Resource-Oriented Case Management to Implement Recommendations for Patients With Chronic Pain and Frequent Use of Analgesics in General Practices (Project RELIEF): Protocol for a Single-Arm Exploratory Feasibility Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) is a frequent reason for counseling in general practice. Current German guidelines emphasize its biopsychosocial etiology and the importance of self-care and nonpharmacological treatment strategies such as education, physical and social activity, and psychological approaches. Comprehensive assessments are necessary to individualize treatment maximally and monitor appropriate use of pain medication. General practitioners face many challenges in implementing holistic pain management, which considers biological, psychological, and social aspects. In project RELIEF (resource-oriented case management to implement recommendations for patients with chronic pain and frequent use of analgesics in general practices), a case management program was developed to facilitate implementation of guideline recommendations on pain management regarding medical assessment and monitoring, patient and practice team education, promotion of self-care strategies, and rational pharmacotherapy. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the feasibility of the intervention and study procedures before applying them in a larger cluster randomized controlled trial. Our secondary objective is to estimate potential effects of the complex intervention. METHODS: A single-arm trial with general practices and patients with CNCP and analgesics use will be conducted, accompanied by a mixed methods process evaluation. The intervention comprises 5 components, including software-supported medical pain history, 3 scheduled structured appointments, e-learning on CNCP for general practitioners and medical assistants, educational material for patients, toolbox with information on (regional) resources for patients and practice teams. Participating practices will be located in the federal state of Baden-Württemberg, Germany, and will recruit eligible patients (adults with CNCP for more than 3 months, with at least moderate pain-related disability, permanent or on-demand use of analgesics or co-analgesics in the previous 4 weeks, and practice team assessed ability to participate actively in the trial). A questionnaire given to the first 150 adult patients entering the practice in February 2025 will help screen eligible patients. The primary objective will be measured by a set of predefined indicators. The key secondary outcome is pain-related disability measured by the Pain Disability Index German version. All participants will be asked to participate in the process evaluation. Outcome evaluation data will be gathered by paper-based and digitally provided questionnaires to be completed by participants. Process evaluation data will be gathered in surveys and a qualitative study. Descriptive analyses will be performed. RESULTS: Recruitment occurred between October and December 2024. Targeted sample size was 6 practices and 50 patients. The intervention period will be February-June 2025. It is expected that eligible patients will benefit from the intervention and that improved medication management and intensified use of nonpharmacological treatment strategies will reduce pain-related disabilities and other patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study will provide valuable information regarding feasibility and potential effects before testing the intervention in a confirmatory cluster randomized controlled trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00034831; https://www.drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00034831. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/66335.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.059 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.047 | 0.009 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".