Skip to main content
Download PDF

The effect of exercise referral schemes and self-management strategies on use of prescription analgesics among community-dwelling older adults: registry linkage with randomised controlled trials

BMC Geriatrics volume 24, Article number: 641 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background and objective

Exercise referral schemes and self-management strategies have shown positive effects on patient-reported and objectively measured outcomes, such as increased functional capacity and physical activity level. However, the impact of these interventions on analgesic use remains uncertain. We hypothesised that exercise referral schemes, either utilised alone or in combination with self-management strategies, is more effective in reducing use of prescription analgesics compared with a self-management strategy only.

Subjects and methods

We utilised data from two completed randomised controlled trials, namely The Welfare Innovation in Primary Prevention (n = 121) and The SITLESS project (n = 338), and information from the national Danish health registries, including the National Prescription Registry. The two trials have investigated the effectiveness of interventions, which include exercise referral schemes and self-management strategies, on various aspects such as physical function and levels of physical activity among community-dwelling older adults. The studies were conducted in the period 2015–2020 and comprised older adults aged 65+ years, living in three different Danish municipalities. Participants were recruited through nationally regulated preventive home-visits. To estimate changes in use of prescription analgesics over time, a linear fixed effects regression model was applied. The outcome measure was the mean total yearly defined daily dose of analgesics.

Results

All intervention groups showed a within-group increase in overall analgesic use, though not statistically significantly different from zero. There were no differences in estimated changes in mean total yearly defined daily dose when comparing the intervention groups to the group receiving the least extensive intervention (self-management strategies/control). The findings indicated that exercise referral schemes and self-management strategies, whether administrated individually or in combination, did not result in a reduction in analgesic use over time.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Analgesic use is common among older adults, aged 65 years and above, with an estimated prevalence of prescribed analgesics of 21% and 29% in Danish older men and women, respectively [1]. The high proportion is partly explained by a high prevalence of chronic pain in this age group [2]. Use of analgesics is associated with an elevated risk of experiencing both side effects and adverse events. For instance, opioid use can lead to side effects such as constipation, nausea, and dizziness [3]. On the other hand, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medication (NSAIDs) may result in epigastric pain, nausea, and diarrhoea [4]. The most significant adverse event associated with consumption of paracetamol is unintentional overdosing, which can cause acute liver failure [5]. Besides, increased age is associated with higher risk of polypharmacy leading in turn to an increased risk of hospital admissions [6]. Therefore, identifying effective approaches without negative side effects which may alleviate pain and subsequently reduce the use of analgesics among older adults, should be regarded as an important healthcare concern for both health authorities and older individuals.

Physical activity is considered a vital element in retaining health and normal physiologic function during the life span [7], and several studies have shown positive effects on pain severity [2, 7, 8]. Exercise referral schemes (ERS) are nationally regulated interventions in several countries. The main purpose of ERS is to serve as a primary care strategy to enhance physical activity at an individual level. ERS can be defined as a tailored program consisting of structured exercise, recommended by a primary healthcare professional. These customised exercise programmes incorporate ongoing supervision and monitoring, and are usually implemented within the community settings, like public recreational facilities, and facilitated by the local municipalities [9, 10]. A potential way to enhance the effectiveness of ERS is to combine them with self-management strategies (SMS), which involves behaviour changes techniques to increase exercise adherence and promote adoption of physically active behaviours. The concept of self-management is typically associated with an individual’s capacity to handle chronic diseases. Consequently, the patient’s proactive involvement is a fundamental element within the self-management framework [11]. Lorig et al. highlights five principal self-management concepts yet notes that many studies incorporating SMS do not encompass all five concepts. These key concepts encompass (a) problem-oriented approaches, (b) decision-making processes, (c) assistance in identifying and utilising relevant resources (d) establishing a collaborative relationship between the individual and healthcare provider, and (e) initiating action and making progress [11]. Previous studies have found that non-pharmacologic cognitive-behavioural therapy is associated with small to moderate efficacy for chronic or subacute lower back pain [12,13,14]. In addition, a two-armed randomised controlled trial (RCT) that included individuals aged 18–75 years showed no between-group differences in pain intensity at 6–12 months follow-up, when comparing individuals randomised to cognitive functional therapy or group-based exercise. However, both intervention groups experienced a drop in pain intensity from baseline to follow-up [15].

