Highlights
- •More aversive laboratory tests deterred participants.
- •Greater study payment motivated participants' randomized clinical trial selection.
- •Continuing concomitant pain medications were an incentive for participants.
- •Concomitant medications and payment may counteract aversive laboratory tests.
Abstract
Barriers to clinical trial recruitment can delay study completion, potentially resulting
in increased costs and an unrepresentative sample. In the current study of 150 participants
with chronic pain, we used a computerized adaptive choice-based conjoint survey that
included 8 characteristics that may affect enrollment in pharmacologic pain treatment
trials (ie, treatment allocation, frequency of pain ratings, treatment administration
method, current medications, number of study visits, availability of evening and weekend
visits, invasiveness of laboratory procedures, payment). These data were analyzed
using Sawtooth Software ver. 8.4.8 (Sawtooth Software, Inc, Orem, UT), which identifies
the characteristics that dominate participants' decisions across multiple sets of
potential trials. Three characteristics had the largest relative importance in participants’
trial preferences: 1) invasiveness of required laboratory procedures (ie, 22%), with
no procedures or blood tests preferred over ice-water sensory testing or skin biopsy;
2) ability to continue current pain medications (21%); and 3) payment for study participation
(21%), with higher payment preferred. The fourth most important characteristic was
number of study visits (13%), with participants preferring fewer in-person visits
and more phone contacts. Understanding the preferences of potential participants is
an important step toward enhancing enrollment in pain treatment trials.
Perspective
This article presents the preferences of individuals with chronic pain conditions
regarding modifiable pain treatment trial characteristics (eg, number of study visits,
payment, treatment allocation). These findings may help to improve enrollment into
analgesic clinical trials and in turn accelerate the development of new pain treatments.
Key words
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to The Journal of PainAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Factors associated with participation in breast cancer treatment clinical trials.J Clin Oncol. 2006; 24: 1860-1867
- Recruiting patients to randomized trials in primary care: Principles and case study.Fam Pract. 2000; 17: 187-191
- Recruitment of participants to a multiple sclerosis trial: The CombiRx experience.Clin Trials. 2014; 11: 159-166
- The individual and societal burden of chronic pain in Europe: The case for strategic prioritisation and action to improve knowledge and availability of appropriate care.BMC Public Health. 2013; 13: 1229
- Use of ClinicalTrials.gov to estimate condition-specific nocebo effects and other factors affecting outcomes of analgesic trials.J Pain. 2013; 14: 405-411
Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences. International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects, 2002. Available at: http://www.cioms.ch/publications/guidelines/guidelines_nov_2002_blurb.htm. Accessed February 3, 2016
- An assessment of willingness to participate in a randomized trial of arthroscopic knee surgery in patients with osteoarthritis.Contemp Clin Trials. 2005; 26: 169-178
- Considerations for improving assay sensitivity in chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations.Pain. 2012; 153: 1148-1158
- The prevalence of chronic pain with an analysis of countries with a Human Development Index less than 0.9: A systematic review without meta-analysis.Curr Med Res Opin. 2012; 28: 1221-1229
- Ending concerns about undue inducement.J Law Med Ethics. 2004; 32: 100-105
- Preferences for medication attributes among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the UK.Diabetes Obes Metab. 2013; 15: 802-809
- Pain as a global public health priority.BMC Public Health. 2011; 11: 770
- Experience and challenges presented by a multicenter crossover study of combination analgesic therapy for the treatment of painful HIV-associated polyneuropathies.Pain Med. 2013; 14: 1039-1047
- Patient-derived determinants for participation in placebo-controlled clinical trials for fibromyalgia.Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2010; 14: 470-476
- Envisioning a Transformed Clinical Trials Enterprise in the United States: Establishing an Agenda for 2020.(Workshop summary) The National Academies Press, Washington, DC2012
- Relieving Pain in America: A Blueprint for Transforming Prevention, Care, Education, and Research.The National Academies Press, Washington, DC2011
- How redesigning AD clinical trials might increase study partners’ willingness to participate.Neurology. 2008; 71: 1883-1888
- Willingness to pay for complete symptom relief of gastroesophageal reflux disease.Arch Intern Med. 2002; 162: 1361-1366
- Overcoming recruitment challenges in patients with multiple sclerosis: Results from an Italian survey.Clin Trials. 2014; 11: 667-672
- Assessing preferences for improved smoking cessation medications: A discrete choice experiment.Eur J Health Econ. 2012; 13: 533-548
- Randomized trial of informed consent and recruitment for clinical trials in the immediate preoperative period.Anesthesiology. 1999; 91: 969-978
- Getting Started With Conjoint Analysis: Strategies for Product Design and Pricing Research.Research Publishers LLC, Manhattan Beach, CA2014
- Clinical trial implementation and recruitment: lessons learned from the early closure of a randomized clinical trial.Contemp Clin Trials. 2012; 33: 291-297
- Therapeutic effect of follow-up assessments on antidepressant and placebo response rates in antidepressant efficacy trials: Meta-analysis.Br J Psychiatry. 2007; 190: 287-292
- Methodological issues in the recruitment of cancer pain patients and their caregivers.Res Nurs Health. 2006; 29: 190-198
- Less is more in antidepressant clinical trials: A meta-analysis of the effect of visit frequency on treatment response and dropout.J Clin Psychiatry. 2013; 74: 703-715
- Factors associated with refusal to enter a clinical trial: Epidural anesthesia is a deterrent to participation.Can J Anaesth. 2002; 49: 583-587
- Enrolling older adults with cognitive impairment in research: Lessons from a study of Tai Chi for osteoarthritis knee pain.Res Gerontol Nurs. 2009; 2: 228-234
- Treatment of chronic non-cancer pain.Lancet. 2011; 377: 2226-2235
- Patients’ refusal to participate in clinical research.Eur J Anaesthesiol. 1997; 14: 287-289
- Reasons for participation in pain research: Can they indicate a lack of informed consent?.Pain Med. 2009; 10: 111-119
- Clinical factors and the decision to transfuse chronic dialysis patients.Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013; 8: 1942-1951
- Towards patient-centered care for depression: Conjoint methods to tailor treatment based on preferences.Patient. 2010; 3: 145-157
- Towards personalizing treatment for depression: Developing treatment values markers.Patient. 2013; 6: 35-43
- External validity of a randomised clinical trial of temporomandibular disorders: Analysis of the patients who refused to participate in research.Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003; 41: 129-131
Article info
Publication history
Published online: August 21, 2016
Accepted:
July 26,
2016
Received in revised form:
June 20,
2016
Received:
April 12,
2016
Footnotes
S.M.S. and J.S.G. contributed equally to this work.
Financial support for this project was provided by the Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). ACTTION has received research contracts, grants, or other revenue from the FDA, multiple pharmaceutical and device companies, and other sources. No official endorsement by the FDA or the pharmaceutical and device companies that have provided unrestricted grants to support the activities of ACTTION should be inferred.
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Supplementary data accompanying this article are available online at www.jpain.org and www.sciencedirect.com.
Identification
Copyright
© 2016 by the American Pain Society
