Dataset Information

Patterns of SARS-CoV-2 Testing Preferences in a National Cohort in the United States: Latent Class Analysis of a Discrete Choice Experiment.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Inadequate screening and diagnostic testing in the United States throughout the first several months of the COVID-19 pandemic led to undetected cases transmitting disease in the community and an underestimation of cases. Though testing supply has increased, maintaining testing uptake remains a public health priority in the efforts to control community transmission considering the availability of vaccinations and threats from variants.

Objective

This study aimed to identify patterns of preferences for SARS-CoV-2 screening and diagnostic testing prior to widespread vaccine availability and uptake.

Methods

We conducted a discrete choice experiment (DCE) among participants in the national, prospective CHASING COVID (Communities, Households, and SARS-CoV-2 Epidemiology) Cohort Study from July 30 to September 8, 2020. The DCE elicited preferences for SARS-CoV-2 test type, specimen type, testing venue, and result turnaround time. We used latent class multinomial logit to identify distinct patterns of preferences related to testing as measured by attribute-level part-worth utilities and conducted a simulation based on the utility estimates to predict testing uptake if additional testing scenarios were offered.

Results

Of the 5098 invited cohort participants, 4793 (94.0%) completed the DCE. Five distinct patterns of SARS-CoV-2 testing emerged. Noninvasive home testers (n=920, 19.2% of participants) were most influenced by specimen type and favored less invasive specimen collection methods, with saliva being most preferred; this group was the least likely to opt out of testing. Fast-track testers (n=1235, 25.8%) were most influenced by result turnaround time and favored immediate and same-day turnaround time. Among dual testers (n=889, 18.5%), test type was the most important attribute, and preference was given to both antibody and viral tests. Noninvasive dual testers (n=1578, 32.9%) were most strongly influenced by specimen type and test type, preferring saliva and cheek swab specimens and both antibody and viral tests. Among hesitant home testers (n=171, 3.6%), the venue was the most important attribute; notably, this group was the most likely to opt out of testing. In addition to variability in preferences for testing features, heterogeneity was observed in the distribution of certain demographic characteristics (age, race/ethnicity, education, and employment), history of SARS-CoV-2 testing, COVID-19 diagnosis, and concern about the pandemic. Simulation models predicted that testing uptake would increase from 81.6% (with a status quo scenario of polymerase chain reaction by nasal swab in a provider's office and a turnaround time of several days) to 98.1% by offering additional scenarios using less invasive specimens, both viral and antibody tests from a single specimen, faster turnaround time, and at-home testing.

Conclusions

We identified substantial differences in preferences for SARS-CoV-2 testing and found that offering additional testing options would likely increase testing uptake in line with public health goals. Additional studies may be warranted to understand if preferences for testing have changed since the availability and widespread uptake of vaccines.

SUBMITTER: Zimba R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8722498 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivePatients' perceptions and experiences of medication efficacy, medication adverse events, dosing frequency, and dosing complexity have been found to influence adherence to injectable disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). The aim of this study was to quantify patient preferences for features of injectable DMTs for MS.MethodsAdult patients in the United States (US) with a self-reported diagnosis of MS completed an online discrete-choice experiment survey to assess preference for a number of features of a hypothetical injectable DMT. Patients chose hypothetical treatments in paired comparisons, where each treatment was described by features or attributes, including the number of years until disability progression, the number of relapses in the next 4 years, injection time, the frequency of injections, the occurrence of flu-like symptoms (FLS), and severity of injection-site reactions. Random-parameters logit regression parameters were used to calculate preference weights of attribute levels and the relative importance of changes in treatment features.ResultsOf the 205 patients who completed the survey, 192 provided sufficient data for analysis. The results indicated a broad range of tradeoffs that patients would be willing to make. With regard to this, the relative importance of an improvement in the number of years until disability progression from 1 to 2 (i.e., vertical distance between preference weights for these attribute levels) was 0.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.5-1.2], the relative importance of this change was approximately equivalent to that of an improvement from 12 injections per month to two (mean 0.8, 95% CI 0.4-1.2), or approximately equivalent to a decrease from four to one relapses in the next 4 years (mean 0.8, 95% CI 0.5-1.2), or FLS 3 days after every injection to 3 days after some injections (mean 1.0, 95% CI 0.6-1.4).ConclusionsThese results suggest that an improvement in treatment efficacy may be as important as a reduction in injection frequency or a reduction in some adverse events for patients who self-administer injectable DMTs for MS. Understanding the preferences of patients who use injectable treatments will inform the development of such treatments, which may in turn improve patient medication adherence and well-being.

