Preferences for HIV PrEP Products and Delivery Models Among Cisgender Men, Transgender Persons, and Non-binary Individuals Who Have Sex with Men in Seattle, Washington: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Lauren R Violette, Jakar Delacruz, Lisa A Niemann, Chase Cannon, Joanne D Stekler, David A Katz
{"title":"Preferences for HIV PrEP Products and Delivery Models Among Cisgender Men, Transgender Persons, and Non-binary Individuals Who Have Sex with Men in Seattle, Washington: A Discrete Choice Experiment.","authors":"Lauren R Violette, Jakar Delacruz, Lisa A Niemann, Chase Cannon, Joanne D Stekler, David A Katz","doi":"10.1097/QAI.0000000000003718","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Understanding preferences for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) products and delivery models could better meet the needs of populations likely to benefit from PrEP and ultimately increase uptake.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Public Health - Seattle & King County Sexual Health Clinic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between August 2022-December 2023, a convenience sample of individuals seeking HIV testing and participating in Project DETECT2 completed a discrete choice experiment (DCE). We used a D-efficient blocked fractional design and asked participants to choose between two hypothetical PrEP options composed of five attributes (modality, efficacy, dosing frequency, prescriber, and monitoring appointment format). We used multinomial logistic regression to estimate preference weights and relative importance overall and stratified by PrEP experience.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>325 participants completed the DCE; 96 (29.5%) were PrEP-naïve and 229 (70.5%) were PrEP-experienced. Ninety-nine percent efficacy (weight=0.848, 95%CI= 0.769-0.927), 6-month dosing interval (weight=0.381, 95%CI= 0.293-0.469) and pills (weight=0.173, 95%CI= 0.085-0.261) were most preferred. There was a strong preference for PrEP delivery within a pharmacy (weight=0.144, 95%CI= 0.059-0.228) or community-based organization (weight=0.097, 95%CI= 0.011-0.183). Preference for combination online/in-person (weight=0.086, 95%CI= 0.017-0.154) and in-person only monitoring appointments (weight=0.061, 95%CI= -0.023-0.144) was similar. Efficacy had the highest relative importance (52.1%). Stratifying by PrEP experience did not change preference.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Participants preferred products with high efficacy and longer dosing intervals delivered in non-clinical spaces with in-person or online follow-up appointments. These data suggest that, while highly efficacious, longer-acting products are preferred, a range of different modalities, prescribers, and monitoring methods may be needed to reach everyone who may benefit from PrEP.</p>","PeriodicalId":520658,"journal":{"name":"Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/QAI.0000000000003718","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Understanding preferences for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) products and delivery models could better meet the needs of populations likely to benefit from PrEP and ultimately increase uptake.

Setting: Public Health - Seattle & King County Sexual Health Clinic.

Methods: Between August 2022-December 2023, a convenience sample of individuals seeking HIV testing and participating in Project DETECT2 completed a discrete choice experiment (DCE). We used a D-efficient blocked fractional design and asked participants to choose between two hypothetical PrEP options composed of five attributes (modality, efficacy, dosing frequency, prescriber, and monitoring appointment format). We used multinomial logistic regression to estimate preference weights and relative importance overall and stratified by PrEP experience.

Results: 325 participants completed the DCE; 96 (29.5%) were PrEP-naïve and 229 (70.5%) were PrEP-experienced. Ninety-nine percent efficacy (weight=0.848, 95%CI= 0.769-0.927), 6-month dosing interval (weight=0.381, 95%CI= 0.293-0.469) and pills (weight=0.173, 95%CI= 0.085-0.261) were most preferred. There was a strong preference for PrEP delivery within a pharmacy (weight=0.144, 95%CI= 0.059-0.228) or community-based organization (weight=0.097, 95%CI= 0.011-0.183). Preference for combination online/in-person (weight=0.086, 95%CI= 0.017-0.154) and in-person only monitoring appointments (weight=0.061, 95%CI= -0.023-0.144) was similar. Efficacy had the highest relative importance (52.1%). Stratifying by PrEP experience did not change preference.

Conclusions: Participants preferred products with high efficacy and longer dosing intervals delivered in non-clinical spaces with in-person or online follow-up appointments. These data suggest that, while highly efficacious, longer-acting products are preferred, a range of different modalities, prescribers, and monitoring methods may be needed to reach everyone who may benefit from PrEP.

在华盛顿州西雅图市,顺性男性、跨性别者和与男性发生性关系的非二元性个体对HIV PrEP产品和递送模式的偏好:一项离散选择实验。
背景:了解艾滋病毒暴露前预防(PrEP)产品和交付模式的偏好,可以更好地满足可能受益于PrEP的人群的需求,并最终增加使用。环境:公共卫生-西雅图和金县性健康诊所。方法:在2022年8月至2023年12月期间,对寻求HIV检测并参与DETECT2项目的方便样本进行离散选择实验(DCE)。我们使用了d有效的阻断分数设计,并要求参与者在由五个属性(方式、疗效、给药频率、开处方者和监测预约格式)组成的两种假设的PrEP选项中进行选择。我们使用多项逻辑回归来估计偏好权重和相对重要性,并根据PrEP经验分层。结果:325名参与者完成了DCE;96例(29.5%)为PrEP-naïve, 229例(70.5%)为ep -experience。首选疗效为99%(体重=0.848,95%CI= 0.769 ~ 0.927)、6个月给药间隔(体重=0.381,95%CI= 0.293 ~ 0.469)和丸剂(体重=0.173,95%CI= 0.085 ~ 0.261)。受访者强烈倾向于在药店(权重=0.144,95%CI= 0.059-0.228)或社区组织(权重=0.097,95%CI= 0.011-0.183)内提供PrEP。对在线/面对面结合(权重=0.086,95%CI= 0.017-0.154)和仅面对面监测预约(权重=0.061,95%CI= -0.023-0.144)的偏好相似。疗效的相对重要性最高(52.1%)。PrEP经验分层不会改变偏好。结论:参与者更喜欢在非临床空间提供的具有高疗效和较长给药间隔的产品,并有面对面或在线随访预约。这些数据表明,虽然高效、长效的产品是首选,但可能需要一系列不同的模式、开处方者和监测方法,才能惠及所有可能受益于PrEP的人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信