The ABA intervention for improving breastfeeding initiation and continuation: Feasibility study results

The UK has low breastfeeding rates, with socioeconomic disparities. The Assets-based feeding help Before and After birth (ABA) intervention was designed to be inclusive and improve infant feeding behaviours. ABA is underpinned by the behaviour change wheel and offers an assets-based approach focusing on positive capabilities of individuals and communities, including use of a Genogram. This study aimed to investigate feasibility of intervention delivery within a randomised controlled trial (RCT). Nulliparous women ≥16 years, (n = 103) from two English sites were recruited and randomised to either intervention or usual care. The intervention - delivered through face-to-face, telephone and text message by trained Infant Feeding Helpers (IFHs) - ran from 30-weeks' gestation until 5-months postnatal. Outcomes included recruitment rates and follow-up at 3-days, 8-weeks and 6-months postnatal, with collection of future full trial outcomes via questionnaires. A mixed-methods process evaluation included qualitative interviews with 30 women, 13 IFHs and 17 maternity providers; IFH contact logs; and fidelity checking of antenatal contact recordings. This study successfully recruited women, including teenagers, from socioeconomically disadvantaged areas; postnatal follow-up rates were 68.0%, 85.4% and 80.6% at 3-days, 8-weeks and 6-months respectively. Breastfeeding at 8-weeks was obtained for 95.1% using routine data for non-responders. It was possible to recruit and train peer supporters to deliver the intervention with adequate fidelity. The ABA intervention was acceptable to women, IFHs and maternity services. There was minimal contamination and no evidence of intervention-related harm. In conclusion, the intervention is feasible to deliver within an RCT, and a definitive trial required.

Developing interventions to improve health: a systematic mapping review of international practice between 2015 and 2016

Background

Researchers publish the processes they use to develop interventions to improve health. Reflecting on this endeavour may help future developers to improve their practice.

Methods

Our aim was to collate, describe, and analyse the actions developers take when developing complex interventions to improve health. We carried out a systematic mapping review of empirical research studies that report the development of complex interventions to improve health. A search was undertaken of five databases over 2015–2016 using the term ‘intervention dev*’. Eighty-seven journal articles reporting the process of intervention development were identified. A purposive subset of 30 articles, using a range of published approaches to developing interventions, was selected for in-depth analysis using principles of realist synthesis to identify the actions of intervention development and rationales underpinning those actions.

Results

The 87 articles were from the USA (39/87), the UK (32/87), continental Europe (6/87), and the rest of the world (10/87). These mainly took a pragmatic self-selected approach (n = 43); a theory- and evidence-based approach, e.g. Intervention Mapping, Behaviour Change Wheel (n = 22); or a partnership approach, e.g. community-based participatory research, co-design (n = 10). Ten actions of intervention development were identified from the subset of 30 articles, including identifying a need for an intervention, selecting the intervention development approach to follow, considering the needs of the target population, reviewing published evidence, involving stakeholders, drawing or generating theory, and designing and refining the intervention. Rationales for these actions were that they would produce more engaging, acceptable, feasible, and effective interventions.

Conclusions

Developers take a variety of approaches to the international endeavour of complex intervention development. We have identified and described a set of actions taken within this endeavour regardless of whether developers follow a published approach or not. Future developers can use these actions and the rationales that underpin them to help them make decisions about the process of intervention development.

Trial registration

PROSPERO, CRD42017080545.