Project description:IntroductionThe PROMISE study, launched in 2018, evaluates the implementation of revisions to the HIV Care Coordination Program (CCP) designed to minimize persistent disparities in HIV outcomes among high-need persons living with HIV in New York City. We conducted a discrete choice experiment (DCE) assessing the preferences of CCP clients to inform improvements to the program's design.MethodsClients chose between two hypothetical CCP options that varied across four program attributes: help with antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence (directly observed therapy [DOT] vs. remind via phone/text vs. adherence assessment), help with primary care appointments (remind and accompany vs. remind and transport vs. remind only), help with issues other than primary care (coverage and benefits vs. housing and food vs. mental health vs. specialty medical care) and visit location (meet at home vs. via phone/video vs. program visit 30 or 60 minutes away). The latent class analysis identified different preference patterns. A choice simulation was performed to model client preferences for hypothetical CCPs as a whole.ResultsOne hundred and eighty-one CCP clients from six sites implementing the revised CCP completed the DCE January 2020-March 2021. Most clients had stable housing (68.5%), reported no problem substance use in the last 3 months (72.4%) and achieved viral suppression (78.5) with only 26.5% receiving DOT within a CCP. 77.3% of responses were obtained before the COVID-19 pandemic. Preferences clustered into three groups. Visit location and ART adherence support were the most important attributes. Group 1 (40%) endorsed telehealth for visit location; telehealth for ART adherence support; and help with securing housing/food; Group 2 (37%) endorsed telehealth for visit location; telehealth for ART adherence support; and staff reminding/arranging appointment transportation; Group 3 (23%) endorsed staff meeting clients at program location and staff working with clients for medication adherence. In the choice simulation, Basic and Medium hypothetical CCPs were endorsed more than Intensive CCPs.ConclusionsThis DCE revealed a strong preference for telehealth and a relatively low preference for intensive services, such as DOT and home visits; preferences were heterogeneous. The findings support differentiated care and remote service delivery options in the NYC CCP, and can inform improvements to CCP design.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:It is desirable that public preferences are established and incorporated in emergency healthcare reforms. The aim of this study was to investigate preferences for local versus centralised provision of all emergency medical services (EMS) and explore what individuals think are important considerations for EMS delivery. DESIGN:A discrete choice experiment was conducted. The attributes used in the choice scenarios were: travel time to the hospital, waiting time to be seen, length of stay in the hospital, risks of dying, readmission and opportunity for outpatient care after emergency treatment at a local hospital. SETTING:North East England. PARTICIPANTS:Participants were a randomly sampled general population, aged 16 years or above recruited from Healthwatch Northumberland network database of lay members and from clinical contact with Northumbria Healthcare National Health Service Foundation Trust via Patient Experience Team. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Analysis used logistic regression modelling techniques to determine the preference of each attribute. Marginal rates of substitution between attributes were estimated to understand the trade-offs individuals were willing to make. RESULTS:Responses were obtained from 148 people (62 completed a web and 86 a postal version). Respondents preferred shorter travel time to hospital, shorter waiting time, fewer number of days in hospital, low risk of death, low risk of readmission and outpatient follow-up care in their local hospital. However, individuals were willing to trade off increased travel time and waiting time for high-quality centralised care. Individuals were willing to travel 9 min more for a 1-day reduction in length of stay in the hospital, 38 min for a 1% reduction in risk of death and 112 min for having outpatient follow-up care at their local hospital. CONCLUSIONS:People value centralised EMS if it provides higher quality care and are willing to travel further and wait longer.

Project description:Choosing hypodontia treatment requires young people and parents to consider a large amount of information, identify what is important to them, and make trade-offs between options. This study aimed to examine young people and parents' preferences for hypodontia treatment using discrete choice experiment (DCE). This was a cross-sectional survey of young people (12-16 y) with hypodontia of any severity, at any stage of treatment, and their parents. Participants were recruited from NHS Hospitals in England and Wales. A bespoke DCE questionnaire was developed to measure preferences for 6 attributes of hypodontia treatment (waiting time, treatment time, problems during treatment, discomfort during treatment, bite, appearance). The questionnaire was completed 1) online by young people and parents, individually or together, and 2) by child-parent dyads under observation. Preferences were analyzed using regression models. In total, 204 participants (122 young people, 56 parents, 26 dyads) completed the online questionnaire and 15 child-parent dyads completed the questionnaire under observation. The most important attribute in hypodontia treatment was improvement in appearance, but significant heterogeneity was found in preferences. Four distinct groups of participants were found: group 1 (39%): severe discomfort and problems were most important; group 2 (31%): most concerned about improvement in appearance of teeth and improvement in bite; group 3 (22%): appearance 3 times more important than any other attribute; and group 4 (9%): preferences difficult to interpret. There was variation in how child-parent dyads approached decision-making, with some negotiating joint preferences, while for others, one individual dominated. Making trade-offs in DCE tasks helped some people think about treatment and identify their preferences. Appearance is an important outcome from hypodontia treatment, but preferences vary and potential risks and functional outcome are also important to some people. There is a notable level of uncertainty in decision-making, which suggests further shared decision support would be valuable.