While ERS and SMS alone may decrease pain levels, it is currently unknown whether these interventions may be capable of reducing the use of prescription analgesic among community-dwelling older adults, particularly when the interventions do not specifically target pain or analgesic use. We hypothesised that ERS, either utilised alone or in combination with self-management strategies, is more effective in reducing use of prescription analgesics compared with SMS only. This study aimed to investigate the effect of ERS alone or in combination with SMS, on use of analgesics in Danish community-dwelling older adults.

Methods

In this study we used data from two completed RCTs, The Welfare Innovation in Primary Prevention (WIPP) (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04531852) [16] and The SITLESS project (SITLESS) (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02629666) [17]. Both studies, designed as complex interventions combining ERS and SMS, had the primary aim of modifying behaviours associated with premature risk of functional decline and disability in community-dwelling older adults. WIPP aimed at increasing physical function, quality of life, and healthy life years, and SITLESS aimed at determining whether the effects of ERS were enhanced by adding on an SMS-program to reduce sedentary behaviour, increase physical activity, and improve health and quality of life. The primary result from the WIPP study revealed that the combined intervention (ERS + SMS) significantly improved physical function compared to SMS alone [16], which underscores the efficacy of the combined intervention. Both WIPP and SITLESS were international multicentre studies, but this study includes only Danish participants. The studies were conducted in the years 2015–2020 in the three Danish municipalities; Esbjerg (WIPP), Slagelse (WIPP), and Odense (SITLESS). For a detailed overview of the inclusion criteria in WIPP and SITLESS see Additional file 1. Data from these studies were linked on an individual level with national Danish health registries, including the National Prescription Registry.

Study population

Participants from both WIPP and SITLESS were community-dwelling older adults recruited through the Danish nationally regulated preventive home-visits offered by the municipalities. According to Danish regulations, the Act on Social Services § 79a, preventive home-visits are offered to self-reliant individuals (i.e., who do not receive municipal home care services on a regular basis) aged 75+ years, or 65+ years if evaluated as vulnerable [18, 19]. Inclusion criteria for this study were (I) included and randomised to an intervention in either WIPP or SITLESS, and (II) complete social security number (CPR number). All Danish citizens are assigned with a CPR number, a unique personal identifier in the Danish health registries. To see the study population flow from the WIPP and SITLESS studies see Fig. 1.

A reference group from the general Danish population were identified from the national registries and matched on age and sex, and vital status (alive) at index date in a 1:10 ratio.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flowchart of the study population

Full size image

Interventions

In short, WIPP was a two-armed RCT, where individuals were randomised to either an ERS + SMS or SMS intervention [16]. SITLESS was a three-armed RCT with following intervention groups: ERS + SMS, ERS, and SMS/control [17]. In SITLESS a control group was included, however this group received recommendations on physical activity and was invited to two seminars focusing on (1) health-enhancing benefit of increasing physical activity, and reducing sedentary behaviour, and (2) healthy nutrition. Participants were encouraged to ask questions and discuss their experiences with both themes [17]. Based on this, we refer to the group as having received an SMS/control intervention, despite differences in the structured and theory-based SMS-programmes with respect to the volume and intensity of targeted behaviour-change strategies. See Table 1 for description of the interventions in WIPP and SITLESS.

Table 1 Description of the interventions in WIPP and SITLESS
Full size table

In this study, we combined the groups from WIPP and SITLESS leading to three groups: the combined ERS + SMS, ERS, and SMS/control.

Data sources

Individual level data from WIPP and SITTLESS was combined with data from the Danish National Prescription Registry (DNPR) [20], The Population Register at Statistics Denmark [21], the Danish Register of Cause of Death [22], the register concerning immigration and emigration at Statistics Denmark [23], and the Danish National Patient Registry [24].

