| Title |
Cannabis and intractable chronic pain: an explorative retrospective analysis of Italian cohort of 614 patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Pain Research, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/jpr.s132814 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Guido Fanelli, Giuliano De Carolis, Claudio Leonardi, Adele Longobardi, Ennio Sarli, Massimo Allegri, Michael E Schatman |
| Abstract |
Despite growing interest in the therapeutic use of cannabis to manage chronic pain, only limited data that address these issues are available. In recent years, a number of nations have introduced specific laws to allow patients to use cannabis preparations to treat a variety of medical conditions. In 2015, the Italian government authorized the use of cannabis to treat several diseases, including chronic pain generally, spasticity in multiple sclerosis, cachexia and anorexia among AIDS and cancer patients, glaucoma, Tourette syndrome, and certain types of epilepsy. We present the first snapshot of the Italian experience with cannabis use for chronic pain over the initial year of its use. This is a retrospective case series analysis of all chronic pain patients treated with oral or vaporized cannabis in six hubs during the initial year following the approval of the new Italian law (December 2015 to November 2016). We evaluated routes of administration, types of cannabis products utilized, dosing, and effectiveness and safety of the treatment. As only one of the six centers has extensively used cannabinoids for intractable chronic pain (614 patients of 659), only the population from Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Pisana (Pisa) was considered. Cannabis tea was the primary mode of delivery, and in almost all cases, it was used in association with all the other pain treatments. Initial and follow-up cannabinoid concentrations were found to vary considerably. At initial follow-up, 76.2% of patients continued the treatment, and <15% stopped the treatment due to side effects (none of which were severe). We present the first analysis of Italian clinical practice of the use of cannabinoids for a large variety of chronic pain syndromes. From this initial snapshot, we determined that the treatment seems to be effective and safe, although more data and subsequent trials are needed to better investigate its ideal clinical indication. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 46 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 15 | 33% |
| Canada | 5 | 11% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 9% |
| Italy | 1 | 2% |
| Greece | 1 | 2% |
| Central African Republic | 1 | 2% |
| Comoros | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Sweden | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 16 | 35% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 38 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 13% |
| Scientists | 1 | 2% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 178 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 177 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 21 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 12% |
| Other | 17 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 41 | 23% |
| Unknown | 49 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 40 | 22% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 17 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 4% |
| Psychology | 7 | 4% |
| Other | 34 | 19% |
| Unknown | 56 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 58. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 June 2022.
All research outputs
#744,760
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#99
of 1,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,116
of 325,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#3
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,969 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,074 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.