Search

Background and Aims Design Setting Participants Measurements Findings Conclusions Clinical trials support injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) for individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) for whom other pharmacological management approaches are not well‐suited. However, despite substantial research indicating that person‐centered care improves engagement, retention and health outcomes for individuals with OUD, structural requirements (e.g. drug policies) often dictate how iOAT must be delivered, regardless of client preferences. This study aimed to quantify clients' iOAT delivery preferences to improve client engagement and retention.Cross‐sectional preference elicitation survey.Metro Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.124 current and former iOAT clients.Participants completed a demographic questionnaire package and an interviewer‐led preference elicitation survey (case 2 best–worst scaling task). Latent class analysis was used to identify distinct preference groups and explore demographic differences between preference groups.Most participants (n = 100; 81%) were current iOAT clients. Latent class analysis identified two distinct groups of client preferences: (1) autonomous decision‐makers (n = 73; 59%) and (2) shared decision‐makers (n = 51; 41%). These groups had different preferences for how medication type and dosage were selected. Both groups prioritized access to take‐home medication (i.e. carries), the ability to set their own schedule, receiving iOAT in a space they like and having other services available at iOAT clinics. Compared with shared decision‐makers, fewer autonomous decision‐makers identified as a cis‐male/man and reported flexible preferences.Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) clients surveyed in Vancouver, Canada, appear to prefer greater autonomy than they currently have in choosing OAT medication type, dosage and treatment schedule. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) is an effective treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD). To our knowledge, no research has systematically studied client preferences for accessing iOAT. Incorporating preferences could help meet the heterogenous needs of clients and make addiction care more person-centred. This paper presents a pilot study of a best-worst scaling (BWS) preference elicitation survey that aimed to assess if the survey was feasible and accessible for our population and to test that the survey could gather sound data that would suit our planned analyses. Patients and Methods: Current and former iOAT clients (n = 18) completed a BWS survey supported by an interviewer using a think-aloud approach. The survey was administered on PowerPoint, and responses and contextual field notes were recorded manually. Think-aloud audio was recorded on Audacity. Results: Clients' feedback fell into five categories: framing of the task, accessibility, conceptualization of attributes and levels, formatting, and behaviour predicting questions. Survey repetitiveness was the most consistent feedback. The data simulation showed that 100 responses should provide an adequate sample size. Conclusion: This pilot demonstrates the type of analysis that can be done with BWS in our population, suggests that such analysis is feasible, and highlights the importance of the interviewer and participant working side-by-side throughout the task. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]