Outcomes

Main outcome

The main outcome measure was the mean number of defined daily dose (DDD) of analgesics consumed per year according to redeemed prescriptions in the DNPR covering the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) codes N02BE01 (paracetamol), M01A* (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs - NSAIDs), and N02A* (opioids) [see Additional file 2]. The inclusion of the three categories of analgesics is based on the most consumed analgesics in Denmark [25, 26]. A DDD is assigned to every drug substance by the WHO and represents the average maintenance dose per day in an adult for a drug that is used for its original indication [27]. Only oral and rectal routes of administration for opioids were included. For each redeemed prescription, the amount of DDD, as provided in the DNPR, was calculated by dividing the milligrams of the drug substance per one unit (e.g. on tablet) by the DDD for that specific drug. Subsequently, the DDD for each drug was multiplied by the number of packages. Baseline analgesic use was defined as the utilisation of analgesics during the 12-months period leading up to the index date [day  -361 to -1]. The index date of each participant in the intervention group, as well as their matched controls in the reference group, was defined as the date of the first ERS + SMS, ERS or SMS/control session. To ensure equal length of periods for all participants, we define the baseline period of 360 days and the follow-up period of 720 days. The index date [day 0] was included in the follow-up period. In case of death or migration, time at risk were less than two years. As the follow-up period was two years [day 0 to 720], we divided the total amount of DDD in the follow-up period by two as well as considering risk time, to estimate the mean total yearly DDD.

Secondary outcomes

We estimated the mean total yearly DDD for paracetamol and NSAIDs separately. For opioids we calculated the total amount of morphine milligram equivalent (MME) per individual per year. To derive MME, the DDD was calculated by accounting for the number of packages and afterwards multiplied with the current opioid dose (mg/DDD) multiplied by an equianalgesic ratio [28]. For conversion table [see Additional file 2].

Statistics

Baseline descriptive statistics were reported as counts (n) and proportions (%) and the included variables are described in [Additional file 3]. An intention-to-treat approach was used which implies that all individuals who were randomised to an intervention in either WIPP or SITLESS were included in the analyses, and analysed according to the intervention group to which they were assigned. To compare the difference in estimated within-group changes in mean total yearly DDD from baseline to follow-up in the ERS + SMS, ERS, and matched reference group compared to the SMS/control group we applied a linear fixed effects regression model accounting for clustering in matched groups. In a fixed effect model, one cannot estimate the effect of covariates which are constant. The SMS/control group was used as the reference group in the analyses as it was the group receiving the least extensive intervention. The relevant regression coefficient was modelled as an interaction term between time and intervention group (time x group). To estimate the use of analgesics over time in 6-months intervals, we estimated the mean level of DDD in each 6-months interval. Only individuals alive during the entire 6-months period were included in the analyses. The level of statistical significance was set at 5%. All statistical analyses were performed in Stata/BE 17.0 (StataCorp LLC, 2019).

Results

A total of 448 participants from WIPP and SITLESS were included in the analyses. Of the included 61% (n = 273) were women and the majority (62%, n = 278) were in the age group 75–84 years (Table 2). 44% of the total intervention group redeemed no prescriptions of the analgesic types included in this study during the baseline period [Additional file 4]. The descriptive statistics stratified by project can be found in [Additional file 5].

Table 2 Baseline characteristics of the study population
Full size table

Main outcome - overall analgesic use

Results for both main and secondary analyses are presented in Table 3. No statistically significant within-group changes in overall analgesic use, from baseline to follow-up, were found in any of the three intervention groups. The estimated within-group changes ranged from 1.5 mean DDD per year (95% CI: -14.1 ; 17.1) in the ERS group to 38.3 (95% CI: -5.1 ; 81.7) in the ERS + SMS group. Only the matched reference group showed a statistically significant within-group increase in mean use of total yearly DDD from baseline to follow-up on 9.4 (95% CI: 6.6 ; 12.3). No statistically significant between-group differences were observed when comparing the intervention groups and the matched reference group to the SMS/control group. Figure 2 illustrates total mean DDD of overall analgesic use over time, displayed in 6-months intervals, for the intervention groups including the matched reference group.

Table 3 Results for main and secondary analyses
Full size table
Fig. 2
figure 2

Simple illustration of average overall analgesic use over time

Full size image

The figure displays mean values of total Defined Daily Dose (DDD) over time within groups in 6-months intervals in relation to the index date (date 0) for individuals alive in each assessment point. To get an overview of the data used to generate the figure [see Additional file 6].

Secondary outcomes – stratified per analgesic type

There was a statistically significant increase in use of paracetamol and opioids, and a statistically significant decrease in use of NSAIDs within the matched reference group from baseline to follow-up. Among the intervention groups, the SMS/control group showed a statistically significant within-group increase in mean paracetamol use of 13.5 DDD per year (95% CI: 1.3 ; 25.7). The remaining results among the intervention groups were not statistically significant. Illustrations of total mean DDD/MME in specific analgesic drug use over time, displayed in 6-months intervals, can be found in [Additional file 7].

Discussion

We observed an apparent increase in the use of overall prescription analgesics within the three intervention groups, though none reached statistical significance. Increases over time were statistically significant solely within the matched reference group and among the SMS/control group when specifically focusing on consumption of paracetamol. We found no statistically significant difference between the groups receiving ERS + SMS or ERS when compared to the SMS/control group. Thus, it does not seem likely that a more comprehensive intervention to promote physically active and healthy lifestyle among community-dwelling older adults has any influence on analgesic use.

To our knowledge this is the first study investigating whether complex interventions combining ERS + SMS have an impact on use of redeemed prescriptions for analgesics among community-dwelling older adults. Previous research within this field has focused primarily on patient-reported and objectively measured outcomes such as functional capacity, physiological measures, pain intensity, and quality of life [15, 16, 29].

The main aims of the WIPP and SITLESS interventions were to enhance physical activity levels, reduce sedentary behaviour, and improve overall quality of life besides additional health outcomes. However, the interventions did not contain specific elements targeting analgesic use, such as review of medication lists, initiating the possibility of ceasing medication in collaboration with a general practitioner, etc. This may be one of the reasons for the observed results. Most of the participants in the study were 75+ years and analgesic use was followed over a two-year period. Health declines at a faster rate with increasing age [30], which often translates into a higher consumption of analgesics [1]. Accordingly, we found a statistically significant within-group increase in overall analgesic use in the matched reference group. When comparing the within-group changes in overall use of analgesics, among the intervention groups with the reference group matched on sex and age, it showed that the matched reference group had an increase in mean use of total yearly DDD that was close to the increase observed in the SMS/control group (Table 3). In the matched reference group, we found an increased use of paracetamol and opioids, opposite to a reduced use of NSAIDs. The reduced use of NSAIDs among this group is a positive finding and align with findings from another Danish study [31]. This as prescriptions of NSAIDs is not recommended to older adults, due to an elevated risk of adverse events [32]. The rise in utilisation of opioids among older individuals is undesirable. Particularly, given the heightened attention to the opioid epidemic, efforts should be directed towards reducing the consumption of this specific type of medication. A previous study aimed at investigating changes in use of opioids after participating in a standardised treatment program for osteoarthritis (Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark - GLA: D), found no effect of such program among patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis and chronic opioid use [28]. The GLA: D study, like WIPP and SITLESS, comprise exercise therapy and behaviour changes techniques, but none of the studies specifically aimed at reducing analgesic use [16, 17, 33]. Another study using data from the Good Life with osteoArthritis in Denmark (GLA: D) reported that the proportion of analgesic users among older patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis decreased over time, when participating in the GLA: D exercise interventions [34]. Nevertheless, individual patients may experience onset of pain or increased pain severity from being more physical active [35], which could lead to use of pain medication. A systematic review focusing on patient enablers and barriers of deprescribing finds that the patients’ feeling of improvement while taking the medication and lack of time and support from the general practitioner was perceived as barriers to cease medication. Conversely, positive influence including a good relationship with the general practitioner was considered an enabler towards deprescribing. In addition, lack of symptoms, the feeling of not needing the medication, and a slowly reduction in the dose of medication combined with knowing the possibility to return to the medication if the patient perceived symptoms returning, increased the openness of deprescribing [36]. This pinpoints that cessation of medication is complex and interventions aiming at deprescribing analgesics should acknowledge the importance of including the patients’ general practitioner, as a core element in the deprescribing process.

Limitations

Although the present study used high quality data from already completed RCTs and the national Danish health registries some limitations should also be acknowledged. We do not have information about the use of over-the-counter (OTC) medication. Both Paracetamol and NSAIDs are available OTC at a relatively low price in Denmark. We acknowledge that some participants may have used OTC analgesics. However, frequent use of OTC analgesics is not inexpensive and in Denmark there is a financial incentive to use prescribed medication as most of it is reimbursed and covered by universal healthcare [20]. As most Danes (85%) aged 65 years and above receive prescribed medication [37], we believe that frequently used analgesics are most likely prescribed and only a limited amount is purchased OTC. Considering this, we believe that the limitation related to the lack of information on OTC medication is not significant in our study. Even though the Danish registry data is of high quality, is it worth mentioning, that the utilisation of registry data for prescription medication does not provide insights into whether the individuals consume their prescribed medication or whether they share medication with others.

