ANALGESIC AVOIDANCE IN JAPAN: AN EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDY EXPLORING ATTITUDES TOWARD MENSTRUAL PAIN AND MEDICATION
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background In Japan, 'addiction' is highly stigmatized, leading to the avoidance of analgesics due to concerns about addiction (Purnell 2019). Furthermore, there is a cultural belief in Japan that emphasizes enduring pain as a virtue (Purnell 2019). These cultural contexts related to pain contribute to attitudes toward analgesics in Japan. Aims & Objectives This study aimed to investigate the situation among Japanese women who do not use any analgesics for menstrual pain, concerning their avoidance of analgesics and fear of dependence. Additionally, the study aimed to examine the pain endurance practices among women who engage in self-medication for menstrual pain using over-the-counter (OTC) analgesics. Method All participants provided their web-based informed consent before responding to the online questionnaire. The Ethics Committee at Juntendo University Faculty of Medicine approved this study (approval number E22-0469-M02). We analyzed data from a cross-sectional web survey with self- reported questionnaires conducted in 2023 among Japanese women experiencing menstruation. The study included 557 women who did not use analgesics and 1284 women who exclusively used OTC analgesics for menstrual pain, after excluding potential confounding factors and other relevant variables. For women who did not use analgesics, we asked about their concerns regarding menstrual pain, reasons for not using pain relievers, and other related questions. For women who used OTC analgesics, we used a numerical rating scale (NRS) to assess pain threshold they deemed acceptable without analgesics and explored other pertinent factors. Results Of 557 women who did not use analgesics, 365 women (65.5%) were actually concerned with menstrual pain. For the 365 women who were concerned about menstrual pain but did not use analgesics, the reasons for not using analgesics are as follows: 15.3% of the women believed they should endure the pain, 15.1% thought analgesics are harmful to their health, and 40.6% fear that they might become dependent on them. The median number of analgesics was 2.0. Of the 1284 women who used analgesics, 47.1% believed that they should endure menstrual pain up to an NRS of 5 or higher, while 4.1% believed they should endure it up to an NRS of 8 or higher. Discussion & Conclusion This study represents the first epidemiological research in Japan that investigates the reasons behind analgesic avoidance for menstrual pain and the belief that one should endure pain without using analgesics for menstrual pain. Surprisingly, among women who actually experience concerns about menstrual pain, approximately 40% refrain from using analgesics due to fear of potential dependence. Additionally, about half of those who use analgesics for menstrual pain believe that they should only use them when their pain reaches an NRS of 5 or higher. It is important to suggest that excessive fear of using analgesics for menstrual pain is unnecessary, and that using analgesics appropriately can make menstrual discomfort more manageable. References Purnell, L.D. and Fenkl, E.A. (2019). People of Japanese heritage. In: Purnell, L. (ed.), Handbook for Culturally Competent Care, 1st edn. Springer Nature, New York.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».