Search

Background and aims: Offering financial incentives is effective for smoking cessation during pregnancy. We tested the effectiveness of financial incentives for maintaining postpartum cessation, comparing 12-month and 3-month incentives with each other and with usual care (UC). Design, setting and participants: This study was a pragmatic, multi-centre, three-arm randomized controlled trial involving four English, National Health Service, stop smoking services. A total of 462 postpartum women (aged ≥ 16 years) took part, who stopped smoking during pregnancy with financial incentives, validated as abstinent from smoking at end of pregnancy or early postpartum. Interventions: Interventions comprised (i) UC; (ii) UC plus up to £60 of financial voucher incentives offered to participants and £60 offered to an optional significant-other supporter, over 3 months postpartum, contingent upon validated abstinence ('3-month incentives'); or (iii) UC plus '3-month incentives' plus £180 of vouchers offered to participants over 9 months postpartum, contingent upon abstinence ('12-month incentives'). Measurements: Primary outcome: biochemically validated abstinence at 1 year postpartum. To adjust for testing all comparisons between groups with equal precision, P < 0.017 was necessary for significance. Secondary outcomes: self-reported and validated abstinence at 3 months postpartum; self-reported abstinence at 1 year postpartum. Findings: Primary outcome ascertainment: abstinence was 39.6% (63/159) 12 months incentives, 21.4% (33/154) 3 months incentives and 28.2% (42/149) UC. Adjusted odds ratios [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 12-month versus 3-month incentives OR = 2.41 (95% CI = 1.46-3.96), P = 0.001; 12 months versus UC 1.67 (1.04-2.70), P = 0.035; 3 months versus UC 0.69 (0.41-1.17), P = 0.174. Bayes factors indicated that for 12- month versus 3-month incentives and 12 months versus UC there was good evidence for the alternative hypothesis, and for 3 months versus UC there was good evidence for the null hypothesis. Conclusions: This randomized controlled trial provides weak evidence that up to £300 of voucher incentives over 12 months is effective for maintaining smoking abstinence postpartum compared with usual care. There was good evidence that 12-month incentives are superior to those over only 3 months, for which there was no evidence of effectiveness relative to usual care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims: The majority of smokers accessing the current best treatments continue to smoke. We aimed to test if e‐cigarettes (EC) compared with nicotine replacement treatment (NRT) can help such smokers to reduce smoking. Design Randomized controlled trial of EC (n = 68) versus NRT (n = 67) with 6‐month follow‐up. Setting: Stop smoking service in London, UK. Participants: A total of 135 smokers (median age = 40 years, 51% male) previously unable to stop smoking with conventional treatments. Interventions: Participants received either NRT of their choice (8‐week supply) or an EC starter pack and instructions to purchase further e‐liquids of strength and flavours of their choice themselves. Products were accompanied by minimal behavioural support. Measurements Participants who reported that they stopped smoking or reduced their daily cigarette consumption by at least 50% at 6‐month follow‐up were invited to provide a carbon monoxide (CO) reading. The primary outcome was biochemically validated reduction in smoke intake of at least 50% at 6 months and the main secondary outcome was sustained validated abstinence at 6 months. Drop‐outs were included as 'non‐reducers'. Findings Validated smoking reduction (including cessation) was achieved by 26.5 versus 6.0% of participants in the EC and NRT study arms, respectively [relative risk (RR) = 4.4, P = 0.005, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.6–12.4]. Sustained validated abstinence rates at 6 months were 19.1 versus 3.0% (RR = 6.4, P = 0.01, 95% CI = 1.5–27.3). Product use was high and equal in both study arms initially, but at 6 months allocated product use was 47% in the EC arm versus 10% in the NRT arm (χ2(1) = 22.0, P < 0.001), respectively. Adverse events were minor and infrequent. Conclusions: In smokers unable to quit using conventional methods, e‐cigarettes were more effective than nicotine replacement therapy in facilitating validated long‐term smoking reduction and smoking cessation when limited other support was provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aim: Reducing alcohol misuse by male prisoners is an important global issue. Control of drinking behaviour could be a useful target for intervention in this population, and locus of control could be a causal factor in this. We aimed to assess the effect of a clinical psychologist‐facilitated group intervention on male prisoners' locus of control of drinking behaviour. Design A two‐arm, single‐site, open, randomized controlled trial. Setting: A category B local training prison in South Wales, housing about 770 mainly sentenced men. Participants: Prisoners serving less than 2 years who met inclusion criteria for pre‐imprisonment alcohol misuse, alone or with drug misuse. A total of 119 were allocated to the intervention arm and 119 to the control arm; 104 and 87, respectively, completed the post‐randomization baseline interview and 68 and 60 completed a second interview approximately 4 weeks later, respectively, after intervention or treatment as usual (TAU) alone. Intervention: Nine clinical psychologist‐facilitated groups in the prison over 3 weeks. Range of participants per session was one to seven, with three to five most usual. Measures: The primary outcome was locus of control of behaviour (LCB); secondary outcomes included mental state generally (comprehensive psychiatric rating scale/CPRS) and specifically (Beck Depression Inventory/BDI). An integral process evaluation was conducted. Findings LCB scores decreased during the study, but without significant intervention effect [−1.