2,977
Views
3
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Understanding the Role of Patient Preference in the Treatment Algorithm for Chronic Low Back Pain: Results from a Survey-Based Study

, , , ORCID Icon, & ORCID Icon
Pages 371-382 | Received 07 Feb 2021, Accepted 11 Aug 2021, Published online: 02 Sep 2021

Figures & data

Figure 1. Treatment options by order of choice as ranked by Survey 1 respondents.

PNS: Peripheral nerve stimulation; SCS/DRG: Spinal cord stimulation/dorsal root ganglion stimulation.

Figure 1. Treatment options by order of choice as ranked by Survey 1 respondents.PNS: Peripheral nerve stimulation; SCS/DRG: Spinal cord stimulation/dorsal root ganglion stimulation.
Figure 2. Mean rank values by treatment option.

*p = 0.0008 versus permanently implanted PNS. p ≤ 0.0001 versus permanently implanted SCS/DRGS.

PNS: Peripheral nerve stimulation; SCS/DRG: Spinal cord stimulation/dorsal root ganglion stimulation; SEM: Standard error of the mean.

Figure 2. Mean rank values by treatment option.*p = 0.0008 versus permanently implanted PNS. ∧p ≤ 0.0001 versus permanently implanted SCS/DRGS.PNS: Peripheral nerve stimulation; SCS/DRG: Spinal cord stimulation/dorsal root ganglion stimulation; SEM: Standard error of the mean.

Table 1. Treatment preferences among patients with lower back pain before and after follow-on details about temporary PNS and RFA.

Table 2. Treatment preferences after follow-on details.

Table 3. Demographic information for survey 2 respondents (n = 347).

Figure 3. Initial and final preference choice for temporary peripheral nerve stimulation and radiofrequency ablation/permanent implant.

(A) Initial and final choices of most desired treatment option among low back pain patients in Survey 1, stratified by their initial choice of Temporary PNS or RFA. Final choices reflect changes after additional information was provided about a potential side effect of each treatment option. p = 0.068. (B) Final choices of all low back pain patients who initially chose temporary PNS or RFA.

*p < 0.0001.

PNS: Peripheral nerve stimulation; RFA: Radiofrequency ablation.

Figure 3. Initial and final preference choice for temporary peripheral nerve stimulation and radiofrequency ablation/permanent implant. (A) Initial and final choices of most desired treatment option among low back pain patients in Survey 1, stratified by their initial choice of Temporary PNS or RFA. Final choices reflect changes after additional information was provided about a potential side effect of each treatment option. p = 0.068. (B) Final choices of all low back pain patients who initially chose temporary PNS or RFA.*p < 0.0001.PNS: Peripheral nerve stimulation; RFA: Radiofrequency ablation.

Table 4. Treatment preference among respondents with low back pain after follow-on details.

Figure 4. Initial and final choice among stimulation, ablation or neither treatment.

(A) Initial and final choices of most desired treatment option among low back pain patients in Survey 2, stratified by their initial choice of stimulation or ablation. Final choices reflect changes after additional information was provided about a potential side effect of each treatment option. (B) Final choices of all low back pain patients who initially chose stimulation or ablation.

*p = 0.0007; **p = 0.0001.

Figure 4. Initial and final choice among stimulation, ablation or neither treatment. (A) Initial and final choices of most desired treatment option among low back pain patients in Survey 2, stratified by their initial choice of stimulation or ablation. Final choices reflect changes after additional information was provided about a potential side effect of each treatment option. (B) Final choices of all low back pain patients who initially chose stimulation or ablation.*p = 0.0007; **p = 0.0001.