Attending to design when developing complex health interventions: A qualitative interview study with intervention developers and associated stakeholders

BACKGROUND

Guidance and frameworks exist to assist those developing health interventions but may offer limited discussion of 'design', the part of development concerned with generating ideas for and making decisions about an intervention's content, format and delivery. The aim of this paper is to describe and understand the views and experiences of developers and associated stakeholders in relation to how design occurs in health intervention development.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 people who had developed complex interventions to improve health and/or who were relevant stakeholders (e.g. funders and publishers of intervention development work), regarding their views, experiences and approaches to intervention design. Sampling was purposive in terms of maximising diversity. A thematic inductive analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Approaches to design varied substantially between intervention developers. This contrasted with consistency in other activities undertaken during development, such as literature review. Design also posed more challenges than other parts of development. We identified six 'modes' of design: informed; negotiated; structured; delegated; 'my baby'; and creative partnership. In understanding the differences between these different modes, and the challenges posed by intervention design, we identified three key themes: enabling creativity during the design process; working with different types of knowledge; and 'stabilising' (developing clear shared understandings of) the intervention development to enable design.

CONCLUSIONS

Design has received less attention than other activities undertaken when developing interventions to improve health. Developers take a variety of approaches to design and often find it challenging. Guidance for intervention development in health has tended to see design as proceeding in a predictable and controlled manner from acquired knowledge. Our study suggests that design rarely reflects this rational ideal. Future guidance on intervention development in healthcare should support developers to work effectively with different types of knowledge, to help design progress more smoothly and to maximise creativity.

Guidance on how to develop complex interventions to improve health and healthcare

OBJECTIVE

To provide researchers with guidance on actions to take during intervention development.

SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS

Based on a consensus exercise informed by reviews and qualitative interviews, we present key principles and actions for consideration when developing interventions to improve health. These include seeing intervention development as a dynamic iterative process, involving stakeholders, reviewing published research evidence, drawing on existing theories, articulating programme theory, undertaking primary data collection, understanding context, paying attention to future implementation in the real world and designing and refining an intervention using iterative cycles of development with stakeholder input throughout.

CONCLUSION

Researchers should consider each action by addressing its relevance to a specific intervention in a specific context, both at the start and throughout the development process.

Understanding successful development of complex health and healthcare interventions and its drivers from the perspective of developers and wider stakeholders: an international qualitative interview study

OBJECTIVE

Identify how individuals involved in developing complex health and healthcare interventions (developers), and wider stakeholders in the endeavour, such as funders, define successful intervention development and what factors influence how interventions are developed.

DESIGN

In-depth interviews with developers and wider stakeholders to explore their views and experiences of developing complex health and healthcare interventions.

SETTING

Interviews conducted with individuals in the UK, Europe and North America.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-one individuals were interviewed: 15 developers and 6 wider stakeholders. Seventeen participants were UK based.

RESULTS

Most participants defined successful intervention development as a process that resulted in effective interventions that were relevant, acceptable and could be implemented in real-world contexts. Accounts also indicated that participants aimed to develop interventions that end users wanted, and to undertake a development process that was methodologically rigorous and provided research evidence for journal publications and future grant applications. Participants' ambitions to develop interventions that had real-world impact drove them to consider the intervention's feasibility and long-term sustainability early in the development process. However, this process was also driven by other factors: the realities of resource-limited health contexts; prespecified research funder priorities; a reluctance to deviate from grant application protocols to incorporate evidence and knowledge acquired during the development process; limited funding to develop interventions and the need for future randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to prove effectiveness. Participants expressed concern that these drivers discouraged long-term thinking and the development of innovative interventions, and prioritised evaluation over development and future implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Tensions exist between developers' goal of developing interventions that improve health in the real world, current funding structures, the limited resources within healthcare contexts, and the dominance of the RCT for evaluation of these interventions. There is a need to review funding processes and expectations of gold standard evaluation.

