Comparing patients' and clinician-researchers' outcome choice for psychological treatment of chronic pain

Abstract

In pain treatment, outcomes are generally defined by researchers and clinicians, predominantly using patient self-report. A large-scale survey of people with chronic pain found a more extensive range of treatment outcomes rated important (Turk et al., "Identifying important outcome domains for chronic pain clinical trials: an IMMPACT survey of people with pain." PAIN 2008;137:276-85) than are conventionally used (Turk et al., "Core outcome domains for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations." PAIN 2003;106:337-45). We compared outcomes from 60 randomised, controlled trials of cognitive and/or behavioural treatment for persistent pain with the 19 domains rated as most important in the survey. Only 2 outcomes, physical activities and emotional well-being, were assigned comparable importance by survey respondents and clinician-researchers. Five of the 19 outcomes important to survey respondents were not measured at all, and 8 rarely. There was a positive, although modest, correlation between the methodological quality of trials and their coverage of survey respondents' outcomes. We lack measures in many areas of outcome valued by people with chronic pain, and we need to extend routine measurement of trial outcomes.