Preferences for risks and benefits of treatment outcomes for chronic low back pain: Choice-based conjoint measure development and discrete choice experiment.

INTRODUCTION

Understanding individual patient preferences for chronic low back pain (cLBP) outcomes is essential for targeting available therapeutic options; yet tools to elicit patient outcome preferences are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and test a choice-based conjoint (CBC) measure, commonly used in behavioral economics research, to elicit what outcomes patients with cLBP want to achieve and avoid.

DESIGN

We developed a survey-based CBC measure to allow patients to make risk/benefit trade-off choices between possible treatment outcomes. After extensive literature, clinician, and patient input, our measure included seven attributes: fatigue, anxiety/depression, difficulty thinking/making decisions, pain intensity, physical abilities, change in pain, and ability to enjoy life despite pain. Random-parameters logit models were used to estimate strength of preferences, and latent class analysis was used to identify patient characteristics associated with distinct preference.

SETTING

Online study using the Sawtooth web-based platform.

PARTICIPANTS

Two hundred eleven individuals with cLBP recruited from online advertising as well as at clinical sites across multiple academic and private institutions.

INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable.

RESULTS

The most valued outcome was the highest level of physical activity (β = 1.6-1.98; p < .001), followed by avoiding cognitive difficulties (β = -1.48; p < .001). Avoidance of severe pain was comparable to avoiding constant fatigue and near-constant depression/anxiety (β = -0.99, -1.02); p < .001). There was an association between preferences and current pain/disability status; patients with higher pain had a stronger preference to avoid severe pain, whereas those with higher disability have stronger preferences for achieving physical activity. The latent class analysis identified two distinct groups: (1) more risk-seeking and willing to accept worse outcomes (56%); and (2) more risk-averse with a stronger preference for achieving maximum benefits (44%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study illuminated cLBP patient preferences for treatment outcomes and heterogeneity in these preferences. Patients stressed the importance of reaching high physical activity and avoiding cognitive declines, even over a desire to avoid pain. More work is needed to understand patient preferences to aid informed, shared decisions.