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) = –5.1 to 1.6, P = 0.329]. Change among completers in the control group was from a mean score of 37.4 [standard deviation (SD) = 10.0] to 33.7[SD = 11.7] and in the intervention group from 37.4 (SD = 11.6) to 31.9 (SD = 11.8). Secondary outcomes, including change in mental state, did not differ between arms, but 686 (64%) sessions were lost, most because of 'prison issues'. Conclusions: A clinical psychologist‐facilitated group intervention did not have a statistically significant effect on sense of control of drinking behaviour among men with pre‐imprisonment alcohol misuse serving less than 2 years in a South Wales prison. The study proved coterminous, however, with 40% prison staff cuts which seem likely to have contributed to the high loss of group sessions and possibly overwhelmed any treatment effect. Intervention completion failures, previously cited as harmful, had no effect here, so the trial should be repeated when the prison climate improves. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Aims: To assess the cost‐effectiveness of a two‐component intervention designed to increase attendance at the NHS Stop Smoking Services (SSSs) in England. Design: Cost‐effectiveness analysis alongside a randomized controlled trial (Start2quit). Setting: NHS SSS and general practices in England. Participants: The study comprised 4384 smokers aged 16 years or more identified from medical records in 99 participating practices, who were motivated to quit and had not attended the SSS in the previous 12 months. Intervention and comparator: Intervention was a personalized and tailored letter sent from the general practitioner (GP) and a personal invitation and appointment to attend a taster session providing information about SSS. Control was a standard generic letter from the GP advertising SSS and asking smokers to contact the service to make an appointment. Measurements: Costs measured from an NHS/personal social services perspective, estimated health gains in quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALYs) measured with EQ‐5D and incremental cost per QALY gained during both 6 months and a life‐time horizon. Findings: During the trial period, the adjusted mean difference in costs was £92 [95% confidence interval (CI) = –£32 to –£216) and the adjusted mean difference in QALY gains was 0.002 (95% CI = –0.001 to 0.004). This generates an incremental cost per QALY gained of £59 401. The probability that the tailored letter and taster session is more cost‐effective than the generic letter at 6 months is never above 50%. In contrast, the discounted life‐time health‐care cost was lower in the intervention group, while the life‐time QALY gains were significantly higher. The probability that the intervention is more cost‐effective is more than 83% using a £20 000–30 000 per QALY‐gained decision‐making threshold. Conclusions: An intervention designed to increase attendance at the NHS Stop Smoking Services (tailored letter and taster session in the services) appears less likely to be cost‐effective than a generic letter in the short term, but is likely to become more cost‐effective than the generic letter during the long term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims Premises licensed for the sale and consumption of alcohol can contribute to levels of assault-related injury through poor operational practices that, if addressed, could reduce violence. We tested the real-world effectiveness of an intervention designed to change premises operation, whether any intervention effect changed over time, and the effect of intervention dose. Design A parallel randomized controlled trial with the unit of allocation and outcomes measured at the level of individual premises. Setting All premises (public houses, nightclubs or hotels with a public bar) in Wales, UK. Participants A randomly selected subsample ( n = 600) of eligible premises (that had one or more violent incidents recorded in police-recorded crime data; n = 837) were randomized into control and intervention groups. Intervention and comparator Intervention premises were audited by Environmental Health Practitioners who identified risks for violence and provided feedback by varying dose (informal, through written advice, follow-up visits) on how risks could be addressed. Control premises received usual practice. Measurements Police data were used to derive a binary variable describing whether, on each day premises were open, one or more violent incidents were evident over a 455-day period following randomization. Findings Due to premises being unavailable at the time of intervention delivery 208 received the intervention and 245 were subject to usual practice in an intention-to-treat analysis. The intervention was associated with an increase in police recorded violence compared to normal practice (hazard ratio = 1.34, 95% confidence interval = 1.20-1.51). Exploratory analyses suggested that reduced violence was associated with greater intervention dose (follow-up visits). Conclusion An Environmental Health Practitioner-led intervention in premises licensed for the sale and on-site consumption of alcohol resulted in an increase in police recorded violence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]