Women's views about a free breast pump service: Online survey informing intervention development

Improving breastfeeding outcomes is a global priority; however, in the United Kingdom, continuation of breastfeeding remains low. Growing empirical evidence suggests a free breast pump service might be an acceptable and feasible incentive intervention to improve breastfeeding outcomes and reduce heath inequalities. To inform intervention development, we conducted an online survey with women recruited via social media using snowball sampling. Data were analysed descriptively (closed questions) with qualitative thematic analysis (free text). The survey was completed by 666 women, most of whom had recently breastfed and used a breast pump. Participants agreed that free pump hire (rental/loan; 567 women; 85.1%) or a free pump to keep (408; 61.3%) should be provided. Free text comments provided by 408 women (free pump) and 309 women (free hire) highlighted potential benefits: helping women to continue breastfeeding; express milk; overcome difficulties; and pump choice. Concerns are possible effect on breast milk supply, reduced breastfeeding, pumps replacing good support for breastfeeding, and pump hire hygiene. Personal and societal costs are important issues. Some suggested a pump service should be for low-income mothers, those with feeding difficulties or sick/preterm infants. A one-size service would not suit all and vouchers were proposed. Some suggested fees and deposits to prevent waste. To our knowledge, this is the first study reporting views about the acceptability of providing a free breast pump hire service. Mothers support and wish to have a say in breast pump service development. Future evaluations should address impact on feeding outcomes, professional support, hygiene for hired pumps, and costs.

Taxonomy of approaches to developing interventions to improve health: a systematic methods overview

Background

Interventions need to be developed prior to the feasibility and piloting phase of a study. There are a variety of published approaches to developing interventions, programmes or innovations to improve health. Identifying different types of approach, and synthesising the range of actions taken within this endeavour, can inform future intervention development.

Methods

This study is a systematic methods overview of approaches to intervention development. Approaches were considered for inclusion if they described how to develop or adapt an intervention in a book, website or journal article published after 2007, or were cited in a primary research study reporting the development of a specific intervention published in 2015 or 2016. Approaches were read, a taxonomy of approaches was developed and the range of actions taken across different approaches were synthesised.

Results

Eight categories of approach to intervention development were identified. (1) Partnership, where people who will use the intervention participate equally with the research team in decision-making about the intervention throughout the development process. (2) Target population-centred, where the intervention is based on the views and actions of the people who will use it. (3) Evidence and theory-based, where the intervention is based on published research evidence and existing theories. (4) Implementation-based, where the intervention is developed with attention to ensuring it will be used in the real world. (5) Efficiency-based, where components of an intervention are tested using experimental designs to select components which will optimise efficiency. (6) Stepped or phased, where interventions are developed with an emphasis on following a systematic set of processes. (7) Intervention-specific, where an approach is constructed for a specific type of intervention. (8) Combination, where existing approaches to intervention development are formally combined. The actions from approaches in all eight categories were synthesised to identify 18 actions to consider when developing interventions.

Conclusions

This overview of approaches to intervention development can help researchers to understand the variety of existing approaches, and to understand the range of possible actions involved in intervention development, prior to assessing feasibility or piloting the intervention. Findings from this overview will contribute to future guidance on intervention development.

Trial registration

PROSPERO CRD42017080553.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s40814-019-0425-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Pilot randomised controlled trial of Weight Watchers® referral with or without dietitian-led group support for weight loss in women treated for breast cancer: the BRIGHT (BReast cancer weIGHT loss) trial

Background

Being overweight or obese following breast cancer diagnosis can increase cancer recurrence and mortality, so effective interventions for weight loss in this group could enhance survival. A pilot randomised controlled trial was conducted to assess whether a weight loss programme comprising generic Weight Watchers® referral offered to women treated for breast cancer with or without additional breast cancer-tailored dietetic support is feasible and shows promise for improving weight and quality of life (QoL).

Methods

Participants were randomly allocated to 3 groups: Weight Watchers® referral (for 12 sessions of meetings and digital tools) plus 5 breast cancer-tailored dietitian-led group support sessions (WW Plus: n = 14), Weight Watchers® referral only (WW: n = 16) or control (Weight Watchers® referral after 3 months, n = 15). Feasibility was assessed based on retention rate, recruitment and randomisation process, meeting attendance, suitability of the setting and outcome measurement tools, unintended consequences, cost and observations of the dietetic sessions. Outcomes were measured at 0, 3 (‘trial exit’) and 12 months post intervention.

