↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Assessment of direct analgesic effect of duloxetine for chronic low back pain: post hoc path analysis of double-blind, placebo-controlled studies

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
Title
Assessment of direct analgesic effect of duloxetine for chronic low back pain: post hoc path analysis of double-blind, placebo-controlled studies
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, June 2017
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s133396
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hiroyuki Enomoto, Shinji Fujikoshi, Jumpei Funai, Nao Sasaki, Michael H Ossipov, Toshinaga Tsuji, Levent Alev, Takahiro Ushida

Abstract

Comorbid depression and depressive symptoms are common in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Duloxetine is clinically effective in major depressive disorder and several chronic pain states, including CLBP. The objective of this post hoc meta-analysis was to assess direct and indirect analgesic efficacy of duloxetine for patients with CLBP in previous clinical trials. Post hoc path analyses were conducted of 3 randomized, double-blind, clinical studies of patients receiving duloxetine or placebo for CLBP. The primary outcome measure for pain was the Brief Pain Inventory, average pain score. A secondary outcome measure, the Beck Depression Inventory-II, was used for depressive symptoms. The changes in score from baseline to endpoint were determined for each index. Path analyses were employed to calculate the proportion of analgesia that may be attributed to a direct effect of duloxetine on pain. A total of 851 patients (400 duloxetine and 451 placebo) were included in this analysis. Duloxetine significantly improved pain scores compared with placebo (p<0.001). It also significantly improved depressive scores compared with placebo (p=0.015). Path analyses showed that 91.1% of the analgesic effect of duloxetine could be attributed to a direct analgesic effect, and 8.9% to its antidepressant effect. Similar results were obtained when data were evaluated at weeks 4 and 7, and when patients were randomized to subgroups based on baseline pain scores, baseline depressive symptoms scores, and gender. Duloxetine significantly improved pain in patients with CLBP. Path analyses results suggest that duloxetine produced analgesia mainly through mechanisms directly impacting pain modulation rather than lifting depressive symptoms. This effect was consistent across all subgroups tested.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 69 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 16%
Researcher 7 10%
Unspecified 6 9%
Other 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 14 20%
Unknown 21 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 30%
Unspecified 6 9%
Neuroscience 4 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Sports and Recreations 3 4%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 25 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 16 June 2017.
All research outputs
#3,095,476
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#347
of 1,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,137
of 331,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#12
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% 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 well, scoring higher than 82% 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 331,010 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.