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

David M. Meads (), John L. O’Dwyer, Claire T. Hulme, Phani Chintakayala, Karen Vinall-Collier and Michael I. Bennett
Additional contact information
David M. Meads: University of Leeds
John L. O’Dwyer: University of Leeds
Claire T. Hulme: University of Leeds
Phani Chintakayala: University of Leeds
Karen Vinall-Collier: University of Leeds
Michael I. Bennett: University of Leeds
Authors registered in the RePEc Author Service: John L. O'Dwyer

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2017, vol. 10, issue 5, No 12, 643-651

Abstract: Abstract Background Pain from advanced cancer remains prevalent, severe and often under-treated. Aim The aim of this study was to conduct a discrete choice experiment with patients to understand their preferences for pain management services and inform service development. Methods Focus groups were used to develop the attributes and levels of the discrete choice experiment. The attributes were: waiting time, type of healthcare professional, out-of-pocket costs, side-effect control, quality of communication, quality of information and pain control. Patients completed the discrete choice experiment along with clinical and health-related quality of life questions. Conditional and mixed logit models were used to analyse the data. Results Patients with cancer pain (n = 221) and within palliative care services completed the survey (45% were female, mean age 64.6 years; age range 21–92 years). The most important aspects of pain management were: good pain control, zero out-of-pocket costs and good side-effect control. Poor or moderate pain control and £30 costs drew the highest negative preferences. Respondents preferred control of side effects and provision of better information and communication, over access to certain healthcare professionals. Those with lower health-related quality of life were less willing to wait for treatment and willing to incur higher costs. The presence of a carer influenced preferences. Conclusions Outcome attributes were more important than process attributes but the latter were still valued. Thus, supporting self-management, for example by providing better information on pain may be a worthwhile endeavour. However, service provision may need to account for individual characteristics given the heterogeneity in preferences.

Keywords: Pain Management; Pain Control; Cancer Pain; Discrete Choice Experiment; Palliative Care Service (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-017-0236-x Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:patien:v:10:y:2017:i:5:d:10.1007_s40271-017-0236-x

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40271

DOI: 10.1007/s40271-017-0236-x

Access Statistics for this article

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research is currently edited by Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research from Springer, International Academy of Health Preference Research
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().