations

Overall quality of evidence

Any adverse event

32

(1 review)

Very serious

Not serious

Not serious

Not serious

None

+◯◯◯
VERY LOW

Figures and Tables -
Table 15. GRADE quality judgement: opioids versus non‐pharmacological intervention
Table 16. Opioids versus placebo: risk ratio and number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for generic adverse events

Adverse event

Studies

Participants

Statistical method

Risk ratio

NNTH

Any adverse event

6

5004

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.42 (1.22, 1.66)

4.20 (3.78, 4.74)

Any serious adverse event

6

4324

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.75 (2.06, 3.67)

28.71 (20.50, 47.88)

Withdrawals due to adverse events

10

11,510

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.40 (3.02, 3.82)

5.55 (5.19, 5.97)

CI: confidence interval
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis

Figures and Tables -
Table 16. Opioids versus placebo: risk ratio and number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for generic adverse events
Table 17. Absolute event rates: opioids versus placebo

Opioid

Placebo

Number of participants

Event rate (%)

Number of participants

Event rate (%)

Analysis

Adverse event

With AE

Total

Average

95% CI

With AE

Total

Average

95% CI

1.1

Any adverse event

2436

3113

78.3

76.8 to 79.7

1030

1891

54.5

52.2 to 56.7

1.2

Any serious adverse event

216

2893

7.5

6.5 to 8.4

57

1431

4.0

3 to 5

1.3

Withdrawals due to adverse events

1836

7316

25.1

24.1 to 26.1

297

4194

7.1

6.3 to 7.9

2.1

Constipation

285

2513

11.3

10.1 to 12.6

94

1742

5.4

4.3 to 6.5

2.6

Dizziness

284

2448

11.6

10.3 to 12.9

71

1682

4.2

3.3 to 5.2

2.7

Drowsiness or somnolence

237

2313

10.3

9 to 11.5

57

1543

3.7

2.8 to 4.6

2.8

Fatigue

57

796

7.2

5.4 to 8.9

29

793

3.7

2.4 to 5

2.10

Hot flushes

14

295

4.8

2.3 to 7.2

5

298

1.7

0.2 to 3.1

2.11

Increased sweating

32

674

4.7

3.1 to 6.3

2

676

0.3

0.0 to 0.7

2.12

Nausea

535

2556

20.9

20.9 to 20.9

151

1790

8.4

8.4 to 8.4

2.13

Pruritus

155

1809

8.6

8.6 to 8.6

52

1056

4.9

4.9 to 4.9

2.15

Vomiting

184

2058

8.9

8.9 to 8.9

28

1310

2.1

2.1 to 2.1

AE: adverse event
CI: confidence interval

Figures and Tables -
Table 17. Absolute event rates: opioids versus placebo
Table 18. Opioids versus placebo: risk ratio and number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for specific adverse events

Adverse event

Studies

Participants

Statistical method

Risk ratio

NNTH

Anorexia

1

330

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

13.64 (0.77, 240.21)

Constipation

4

4255

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.23 (1.39, 3.59)

16.82 (13.20, 23.19)

Diarrhoea

1

313

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.55 (0.69, 9.43)

Dizziness

4

4130

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.76 (2.15, 3.55)

13.55 (11.15, 17.28)

Drowsiness, sleepiness, somnolence, or anergia

3

3856

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.89 (2.19, 3.83)

15.26 (12.34, 20.00)

Fatigue

1

1589

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.96 (1.27, 3.03)

28.54 (17.48, 77.71)

Gastrointestinal (unspecified)

1

98

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.77 (0.90, 3.47)

Headache

1

313

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.78 (0.33, 1.84)

Hot flushes

1

593

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.83 (1.03, 7.75)

32.60 (16.95, 421.76)

Increased sweating

1

1350

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

16.05 (3.86, 66.69)

22.46 (16.37, 35.78)

Infection

2

631

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.87 (0.47, 1.61)

Nausea

3

4346

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.46 (2.08, 2.92)

8.00 (6.88, 9.56)

Nervous system disorders (unspecified)

1

98

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.50 (0.95, 6.56)

Pruritus

1

2865

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.74 (1.28, 2.36)

27.44 (18.25, 55.27)

Sinusitis

1

318

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.56 (0.52, 4.67)

Vomiting

2

3368

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

4.29 (2.90, 6.34)

14.70 (12.10, 18.72)

Xerostomia

1

1668

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.10 (0.47, 2.57)

CI: confidence interval
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis

Figures and Tables -
Table 18. Opioids versus placebo: risk ratio and number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for specific adverse events
Table 19. Active comparators in included reviews

Drug

Total dose per day

Dosing schedule

Cepeda 2006

Chaparro 2012

Enthoven 2016

Haroutiunian 2012

Celecoxib

400 mg

X

Desipramine

10 to 160 mg

X

Diclofenac

25 to 150 mg

Up to 3 times a day

X

Gabapentin

1200 to 3600 mg

3 times a day

X

Lorazepam

0.7 to 1.6 mg

Twice a day and 3 times a day

X

Naproxen

250 to 1000 mg

X

Nortriptyline

10 to 160 mg

Twice a day

X

X

An "X" indicates that the drug was used as an active comparator to opioids in the review.

Rubinstein 2011 used a non‐pharmacological comparator (spinal manipulative therapy).

Figures and Tables -
Table 19. Active comparators in included reviews
Table 20. Absolute event rates: opioids versus active pharmacological comparator

Opioid

Active comparator

Number of participants

Event rate (%)

Number of participants

Event rate (%)

Analysis

Adverse event

With AE

Total

Average

95% CI

With AE

Total

Average

95% CI

1.1

Any adverse event

454

785

57.8

54.4 to 61.3

381

798

47.7

44.3 to 51.2

1.2

Any serious adverse event

5

54

9.3

1.5 to 17

1

54

1.9

0 to 5.4

1.3

Withdrawals due to adverse events

185

1201

15.4

13.4 to 17.4

56

1174

4.8

3.6 to 6

AE: adverse event
CI: confidence interval

Figures and Tables -
Table 20. Absolute event rates: opioids versus active pharmacological comparator
Table 21. Opioids versus active pharmacological comparator: risk ratio and number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for generic adverse events

Adverse event

Studies

Participants

Statistical method

Risk ratio

NNTH

Any adverse event

1

1583

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.21 (1.10, 1.33)

9.91 (6.67, 19.24)

Any serious adverse event

1

108

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

5.00 (0.60, 41.39)

Withdrawals due to adverse events

4

2375

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.23 (2.42, 4.30)

9.40 (7.69, 12.11)

CI: confidence interval
M‐H: Mantel‐Haenszel method of meta‐analysis

Figures and Tables -
Table 21. Opioids versus active pharmacological comparator: risk ratio and number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) for generic adverse events
Table 22. Absolute event rates: opioids versus active non‐pharmacological comparator

Opioid

Active comparator

Number of participants

Event rate (%)

Number of participants

Event rate (%)

Analysis

Adverse event

With AE

Total

Average

95% CI

With AE

Total

Average

95% CI

1.1

Any adverse event

1

17

5.8

0 to 17.1

0

15

0

0 to 0

AE: adverse event
CI: confidence interval

Figures and Tables -
Table 22. Absolute event rates: opioids versus active non‐pharmacological comparator