Results

The response rate to the invitation was 43% (140/327) of whom 58 were eligible and 45 (median age 61.0 years; body mass index 30.2 kg/m²) were randomised. Data from 38 (84%) and 30 (67%) participants were available at trial exit and 12 months respectively. Feasibility issues included slow recruitment process, lack of blinding throughout, weighing scales not measuring > 150 kg, lack of clear instructions for completing QoL questionnaire and workload and time pressures in delivering dietetic sessions. Participants had good attendance rate at group meetings and no serious unintended consequences were reported. WW Plus was most expensive to run. Mean (95% CI) weight change at trial exit was − 3.67 kg (− 5.67, − 2.07) in WW Plus, − 6.03 kg (− 7.61, − 4.44) in WW group and + 0.19 kg (− 1.45, + 1.83) in control group. About 40% of the WW Plus, 64% of the WW group and 56% of the control group lost ≥ 5% of their baseline weight by 12 months. All groups showed promise for improving QoL at trial exit but only the WW group maintained significant improvements from baseline at 12 months.

Conclusions

The trial procedures were feasible, with some modifications. This pilot trial indicates the benefits of providing free WW vouchers for weight loss maintenance and improving QoL but provided no evidence that including additional dietetic support would add any extra value. Further research with WW with long-term follow-up should be undertaken to assess weight loss sustainability and benefit on health outcomes in this patient group.

Trial registration

ISRCTN-29623418.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s40814-019-0405-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Routinely collected infant feeding data: Time for global action

The importance of breastfeeding is clear. However, global action to support breastfeeding is hindered by the lack of reliable standard data, which continues to impede progress. Routinely collected data can monitor the effectiveness of health policy, evaluate interventions, and enhance international research collaboration and comparisons. Use of routine data to support effective public health initiatives such as smoking cessation has been demonstrated. However, the data collected about infant feeding practices worldwide is inconsistent in timing, methods, definitions, detail, storage, and consistency. Improvements to the reach and quality of routinely collected data about infant feeding are needed to strengthen the global evidence and policy base. An international collaborative effort is called for to progress this.

How to incorporate patient and public perspectives into the design and conduct of research

International government guidance recommends patient and public involvement (PPI) to improve the relevance and quality of research.  PPI is defined as research being carried out 'with' or 'by' patients and members of the public rather than 'to', 'about' or 'for' them ( http://www.invo.org.uk/). Patient involvement is different from collecting data from patients as participants.  Ethical considerations also differ.  PPI is about patients actively contributing through discussion to decisions about research design, acceptability, relevance, conduct and governance from study conception to dissemination.  Occasionally patients lead or do research.  The research methods of PPI range from informal discussions to partnership research approaches such as action research, co-production and co-learning. This article discusses how researchers can involve patients when they are applying for research funding and considers some opportunities and pitfalls.  It reviews research funder requirements, draws on the literature and our collective experiences as clinicians, patients, academics and members of UK funding panels.

Public acceptability of financial incentives to reward pregnant smokers who quit smoking: a United Kingdom-France comparison

A substantial amount of research has been conducted on financial incentives to increase abstinence from smoking among pregnant smokers. If demonstrated to be effective, financial incentives could be proposed as part of health care interventions to help pregnant smokers quit. Public acceptability is important; as such interventions could be publicly funded. Concerns remain about the acceptability of these interventions in the general population. We aimed to assess the acceptability of financial incentives to reward pregnant smokers who stop smoking using a survey conducted in the UK and then subsequently in France, two developed countries with different cultural and social backgrounds. More French than British respondents agreed with financial incentives for rewarding quitting smoking during pregnancy, not smoking after delivery, keeping a smoke-free household, health service payment for meeting target and the maximum amount of the reward. However, fully adjusted models showed significant differences only for the two latter items. More British than French respondents were neutral toward financial incentives. Differences between the representative samples of French and British individuals demonstrate that implementation of financial incentive policies may not be transferable from one country to another.

