Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

CAPER: patient preferences to inform nonsurgical treatment of chronic low back pain: a discrete-choice experiment

  • Leslie Wilson
  • , Patricia Zheng
  • , Yelena Ionova
  • , Alina Denham
  • , Connie Yoo
  • , Yanlei Ma
  • , Carol M. Greco
  • , Janel Hanmer
  • , David A. Williams
  • , Afton L. Hassett
  • , Aaron Wolfe Scheffler
  • , Frank Valone
  • , Wolf Mehling
  • , Sigurd Berven
  • , Jeffrey Lotz
  • , Conor O’Neill
  • University of California at San Francisco
  • Cornell University
  • University of Pittsburgh
  • University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

8 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: We developed and used a discrete-choice measure to study patient preferences with regard to the risks and benefits of nonsurgical treatments when they are making treatment selections for chronic low back pain. Methods: “CAPER TREATMENT” (Leslie Wilson) was developed with standard choice-based conjoint procedures (discrete-choice methodology that mimics an individual’s decision-making process). After expert input and pilot testing, our final measure had 7 attributes (chance of pain relief, duration of relief, physical activity changes, treatment method, treatment type, treatment time burden, and risks of treatment) with 3–4 levels each. Using Sawtooth software (Sawtooth Software, Inc., Provo, UT, USA), we created a random, full-profile, balanced-overlap experimental design. Respondents (n ¼ 211) were recruited via an emailed online link and completed 14 choice-based conjoint choice pairs; 2 fixed questions; and demographic, clinical, and quality-of-life questions. Analysis was performed with random-parameters multinomial logit with 1000 Halton draws. Results: Patients cared most about the chance of pain relief, followed closely by improving physical activity, even more than duration of pain relief. There was comparatively less concern about time commitment and risks. Gender and socioeconomic status influenced preferences, especially with relation to strength of expectations for outcomes. Patients experiencing a low level of pain (Pain, Enjoyment, and General Activity Scale [PEG], question 1, numeric rating scale score<4) had a stronger desire for maximally improved physical activity, whereas those in a high level of pain (PEG, question 1, numeric rating scale score>6) preferred both maximum and more limited activity. Highly disabled patients (Oswestry Disability Index score>40) demonstrated distinctly different preferences, placing more weight on achieving pain control and less on improving physical activity. Conclusions: Individuals with chronic low back pain were willing to trade risks and inconveniences for better pain control and physical activity. Additionally, different preference phenotypes exist, which suggests a need for clinicians to target treatments to particular patients.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)963-973
Number of pages11
JournalPain Medicine (United States)
Volume24
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2023

Keywords

  • choice-based conjoint
  • chronic low back pain
  • chronic low back pain treatment
  • decision-making
  • discrete-choice experiment
  • pain
  • patient preference

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'CAPER: patient preferences to inform nonsurgical treatment of chronic low back pain: a discrete-choice experiment'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this