LAUSR

Objective: To determine what outcomes are most important to patients after a limb-threatening injury, and if those preferences vary based on the patients’ treatment (salvage vs amputation), health, demographics, or time since injury. Background: The preferences that motivate the patients’ choice of treatment following a limb-threatening injury are poorly understood. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are a robust survey methodology to quantify preferences. Methods: Patients with a history of traumatic limb-threatening injury, January 2010 to December 2020, completed a survey with our DCE and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) questionnaire. The DCE attributes included recovery time, function, appearance, cost, and time in hospital. We used conditional logit modeling to estimate the relative importance of each attribute on a scale of 0% to 100%, determine willingness to pay for improvements in the included attributes, and assess variation in preferences based on patient characteristics, including PROMIS score. Results: A total of 150 patients completed the survey (104 limb salvage, 46 amputation; mean age, 48±16 years; 79% male). Regaining preinjury function [relative importance=41%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 37%–45%] and minimizing costs (24%; 95% CI, 21%–28%) were of greatest importance. Changes in appearance were least important (7%; 95% CI, 5%–9%). The hierarchy of preferences did not vary between those who had limb salvage or amputation, but patient age, physical and mental health, and income were associated with preference variation. Conclusions: Patients with limb-threatening injuries most valued gains in function and reduced out-of-pocket costs.