Literature DB >> 22510052

Designing family-centered male circumcision services: a conjoint analysis approach.

John F P Bridges1, Sarah C Searle, Frederic W Selck, Neil A Martinson.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Male circumcision (MC) has become an important weapon in the fight against HIV/AIDS in many Sub-Saharan African countries. The successful implementation of a national MC program requires the design of circumcision services that are attractive to young men of various ages. For many potential clients, mothers and/or fathers will play an important role in the decision to be circumcised, and hence services will need to be designed with the preferences of mothers, fathers, and sons in mind.
OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to value multiple design characteristics of potential community-based MC services from the perspectives of mothers, fathers, and sons in Johannesburg, South Africa, and to test for concordance between their values for the design characteristics.
METHODS: Potential design characteristics of MC services were identified through open-ended interviews with key informants (n = 25). Preferences were estimated using conjoint analysis implemented as part of a cluster randomized household survey. Each participant was randomized to receive one of two possible blocks of conjoint analysis, each consisting of six forced-choice tasks comparing two possible MC services varying on 11 design characteristics. With only two levels for each attribute, our experimental design utilized a main effects orthogonal array. Data were analyzed using linear probability models, with tests of concordance of values using Wald tests generated from stratified estimates calculated using restricted least square estimation.
RESULTS: A racially and geographically diverse sample consisting of 204 fathers, 204 mothers, and 237 sons completed the survey. In aggregate, requiring a follow-up visit was the most valued design factor (p < 0.001), followed by having a lower infection rate (p < 0.001), having less pain (p = 0.001), and a private waiting room (p = 0.001). Based on stratified analysis, sons also valued having the risks and benefits of MC explained (p = 0.01) and mothers valued requiring an HIV test as part of the procedure. Requiring an HIV test was the most significant difference between the respondents (p = 0.03), with sons finding it somewhat repulsive (p = 0.30).
CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that valuation of aspects of MC clinic design can diverge by decision maker. To better ensure utilization of services, these variations should be taken into account to prior to implementation of a national strategy in South Africa.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22510052     DOI: 10.2165/11592970-000000000-00000

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient        ISSN: 1178-1653            Impact factor:   3.883


  22 in total

1.  Using conjoint analysis to elicit the views of health service users: an application to the patient health card.

Authors:  Mandy Ryan; Emma McIntosh; Phil Shackley
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 3.377

2.  Conjoint Analysis Applications in Health - How are Studies being Designed and Reported?: An Update on Current Practice in the Published Literature between 2005 and 2008.

Authors:  Deborah Marshall; John F P Bridges; Brett Hauber; Ruthanne Cameron; Lauren Donnalley; Ken Fyie; F Reed Johnson
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 3.883

3.  Condom avoidance and determinants of demand for male circumcision in Johannesburg, South Africa.

Authors:  John F P Bridges; Fred W Selck; Glenda E Gray; James A McIntyre; Neil A Martinson
Journal:  Health Policy Plan       Date:  2010-10-20       Impact factor: 3.344

4.  Male circumcision for HIV prevention: research implications for policy and programming. WHO/UNAIDS technical consultation, 6-8 March 2007. Conclusions and recommendations (excerpts).

Authors: 
Journal:  Reprod Health Matters       Date:  2007-05

5.  Male circumcision for HIV prevention in men in Rakai, Uganda: a randomised trial.

Authors:  Ronald H Gray; Godfrey Kigozi; David Serwadda; Frederick Makumbi; Stephen Watya; Fred Nalugoda; Noah Kiwanuka; Lawrence H Moulton; Mohammad A Chaudhary; Michael Z Chen; Nelson K Sewankambo; Fred Wabwire-Mangen; Melanie C Bacon; Carolyn F M Williams; Pius Opendi; Steven J Reynolds; Oliver Laeyendecker; Thomas C Quinn; Maria J Wawer
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2007-02-24       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Male circumcision for HIV prevention in young men in Kisumu, Kenya: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Robert C Bailey; Stephen Moses; Corette B Parker; Kawango Agot; Ian Maclean; John N Krieger; Carolyn F M Williams; Richard T Campbell; Jeckoniah O Ndinya-Achola
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2007-02-24       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Preferences for characteristics of antiretroviral therapy provision in Johannesburg, South Africa: results of a conjoint analysis.

Authors:  Marjorie Opuni; David Bishai; Glenda E Gray; James A McIntyre; Neil A Martinson
Journal:  AIDS Behav       Date:  2009-06-16

Review 8.  Behavioral aspects of male circumcision for the prevention of HIV infection.

Authors:  Lisa Eaton; Seth C Kalichman
Journal:  Curr HIV/AIDS Rep       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 5.071

9.  Randomized, controlled intervention trial of male circumcision for reduction of HIV infection risk: the ANRS 1265 Trial.

Authors:  Bertran Auvert; Dirk Taljaard; Emmanuel Lagarde; Joëlle Sobngwi-Tambekou; Rémi Sitta; Adrian Puren
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2005-10-25       Impact factor: 11.069

Review 10.  Acceptability of male circumcision for prevention of HIV/AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa: a review.

Authors:  N Westercamp; R C Bailey
Journal:  AIDS Behav       Date:  2006-10-20
View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Risk as an attribute in discrete choice experiments: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Mark Harrison; Dan Rigby; Caroline Vass; Terry Flynn; Jordan Louviere; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 2.  Discrete choice experiments in health economics: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Michael D Clark; Domino Determann; Stavros Petrou; Domenico Moro; Esther W de Bekker-Grob
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 3.  Sample Size Requirements for Discrete-Choice Experiments in Healthcare: a Practical Guide.

Authors:  Esther W de Bekker-Grob; Bas Donkers; Marcel F Jonker; Elly A Stolk
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 3.883

Review 4.  Application of discrete choice experiments to enhance stakeholder engagement as a strategy for advancing implementation: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ramzi G Salloum; Elizabeth A Shenkman; Jordan J Louviere; David A Chambers
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2017-11-23       Impact factor: 7.327

5.  Eliciting Preferences for HIV Prevention Technologies: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  S Wilson Beckham; Norah L Crossnohere; Margaret Gross; John F P Bridges
Journal:  Patient       Date:  2020-12-15       Impact factor: 3.883

6.  Listening to diverse community voices: the tensions of responding to community expectations in developing a male circumcision program for HIV prevention in Papua New Guinea.

Authors:  Anna Tynan; Peter S Hill; Angela Kelly; Martha Kupul; Herick Aeno; Richard Naketrumb; Peter Siba; John Kaldor; Andrew Vallely
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2013-08-13       Impact factor: 3.295

Review 7.  Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health Services and Implications for the Provision of Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision: Results of a Systematic Literature Review.

Authors:  Michelle R Kaufman; Marina Smelyanskaya; Lynn M Van Lith; Elizabeth C Mallalieu; Aliza Waxman; Karin Hatzhold; Arik V Marcell; Susan Kasedde; Gissenge Lija; Nina Hasen; Gertrude Ncube; Julia L Samuelson; Collen Bonnecwe; Kim Seifert-Ahanda; Emmanuel Njeuhmeli; Aaron A R Tobian
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-03-03       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 8.  Stated-preference research in HIV: A scoping review.

Authors:  John M Humphrey; Violet Naanyu; Katherine R MacDonald; Kara Wools-Kaloustian; Gregory D Zimet
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-10-30       Impact factor: 3.752

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.