4.5 Article

Veterans' preferences for tobacco treatment in primary care: A discrete choice experiment

Journal

PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
Volume 103, Issue 3, Pages 652-660

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2019.10.002

Keywords

Discrete choice experiment; Conjoint analysis; Preferences; Smoking cessation; Veterans

Funding

  1. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Health Services Research and Development [PPO 15-429]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To evaluate US veterans' preferences for smoking cessation counseling and pharmacotherapy. Methods: A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted in 123 Veterans Health Administration primary care outpatients who planned to quit smoking within 6 months. Key attributes of tobacco cessation treatment were based on literature review and expert opinion. We used a hierarchical Bayesian approach with a logit model to estimate the part-worth utility of each attribute level and used latent class logit models to explore preference heterogeneity. Results: In the aggregate, participants valued counseling options with the following attributes: higher quit rate at 1 year, emphasis on autonomy, familiarity of the counselor, counselor's communication skills, and inclusion of printed materials on smoking cessation. Participants valued pharmacotherapy options with the following attributes: higher quit rate at 1 year, lower risk of physical side effects, zero copayment, monthly check-in calls, and less weight gain. Latent class analysis revealed distinct clusters of patients with a unique preference phenotype. Conclusions: Veterans have distinct preferences for attributes of cessation counseling and pharmacotherapy. Practice implications: Identifying patients' preferences provides an opportunity for clinicians to offer tailored treatment options that better engage veterans in their own care and boost adherence to guideline-recommended counseling and pharmacotherapy. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available