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

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 = 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.

Does Choice of Steroid Matter for Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain with Sacroiliac Joint Injections: a Retrospective Study.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Prevalence of chronic low back pain (cLBP) is increasing. Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) is a common source of cLBP, but data behind its diagnosis and treatment is controversial. There is moderate quality evidence for effectiveness of therapeutic SIJ injections. However, there are no studies comparing the two most common steroid preparations, methylprednisolone (MTP) and triamcinolone (TAC) in SIJ injections. RECENT FINDINGS: After institutional IRB approval, a retrospective chart review was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of SIJ injections in terms of pain relief at 1-month follow-up and compare MTP versus TAC. All injections were performed by a single pain physician with fluoroscopic guidance. RESULTS: Sixty-five percent of patients in the MTP group and 57% patients in the TAC group had >50% pain relief at 1-month follow-up, with no statistical difference between the two groups. Patients in the TAC group had significantly greater BMI and consisted of higher proportion of smokers (72% patients in TAC group versus 39% patients in the MTP group, p-value 0.004). Other sources of pain such as facet joints were unmasked post-procedurally after SIJ injections, with this unmasking being significant for the TAC group. Opiate use decreased in the MTP group from 35% pre-procedurally to 20% post-procedurally, and this difference did not reach statistical significance. Both MTP and TAC are effective in providing pain relief for SIJ pain at 1-month follow-up, with no statistical difference between the two types of steroids. Although not statistically significant, there is a modest reduction in opiate use in the MTP group.