Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
ABSTRACTInjectable antiretroviral treatment (ART) represents a new effective and potentially more convenient alternative to oral ART for people living with HIV (PLWH). This study assessed preferences of PLWH for long-acting injectable compared with oral ART in the Netherlands. A labelled discrete choice experiment presented 12 choice sets of long-acting injectable and oral ART. PLWH were asked to select their preferred ART, described by six attributes: location of administration, dosing frequency, risk of short-term side effects, drug-drug interaction, forgivability, and food and mealtime restrictions. Random parameters logit and latent class models were used to estimate preferences of PLWH. 98.6% of 76 respondents were experienced oral ART users that had taken ART for a median of 12 years (Q1-Q3: 7.0-20.0). 30 (39.5%) respondents chose long-acting injectable ART in all choice tasks and 22 (28.9%) always chose oral ART. The random parameter model showed that, on average, respondents significantly favoured long-acting injectable ART over oral ART, preferred administration of the long-acting injectable ART at home, and a less frequent regimen. The latent class model confirmed one class strongly preferring long-acting injectable ART and one class slightly preferring oral ART. This study highlights the value for both long-acting injectable and oral ART.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kremer et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: