A discrete choice experiment to investigate patient preferences for HIV testing programs in Bogotá, Colombia

ABSTRACT

Background: To assess patients’ preferences for HIV testing in Colombia.

Methods: A discrete choice experiment was used to assess preferences of patients diagnosed with HIV, for HIV testing in two HIV clinics in Bogotá, Colombia. Patients were asked to choose repeatedly between two hypothetical HIV testing options that varied with respect to five attributes: distance to testing site, confidentiality, testing days, sample collection method, and the services if HIV positive. A random parameter model was used to analyze the data.

Results: A total of 249 questionnaires were eligible for data analysis. Respondents showed a preference for testing on weekdays, nobody being aware, a sample taken from the arm, and receiving medications through a referral. The respondents showed a high negative preference for many people being aware, followed by testing during the weekend and home testing. Subgroup analyses by gender and prior testing history did not reveal significant differences.

Conclusion: This study suggests that patients’ preferences for HIV testing focused especially on confidentiality, availability during weekdays, and using a sample from the arm. This information could be useful to improve uptake of HIV testing in Bogotá, Colombia.

KEYWORDS:

• Colombia
• discrete choice experiment
• HIV
• patients preferences
• testing programs

Author contributions

All author(s) made substantial contributions to the paper. BFMW, RPLBE, and MH were involved in drafting the manuscript, analysis, and interpretation of the data. JO and AM were involved in the design of the questionnaire and interpretation of the data. AFWH, RC, JGRG, and MJGG were involved in interpretation of the data and the collection of data. SMAAE and MH both supervised the project. In addition, all authors were involved in proofreading the manuscript.

Declaration of interest

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

Reviewer disclosures

Peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial or other relationships to disclose.

Additional information

Funding

This paper was not funded.