We pooled data from two RCTs which requires that study populations are similar. While the studies had similar inclusion criteria such as community-dwelling older adults with sedentary behaviour for extended periods, there were variations in the inclusion criteria regarding the level of functional capacity. A limitation, regarding the use of data from the two RCTs, that may have impacted the statistical power is the absence of data from one of the municipalities participating in the WIPP study. This occurred because the municipality opted not to provide us with the requested data, which they are entitled to do under Danish legislation. The broad confidence intervals in some of the analyses in this study may suggest a lack of statistical power, potentially compromising the detection of effects over time. A way to increase the statistical power would be to increase the sample size, yet this was not an option in this study, as we used data from two already completed RCTs.

In our study, we employed a mean-based statistical analysis approach. However, we acknowledge that alternative approaches, such as logistic regression or median regression models, could have been utilised. The mean approach is sensible to outliers. Given that only a small subset of participants exhibited high usage of prescription analgesics, which positioned them as outliers, we opted for the mean-based approach. This approach also provides a more illustrative representation of the data.

Both the WIPP and SITLESS studies relied on voluntary participation, resulting in a self-selected group of individuals, which is why we included a matched reference group. While self-selection introduces a potential bias that is challenging to avoid, it is worth noting that the study participants were community-dwelling older adults with varying levels of functional loss and disability risks and the recruitment was performed by municipal staff through the Danish nationally regulated preventive home-visits. Therefore, we believe the findings of this study are to some extent generalisable to the average community-dwelling older adults aged 65 years and above in Denmark.

Conclusion and further perspective

This study found that complex interventions comprising exercise referral schemes, either utilised alone or in combination with self-management strategies, did not reduce the overall use of prescription analgesics among Danish community-dwelling older adults over time. In future projects offering similar interventions aiming at improving overall health in older adults, it would be interesting to include focus on analgesic use. In addition, future studies should investigate whether different levels of exercise might mediate the association between exercise, perceived pain, and use of analgesics among older adults.

Data availability

The datasets supporting the conclusion of this article are not publicly available due to privacy and confidentiality restrictions pertaining to person-level health information. However, metadata such as names on variables used from the registries as well as the analytic codes used to perform the analyses are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Danish Health Authority [Danish Sundhedsstyrelsen]. Older adults health and well-being - the older adult profile 2019 [Danish: Ældres sundhed og trivsel - ældreprofilen 2019]. 2019.

  2. Geneen LJ, Moore RA, Clarke C, Martin D, Colvin LA, Smith BH. Physical activity and exercise for chronic pain in adults: an overview of Cochrane Reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Reviews. 2017(4).

