Framing Chronic Pain in U.S. News Coverage of the Opioid Epidemic (2012-2022).

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Health Communication Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-12 DOI:10.1080/10410236.2024.2304494
Jacqueline N Gunning, Lili R Romann, Elizabeth A Hintz
{"title":"Framing Chronic Pain in U.S. News Coverage of the Opioid Epidemic (2012-2022).","authors":"Jacqueline N Gunning, Lili R Romann, Elizabeth A Hintz","doi":"10.1080/10410236.2024.2304494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Chronic pain, pain persisting longer than six months, afflicts 20% of the U.S. population and is the leading cause of disability. To manage pain, many chronic pain patients (CPPs) and healthcare providers turn to opioids, prescription medications that block pain signals and offer relief. However, in light of the U.S.' ongoing opioid epidemic, CPPs without a history of opioid use disorder (OUD) are facing increased stigma when seeking opioid medication. Further, many have been forced to taper their therapeutic dose due to updated Centers for Disease Control and Prevention prescribing guidelines in 2016 and 2022, with a range of (adverse) outcomes. Though research has explored experiences of chronic pain and OUD independently, few studies have explored how media coverage of the opioid epidemic has shaped representations, and resulting stereotypes, of CPPs. Guided by framing theory, this content analysis examines sources' characterization of CPPs amidst a decade of U.S. news coverage of the opioid epidemic (<i>N</i> = 492). Findings identify four dominant news frames, including two novel frames termed <i>culpability</i> and <i>strategy</i>, and elements (i.e., characters, significant events) that comprise these frames. When discussed, CPPs were ascribed the identity of a drug-seeking addict 82% of the time. Collectively, this study provides insight as to how news media coverage of the opioid epidemic influence(d) public perceptions of chronic pain (patients). Findings offer theoretical and practical implications for media outlets, policymakers, CPPs and healthcare providers, as well as highlighting how use of opioids for pain management does not equate to abuse of opioids.</p>","PeriodicalId":12889,"journal":{"name":"Health Communication","volume":" ","pages":"3122-3133"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Communication","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2024.2304494","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Chronic pain, pain persisting longer than six months, afflicts 20% of the U.S. population and is the leading cause of disability. To manage pain, many chronic pain patients (CPPs) and healthcare providers turn to opioids, prescription medications that block pain signals and offer relief. However, in light of the U.S.' ongoing opioid epidemic, CPPs without a history of opioid use disorder (OUD) are facing increased stigma when seeking opioid medication. Further, many have been forced to taper their therapeutic dose due to updated Centers for Disease Control and Prevention prescribing guidelines in 2016 and 2022, with a range of (adverse) outcomes. Though research has explored experiences of chronic pain and OUD independently, few studies have explored how media coverage of the opioid epidemic has shaped representations, and resulting stereotypes, of CPPs. Guided by framing theory, this content analysis examines sources' characterization of CPPs amidst a decade of U.S. news coverage of the opioid epidemic (N = 492). Findings identify four dominant news frames, including two novel frames termed culpability and strategy, and elements (i.e., characters, significant events) that comprise these frames. When discussed, CPPs were ascribed the identity of a drug-seeking addict 82% of the time. Collectively, this study provides insight as to how news media coverage of the opioid epidemic influence(d) public perceptions of chronic pain (patients). Findings offer theoretical and practical implications for media outlets, policymakers, CPPs and healthcare providers, as well as highlighting how use of opioids for pain management does not equate to abuse of opioids.

美国关于阿片类药物流行的新闻报道中对慢性疼痛的定格(2012-2022 年)》。
慢性疼痛(疼痛持续时间超过六个月)困扰着美国 20% 的人口,是导致残疾的主要原因。为了控制疼痛,许多慢性疼痛患者(CPP)和医疗服务提供者都会求助于阿片类药物,这种处方药可以阻断疼痛信号并缓解疼痛。然而,在美国阿片类药物持续流行的情况下,没有阿片类药物使用障碍(OUD)病史的慢性疼痛患者在寻求阿片类药物治疗时面临越来越多的羞辱。此外,由于美国疾病控制和预防中心于 2016 年和 2022 年更新了处方指南,许多人被迫减少治疗剂量,并产生了一系列(不良)结果。尽管已有研究独立探讨了慢性疼痛和 OUD 的经历,但很少有研究探讨媒体对阿片类药物流行的报道如何塑造了对 CPPs 的表述以及由此产生的刻板印象。在框架理论的指导下,本内容分析研究了在美国阿片类药物流行的十年新闻报道中,消息来源对慢性疼痛患者的描述(N = 492)。研究结果确定了四种主要的新闻框架,包括两种称为 "罪责 "和 "策略 "的新框架,以及构成这些框架的要素(即人物、重大事件)。在讨论中,82% 的时间里,CPP 被赋予了寻求毒品成瘾者的身份。总之,本研究深入探讨了新闻媒体对阿片类药物流行的报道如何影响公众对慢性疼痛(患者)的看法。研究结果为媒体机构、政策制定者、社区保健中心和医疗服务提供者提供了理论和实践意义,并强调了使用阿片类药物治疗疼痛并不等于滥用阿片类药物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
10.30%
发文量
184
期刊介绍: As an outlet for scholarly intercourse between medical and social sciences, this noteworthy journal seeks to improve practical communication between caregivers and patients and between institutions and the public. Outstanding editorial board members and contributors from both medical and social science arenas collaborate to meet the challenges inherent in this goal. Although most inclusions are data-based, the journal also publishes pedagogical, methodological, theoretical, and applied articles using both quantitative or qualitative methods.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信