Breastfeeding and risk for ceasing in mothers of preterm infants-Long-term follow-up

Breastfeeding is challenging for mothers of preterm infants. The aim of this paper is to describe risk factors for ceasing breastfeeding and methods of feeding until 12 months postnatal age in mothers who breastfed their preterm infants at discharge from neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). The data come from a randomised controlled trial, which evaluated the effectiveness on exclusive breastfeeding at 8 weeks of proactive telephone support compared with reactive support offered to mothers of preterm infants following discharge from NICU. Six NICUs across Sweden randomised a total of 493 mothers. We used regression and survival analyses to assess the risk factors for ceasing breastfeeding and the long‐term outcomes of the intervention. The results showed that 305 (64%) of the infants were breastfed at 6 months and 49 (21%) at 12 months. Partial breastfeeding at discharge, low maternal educational level, and longer length of stay in the NICU increased the risk for ceasing breastfeeding during the first 12 months. Furthermore, the Kaplan–Meier analysis showed that the proportion of mothers who ceased breastfeeding did not differ between the intervention (n = 231) and controls (n = 262) during the first 12 months (log‐rank test p = .68). No difference was found between groups on method of feeding. More than 85% of the infants were fed directly at the breast. These findings provide important insights for health professionals who are supporting mothers of preterm infants to breastfeed long term. Registered in http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01806480).

Proactive telephone support provided to breastfeeding mothers of preterm infants after discharge: a randomised controlled trial

Aim

The aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of proactive telephone support provided to breastfeeding mothers of preterm infants after discharge from neonatal intensive care units (NICU).

Methods

Between March 2013 and December 2015, a randomised controlled trial was conducted at six NICUs across Sweden. At each NICU, a breastfeeding support team recruited, randomised and delivered the support to participating mothers. The intervention group received a daily proactive telephone call up to 14 days after discharge from the support team. The control group could initiate telephone contact themselves. Primary outcome was exclusive breastfeeding eight weeks after discharge. Secondary outcomes were maternal satisfaction with breastfeeding, attachment, quality of life and parental stress.

Results

In total, 493 mothers were randomised, 231 to intervention group and 262 to control group. There were no differences between the groups for exclusive breastfeeding, odds ratio 0.96, 95% CI 0.66–1.38, nor for maternal satisfaction with breastfeeding, attachment or quality of life. The intervention group reported significantly less parental stress than the controls, t = 2.44, 95% CI 0.03–0.23, effect size d = 0.26.

Conclusion

In this trial, proactive telephone support was not associated with increased exclusive breastfeeding prevalence eight weeks following discharge. However, intervention group mothers showed significantly lower parental stress.

Protocol for a feasibility trial for improving breast feeding initiation and continuation: assets-based infant feeding help before and after birth (ABA)

INTRODUCTION

Breast feeding improves the health of mothers and infants; the UK has low rates, with marked socioeconomic inequalities. While trials of peer support services have been effective in some settings, UK trials have not improved breast feeding rates. Qualitative research suggests that many women are alienated by the focus on breast feeding. We propose a change from breast feeding-focused interactions to respecting a woman's feeding choices, inclusion of behaviour change theory and an increased intensity of contacts in the 2 weeks after birth when many women cease to breast feed. This will take place alongside an assets-based approach that focuses on the positive capability of individuals, their social networks and communities.We propose a feasibility study for a multicentre randomised controlled trial of the Assets feeding help Before and After birth (ABA) infant feeding service versus usual care.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A two-arm, non-blinded randomised feasibility study will be conducted in two UK localities. Women expecting their first baby will be eligible, regardless of feeding intention. The ABA infant feeding intervention will apply a proactive, assets-based, woman-centred, non-judgemental approach, delivered antenatally and postnatally tailored through face-to-face contacts, telephone and SMS texts. Outcomes will test the feasibility of delivering the intervention with recommended intensity and duration to disadvantaged women; acceptability to women, feeding helpers and professionals; and feasibility of a future randomised controlled trial (RCT), detailing recruitment rates, willingness to be randomised, follow-up rates at 3 days, 8 weeks and 6 months, and level of outcome completion. Outcomes of the proposed full trial will also be collected. Mixed methods will include qualitative interviews with women/partners, feeding helpers and health service staff; feeding helper logs; and review of audio-recorded helper-women interactions to assess intervention fidelity.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Study results will inform the design of a larger multicentre RCT. The National Research Ethics Service Committee approved the study protocol.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN14760978; Pre-results.

