What influences participants' treatment preference and can it influence outcome? Results from a primary care-based randomised trial for shoulder pain

Authors: Thomas, Elaine1; Croft, Peter R.1; Paterson, Susan M.1; Dziedzic, Krysia1; Hay, Elaine M.2

Source: British Journal of General Practice, Volume 54, Number 499, February 2004 , pp. 93-96(4)

Publisher: Royal College of General Practitioners

Key:
Free Content - Free Content
New Content - New Content
Subscribed Content - Subscribed Content
Free Trial Content - Free Trial Content

Abstract:

Background: In randomised clinical trials (RCTs), outcome may be influenced by the opinions of the participants about the efficacy of treatments.

Aim: To examine how initial treatment preferences of participants in a shoulder pain trial affected functional outcome and future treatment preferences.

Design of study: Observational cohort study nested within a multicentre, pragmatic RCT of steroid injection versus physiotherapy for unilateral shoulder pain.

Setting: Nine general practices in north Staffordshire.

Method: Two hundred and seven adults were randomised in the trial. Disability scores and preferences of the participants for the trial treatments were elicited at two points: prior to randomisation and 6 months post-randomisation. A good functional outcome was defined as at least a halving in the disability score at the 6 months follow-up point.

Results: Pre-randomisation preferences were: 40% for injection and 20% for physiotherapy, and 40% gave no preference. A good outcome was achieved in a higher percentage of participants who gave a pre-randomisation treatment preference compared with those who did not (62% compared with 48% percentage difference = 14%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1 to 27%) with similar percentages in each preferred treatment group. However, receiving the preferred treatment did not confer any additional benefit in those who expressed a preference (receiving preferred treatment = 56%; not receiving preferred treatment = 69%). At 6 months post-randomisation, participants with a good, as opposed to poor, outcome were more likely to report as their preferred treatment the one to which they had been randomised, irrespective of pre-randomisation preference and whether the preferred treatment was received.

Conclusion: This analysis suggests that preferences prior to treatment can affect outcome, but that treatment outcome is a stronger influence on post-treatment preferences. We present some empirical evidence to support the statement that treatment preferences can have important effects on the results of RCTs.

Keywords: PATIENT PREFERENCE; COHORT STUDIES; SHOULDER PAIN; RANDOMISED CLINICAL TRIALS; PHYSIOTHERAPY; STEROID INJECTION

Document Type: Research article

Affiliations: 1: Primary Care Sciences Research Centre, Keele University 2: Primary Care Sciences Research Centre, Keele University and the Staffordshire Rheumatology Centre

The full text electronic article is available for purchase. You will be able to download the full text electronic article after payment.

$31.30 plus tax      Refund Policy

 

OR

Back to top

Key:
Free Content - Free Content
New Content - New Content
Subscribed Content - Subscribed Content
Free Trial Content - Free Trial Content
Share this item with others: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Page Help Click here for Page Help
Shopping cart
Tools
Sign in






Need to register?
Sign up here
Text size: A | A | A | A