  3. Carter GT, Duong V, Ho S, Ngo KC, Greer CL, Weeks DL. Side effects of commonly prescribed analgesic medications. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2014;25(2):457–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schwan J, Sclafani J, Tawfik VL. Chronic Pain Management in the Elderly. Anesthesiol Clin. 2019;37(3):547–60.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Aminoshariae A, Khan A, Acetaminophen. Old Drug, New Issues. J Endod. 2015;41(5):588–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Eriksen AV, Thrane MD, Matzen L, Ryg J, Andersen-Ranberg K. Older patients acutely admitted and readmitted to the same geriatric department: a descriptive cohort study of primary diagnoses and health characteristics. Eur Geriatr Med. 2022;13(5):1109–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bangsbo J, Blackwell J, Boraxbekk CJ, Caserotti P, Dela F, Evans AB, et al. Copenhagen Consensus statement 2019: physical activity and ageing. Br J Sports Med. 2019;53(14):856–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Jönsson T, Ekvall Hansson E, Thorstensson CA, Eek F, Bergman P, Dahlberg LE. The effect of education and supervised exercise on physical activity, pain, quality of life and self-efficacy - an intervention study with a reference group. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2018;19(1):198.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Nefyn HW, Maggie H, Barbara F, Ruth L, Clare W. Effectiveness of exercise-referral schemes to promote physical activity in adults: systematic review. Br J Gen Pract. 2007;57(545):979.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Rowley N, Mann S, Steele J, Horton E, Jimenez A. The effects of exercise referral schemes in the United Kingdom in those with cardiovascular, mental health, and musculoskeletal disorders: a preliminary systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(1):949.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Lorig KR, Holman H. Self-management education: history, definition, outcomes, and mechanisms. Ann Behav Med. 2003;26(1):1–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Skelly AC, Chou R, Dettori JR, Turner JA, Friedly JL, Rundell SD, et al. AHRQ Comparative Effectiveness Reviews. Noninvasive Nonpharmacological Treatment for Chronic Pain: a systematic review update. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Chou R, Huffman LH. Nonpharmacologic therapies for acute and chronic low back pain: a review of the evidence for an American Pain Society/American College of Physicians clinical practice guideline. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147(7):492–504.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hayden JA, Ellis J, Ogilvie R, Malmivaara A, van Tulder MW. Exercise therapy for chronic low back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021;9(9):Cd009790.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. O’Keeffe M, O’Sullivan P, Purtill H, Bargary N, O’Sullivan K. Cognitive functional therapy compared with a group-based exercise and education intervention for chronic low back pain: a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT). Br J Sports Med. 2020;54(13):782–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Olsen P, Tully MA, Del Pozo Cruz B, Wegner M, Caserotti P. Community-based exercise enhanced by a self-management programme to promote independent living in older adults: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Age Ageing. 2022;51(7).

  17. Giné-Garriga M, Coll-Planas L, Guerra M, Domingo À, Roqué M, Caserotti P, et al. The SITLESS project: exercise referral schemes enhanced by self-management strategies to battle sedentary behaviour in older adults: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2017;18(1):221.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Legal Information [Danish: Retsinformation]. Act on Social Service § 79 a: Danske love; [cited 2023 aug 8] [cited 2022 18-03-2022]. https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/2021/1548.

  19. Vass M, Avlund K, Hendriksen C, Philipson L, Riis P. Preventive home visits to older people in Denmark–why, how, by whom, and when? Z Gerontol Geriatr. 2007;40(4):209–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Pottegård A, Schmidt SAJ, Wallach-Kildemoes H, Sørensen HT, Hallas J, Schmidt M. Data Resource Profile: the Danish national prescription Registry. Int J Epidemiol. 2017;46(3):798–f.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Statistics Denmark. The Population [ https://www.dst.dk/en/Statistik/dokumentation/documentationofstatistics/the-population.

  22. Helweg-Larsen K. The Danish Register of causes of Death. Scand J Public Health. 2011;39(7 Suppl):26–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Statistics Denmark. Immigration and emigration 2022 [ https://www.dst.dk/en/Statistik/emner/borgere/flytninger/ind-og-udvandring.

  24. Lynge E, Sandegaard JL, Rebolj M. The Danish National Patient Register. Scand J Public Health. 2011;39(7 Suppl):30–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Burghle A, Pottegård A, Rasmussen M, Bruun B, Roost Hosbjerg J, Lundby C. Use of analgesics in Denmark: a national survey. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2023;132(4):321–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Nissen SK, Pottegård A, Ryg J. Trends of Opioid Utilisation in Denmark: a Nationwide Study. Drugs Real World Outcomes. 2019;6(4):155–64.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. WHO. Defined Daily Dose (DDD). 2023 [ https://www.who.int/tools/atc-ddd-toolkit/about-ddd.

  28. Johansson MS, Pottegård A, Søndergaard J, Englund M, Grønne DT, Skou ST et al. Chronic opioid use before and after exercise therapy and patient education among patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2022.