Breastfeeding booklet and proactive phone calls for increasing exclusive breastfeeding rates: RCT protocol

Breastfeeding is associated with infant and maternal health benefits and considerable potential savings to health services. Despite this, only 37% of infants globally are exclusively breastfed for 6 months. Interventions are needed to improve breastfeeding rates. The aim of this study is to determine whether written breastfeeding information in pregnancy and proactive breastfeeding-focused support phone calls, provided by a health professional educated in breastfeeding management, increase exclusive breastfeeding rates at 3 months compared with general birth-related information with proactive support calls or standard care. This is a single-centre, randomised, controlled, three-arm, superiority study with blind outcome assessment. Eligible participants will include primigravidae with singleton pregnancies who speak Croatian, attending six primary care obstetric practices. We estimate a total sample size of 459, with computer generated stratified randomisation of 153 women per arm. Participants in the intervention and active control groups will receive booklets in pregnancy, phone calls 2 weeks later, and 2, 6 and 10 weeks after birth. The primary outcome will be the proportion of women exclusively breastfeeding at 3 months. Secondary outcomes will compare: infant feeding practices and attitudes, social support, breastfeeding difficulties, breastfeeding self efficacy and utilisation of breastfeeding support services. Follow-up at 6 months will compare exclusive and any breastfeeding and utilised support services. Analysis will be by intention to treat. This trial will contribute to future evidence syntheses identifying the most effective forms of breastfeeding support.

Breast pumps as an incentive for breastfeeding: a mixed methods study of acceptability

Increasing breastfeeding rates would improve maternal and child health, but multiple barriers to breastfeeding persist. Breast pump provision has been used as an incentive for breastfeeding, although effectiveness is unclear. Women's use of breast pumps is increasing and a high proportion of mothers express breastmilk. No research has yet reported women's and health professionals' perspectives on breast pumps as an incentive for breastfeeding. In the Benefits of Incentives for Breastfeeding and Smoking cessation in pregnancy (BIBS) study, mixed methods research explored women's and professionals' views of breast pumps as an incentive for breastfeeding. A survey of health professionals across Scotland and North West England measured agreement with ‘a breast pump costing around £40 provided for free on the NHS’ as an incentive strategy. Qualitative interviews and focus groups were conducted in two UK regions with a total of 68 participants (pregnant women, new mothers, and their significant others and health professionals) and thematic analysis undertaken. The survey of 497 health professionals found net agreement of 67.8% (337/497) with the breast pump incentive strategy, with no predictors of agreement shown by a multiple ordered logistic regression model. Qualitative research found interrelated themes of the ‘appeal and value of breast pumps’, ‘sharing the load’, ‘perceived benefits’, ‘perceived risks’ and issues related to ‘timing’. Qualitative participants expressed mixed views on the acceptability of breast pumps as an incentive for breastfeeding. Understanding the mechanisms of action for pump type, timing and additional support required for effectiveness is required to underpin trials of breast pump provision as an incentive for improving breastfeeding outcomes. © 2016 The Authors. Maternal & Child Nutrition published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Benefits of Incentives for Breastfeeding and Smoking cessation in pregnancy (BIBS): a mixed-methods study to inform trial design

BACKGROUND

Smoking in pregnancy and/or not breastfeeding have considerable negative health outcomes for mother and baby.

