Literature DB >> 24950770

Chronic pain patients' treatment preferences: a discrete-choice experiment.

Axel C Mühlbacher1, Uwe Junker, Christin Juhnke, Edgar Stemmler, Thomas Kohlmann, Friedhelm Leverkus, Matthias Nübling.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify, document, and weight attributes of a pain medication that are relevant from the perspective of patients with chronic pain. Within the sub-population of patients suffering from "chronic neuropathic pain", three groups were analyzed in depth: patients with neuropathic back pain, patients with painful diabetic polyneuropathy, and patients suffering from pain due to post-herpetic neuralgia. The central question was: "On which features do patients base their assessment of pain medications and which features are most useful in the process of evaluating and selecting possible therapies?"
METHODS: A detailed literature review, focus groups with patients, and face-to-face interviews with widely recognized experts for pain treatment were conducted to identify relevant treatment attributes of a pain medication. A pre-test was conducted to verify the structure of relevant and dominant attributes using factor analyses by evaluating the most frequently mentioned representatives of each factor. The Discrete-Choice Experiment (DCE) used a survey based on self-reported patient data including socio-demographics and specific parameters concerning pain treatment. Furthermore, the neuropathic pain component was determined in all patients based on their scoring in the painDETECT(®) questionnaire. For statistical data analysis of the DCE, a random effect logit model was used and coefficients were presented.
RESULTS: A total of 1,324 German patients participated in the survey, of whom 44 % suffered from neuropathic back pain (including mixed pain syndrome), 10 % complained about diabetic polyneuropathy, and 4 % reported pain due to post-herpetic neuralgia. A total of 36 single quality aspects of pain treatment, detected in the qualitative survey, were grouped in 7 dimensions by factor analysis. These 7 dimensions were used as attributes for the DCE. The DCE model resulted in the following ranking of relevant attributes for treatment decision: "no character change", "less nausea and vomiting", "pain reduction" (coefficient: >0.9 for all attributes, "high impact"), "rapid effect", "low risk of addiction" (coefficient ~0.5, "middle impact"), "applicability with comorbidity" (coefficient ~0.3), and "improvement of quality of sleep" (coefficient ~0.25). All attributes were highly significant (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The results were intended to enable early selection of an individualized pain medication. The results of the study showed that DCE is an appropriate means for the identification of patient preferences when being treated with specific pain medications. Due to the fact that pain perception is subjective in nature, the identification of patients´ preferences will enable therapists to better develop and implement patient-oriented treatment of chronic pain. It is therefore essential to improve the therapists´ understanding of patient preferences in order to make decisions concerning pain treatment. DCE and direct assessment should become valid instruments to elicit treatment preferences in chronic pain.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24950770     DOI: 10.1007/s10198-014-0614-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Health Econ        ISSN: 1618-7598


  63 in total

1.  Willingness to pay for improved respiratory and cardiovascular health: a multiple-format, stated-preference approach.

Authors:  F R Johnson; M R Banzhaf; W H Desvousges
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.046

2.  Varicella vaccine and infection with varicella-zoster virus.

Authors:  Marietta Vázquez; Eugene D Shapiro
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-02-03       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 3.  Healthy-years equivalent: wounded but not yet dead.

Authors:  A Brett Hauber
Journal:  Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 2.217

4.  [Effectiveness and time to onset of pregabalin in patients with neuropathic pain].

Authors:  R Freynhagen; P Busche; C Konrad; M Balkenohl
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 1.107

5.  Using conjoint analysis to assess women's preferences for miscarriage management.

Authors:  M Ryan; J Hughes
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  1997 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.046

Review 6.  New perspectives on the management of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain.