  29. Sørensen JB, Kragstrup J, Skovgaard T, Puggaard L. Exercise on prescription: a randomized study on the effect of counseling vs counseling and supervised exercise. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2008;18(3):288–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Diehr PH, Thielke SM, Newman AB, Hirsch C, Tracy R. Decline in health for older adults: five-year change in 13 key measures of standardized health. J Gerontol Biol Sci Med Sci. 2013;68(9):1059–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sørensen AMS, Rasmussen L, Ernst MT, Mogensen SH, Laursen MV, Jimenez-Solem E, Pottegård A. Use of tramadol and other analgesics following media attention and risk minimization actions from regulators: a Danish nationwide drug utilization study. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2021;77(4):617–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Wongrakpanich S, Wongrakpanich A, Melhado K, Rangaswami J. A Comprehensive Review of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use in the Elderly. Aging Dis. 2018;9(1):143–50.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Skou ST, Odgaard A, Rasmussen JO, Roos EM. Group education and exercise is feasible in knee and hip osteoarthritis. Dan Med J. 2012;59(12):A4554.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Thorlund JB, Roos EM, Goro P, Ljungcrantz EG, Grønne DT, Skou ST. Patients use fewer analgesics following supervised exercise therapy and patient education: an observational study of 16 499 patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis. Br J Sports Med. 2021;55(12):670–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Lima LV, Abner TSS, Sluka KA. Does exercise increase or decrease pain? Central mechanisms underlying these two phenomena. J Physiol. 2017;595(13):4141–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Reeve E, To J, Hendrix I, Shakib S, Roberts MS, Wiese MD. Patient barriers to and enablers of Deprescribing: a systematic review. Drugs Aging. 2013;30(10):793–807.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. The Association of Danish Pharmacies [Danish. Danmarks Apotekerforening]. The customers of the pharmacy are primarily older chronic patients who use multiple medications [Danish: Apotekets kunder er især ældre kroniske patienter, der anvender mange lægemidler] [. cited 2024 March 21] [ https://www.apotekerforeningen.dk/analyser/analyse-nyhedsbrev/2013/~/media/Apotekerforeningen/analysersundhed/26092013_aldersfordelt_receptindloesning.ashx.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We extend our sincere appreciation to the study population from both the WIPP and SITLESS study as well as the dedicated staff from the municipalities of Esbjerg and Slagelse for their valuable assistance in providing data. Additionally, we would like to express our gratitude to Mathias Skjødt, University of Southern Denmark, for his support in delivering data and sharing his expertise on the SITLESS study. Furthermore, we acknowledge both the WIPP and SITLESS consortiums.

Funding

This work was supported by The University of Southern Denmark; Møllerens Fund; Aase og Ejner Danielsens Fund [grant number 21-20-0083]; and Østifterne [grant number 2022-0023]. The sponsors were not involved in the review or approval of the manuscript.

Open access funding provided by University of Southern Denmark

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Unit of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, Odense M, 5230, Denmark

    Nanna Herning Svensson, Jonas Bloch Thorlund, Jens Søndergaard, Sonja Wehberg, Helene Støttrup Andersen & Trine Thilsing

  2. Research Unit for Musculoskeletal Function and Physiotherapy, Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, Odense M, 5230, Denmark

    Jonas Bloch Thorlund

  3. Department of Health, Culture and Development, Municipality of Tønder, Wegners plads 2, Tønder, 6270, Denmark

    Pia Øllgaard Olsen

  4. Centre for Active and Healthy Aging, Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, Odense M, 5230, Denmark

    Paolo Caserotti

Authors
  1. Nanna Herning Svensson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jonas Bloch Thorlund
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pia Øllgaard Olsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jens Søndergaard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sonja Wehberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Helene Støttrup Andersen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Paolo Caserotti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Trine Thilsing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

NHS, TT, JBT, JS, SW, and PC designed the study. NHS and HSA collected and cleaned the data. NHS, HSA, and SW performed the statistical analyses. NHS and HSA prepared all figures and tables. NHS, TT, JBT, JS, SW, PC, PØO, and HSA interpreted the data. NHS, JBT, PØO, PC, JS, and TT prepared the manuscript. All authors have read, gave critical review, and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nanna Herning Svensson.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Research & Innovation Organisation, University of Southern Denmark (journal no. 11.352) and the University of Southern Denmark’s Research Ethics Committee (case no. 21/30425). Participants in both WIPP and SITLESS have signed written informed consent to share information for scientific purposes [16, 17].

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Svensson, N.H., Thorlund, J.B., Olsen, P.Ø. et al. The effect of exercise referral schemes and self-management strategies on use of prescription analgesics among community-dwelling older adults: registry linkage with randomised controlled trials. BMC Geriatr 24, 641 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-024-05235-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-024-05235-3

BMC Geriatrics

ISSN: 1471-2318

Contact us