ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2015
Chronic pain patients' treatment preferences: a discrete-choice experiment.
Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preferences of People Living with HIV for Long-Acting Antiretroviral Treatment in Germany: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment.The patient · 2023Pooled it
- CDC Clinical Practice Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Pain - United States, 2022.MMWR. Recommendations and reports : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Recommendations and reports · 2022Guideline
- Current Practices for Accounting for Preference Heterogeneity in Health-Related Discrete Choice Experiments: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2022Pooled it
- Multimethod quantitative benefit-risk assessment of treatments for moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2022Pooled it
- Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: Past, Present and Future.PharmacoEconomics · 2019Pooled it
- The ACTTION Guide to Clinical Trials of Pain Treatments, part II: mitigating bias, maximizing value.Pain reportsTrial
- Urban-rural differences in preferences for traditional Chinese medicine services among chronic disease patients: a discrete choice experiment.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2024Article
- Understanding general practitioners' prescribing choices to patients with chronic low back pain: a discrete choice experiment.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2024Article
- Patient Preferences in the Management of Hidradenitis Suppurativa: Results of a Multinational Discrete Choice Experiment in Europe.The patient · 2023Article
- Exploring patient preference heterogeneity for pharmacological treatments for chronic pain: A latent class analysis.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2022Article
- Concern about addiction is associated with lower quality of life in patients with osteoarthritis: an exploratory, real-world data analysis.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2022Article
- Article
- Patients' Preferences Regarding Osteoarthritis Medications: An Adaptive Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2020Article
- A protocol for a discrete choice experiment: understanding patient medicine preferences for managing chronic non-cancer pain.BMJ open · 2019Article
- 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.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2018Article
- Patient Preferences for Pain Management in Advanced Cancer: Results from a Discrete Choice Experiment.The patient · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe 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?"
methodsA 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.
resultsA 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).
conclusionsThe 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.