Authors:  Troels S Jensen; Misha-Miroslav Backonja; Sergio Hernández Jiménez; Solomon Tesfaye; Paul Valensi; Dan Ziegler
Journal:  Diab Vasc Dis Res       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 3.291

7.  Burden of illness in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: the patients' perspectives.

Authors:  Mugdha Gore; Nancy A Brandenburg; Deborah L Hoffman; Kei-Sing Tai; Brett Stacey
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 5.820

8.  Inside the black box of shared decision making: distinguishing between the process of involvement and who makes the decision.

Authors:  Adrian Edwards; Glyn Elwyn
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 3.377

9.  Best--worst scaling: What it can do for health care research and how to do it.

Authors:  Terry N Flynn; Jordan J Louviere; Tim J Peters; Joanna Coast
Journal:  J Health Econ       Date:  2006-05-16       Impact factor: 3.883

10.  Patient preferences for HIV/AIDS therapy - a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Axel C Mühlbacher; Matthias Stoll; Jörg Mahlich; Matthias Nübling
Journal:  Health Econ Rev       Date:  2013-05-11
View more
  11 in total

1.  To take or not to take: the association between perceived addiction risk, expected analgesic response and likelihood of trying novel pain relievers in self-identified chronic pain patients.

Authors:  D Andrew Tompkins; Andrew S Huhn; Patrick S Johnson; Michael T Smith; Eric C Strain; Robert R Edwards; Matthew W Johnson
Journal:  Addiction       Date:  2017-08-10       Impact factor: 6.526

2.  Current Practices for Accounting for Preference Heterogeneity in Health-Related Discrete Choice Experiments: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Suzana Karim; Benjamin M Craig; Caroline Vass; Catharina G M Groothuis-Oudshoorn
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2022-08-12       Impact factor: 4.558

3.  Patient Preferences for Pain Management in Advanced Cancer: Results from a Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  David M Meads; John L O'Dwyer; Claire T Hulme; Phani Chintakayala; Karen Vinall-Collier; Michael I Bennett
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 3.883

4.  Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future.

Authors:  Vikas Soekhai; Esther W de Bekker-Grob; Alan R Ellis; Caroline M Vass
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Patients' Preferences Regarding Osteoarthritis Medications: An Adaptive Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis Study.

Authors:  Basem Al-Omari; Peter McMeekin
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2020-12-22       Impact factor: 2.711

Review 6.  The ACTTION Guide to Clinical Trials of Pain Treatments, part II: mitigating bias, maximizing value.

Authors:  Robert H Dworkin; Robert D Kerns; Michael P McDermott; Dennis C Turk; Christin Veasley
Journal:  Pain Rep       Date:  2021-01-21

7.  Exploring patient preference heterogeneity for pharmacological treatments for chronic pain: A latent class analysis.

Authors:  David A Walsh; Marco Boeri; Lucy Abraham; Jo Atkinson; Andrew G Bushmakin; Joseph C Cappelleri; Brett Hauber; Kathleen Klein; Leo Russo; Lars Viktrup; Dennis Turk
Journal:  Eur J Pain       Date:  2022-01-08       Impact factor: 3.651

8.  A protocol for a discrete choice experiment: understanding patient medicine preferences for managing chronic non-cancer pain.

Authors:  Marian Shanahan; Briony Larance; Suzanne Nielsen; Milton Cohen; Maria Schaffer; Gabrielle Campbell
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-08-02       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 9.  Respondent Understanding in Discrete Choice Experiments: A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Alison Pearce; Mark Harrison; Verity Watson; Deborah J Street; Kirsten Howard; Nick Bansback; Stirling Bryan
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2020-11-03       Impact factor: 3.883

10.  Concern about addiction is associated with lower quality of life in patients with osteoarthritis: an exploratory, real-world data analysis.

Authors:  Louis P Garrison; Patricia Schepman; Andrew G Bushmakin; Rebecca L Robinson; Leslie Tive; Jerry Hall; Mendwas Dzingina; James Jackson; Mia Berry; Joseph C Cappelleri; Stuart Silverman
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2021-07-05       Impact factor: 4.147

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.