AIM

To understand incentive mechanisms of action for smoking cessation in pregnancy and breastfeeding, develop a taxonomy and identify promising, acceptable and feasible interventions to inform trial design.

DESIGN

Evidence syntheses, primary qualitative survey, and discrete choice experiment (DCE) research using multidisciplinary, mixed methods. Two mother-and-baby groups in disadvantaged areas collaborated throughout.

SETTING

UK.

PARTICIPANTS

The qualitative study included 88 pregnant women/recent mothers/partners, 53 service providers, 24 experts/decision-makers and 63 conference attendees. The surveys included 1144 members of the general public and 497 health professionals. The DCE study included 320 women with a history of smoking.

METHODS

(1) Evidence syntheses: incentive effectiveness (including meta-analysis and effect size estimates), delivery processes, barriers to and facilitators of smoking cessation in pregnancy and/or breastfeeding, scoping review of incentives for lifestyle behaviours; (2) qualitative research: grounded theory to understand incentive mechanisms of action and a framework approach for trial design; (3) survey: multivariable ordered logit models; (4) DCE: conditional logit regression and the log-likelihood ratio test.

RESULTS

Out of 1469 smoking cessation and 5408 breastfeeding multicomponent studies identified, 23 smoking cessation and 19 breastfeeding studies were included in the review. Vouchers contingent on biochemically proven smoking cessation in pregnancy were effective, with a relative risk of 2.58 (95% confidence interval 1.63 to 4.07) compared with non-contingent incentives for participation (four studies, 344 participants). Effects continued until 3 months post partum. Inconclusive effects were found for breastfeeding incentives compared with no/smaller incentives (13 studies) but provider commitment contracts for breastfeeding show promise. Intervention intensity is a possible confounder. The acceptability of seven promising incentives was mixed. Women (for vouchers) and those with a lower level of education (except for breastfeeding incentives) were more likely to disagree. Those aged ≤ 44 years and ethnic minority groups were more likely to agree. Agreement was greatest for a free breast pump and least for vouchers for breastfeeding. Universal incentives were preferred to those targeting low-income women. Initial daily text/telephone support, a quitting pal, vouchers for > £20.00 per month and values up to £80.00 increase the likelihood of smoking cessation. Doctors disagreed with provider incentives. A 'ladder' logic model emerged through data synthesis and had face validity with service users. It combined an incentive typology and behaviour change taxonomy. Autonomy and well-being matter. Personal difficulties, emotions, socialising and attitudes of others are challenges to climbing a metaphorical 'ladder' towards smoking cessation and breastfeeding. Incentive interventions provide opportunity 'rungs' to help, including regular skilled flexible support, a pal, setting goals, monitoring and outcome verification. Individually tailored and non-judgemental continuity of care can bolster women's capabilities to succeed. Rigid, prescriptive interventions placing the onus on women to behave 'healthily' risk them feeling pressurised and failing. To avoid 'losing face', women may disengage.

LIMITATIONS

Included studies were heterogeneous and of variable quality, limiting the assessment of incentive effectiveness. No cost-effectiveness data were reported. In surveys, selection bias and confounding are possible. The validity and utility of the ladder logic model requires evaluation with more diverse samples of the target population.

CONCLUSIONS

Incentives provided with other tailored components show promise but reach is a concern. Formal evaluation is recommended. Collaborative service-user involvement is important.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012001980.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Combining PPI with qualitative research to engage 'harder-to-reach' populations: service user groups as co-applicants on a platform study for a trial

PLAIN ENGLISH SUMMARY

It is recommended that research studies are carried out with or by patients and the public through their involvement from the beginning and in as many stages as possible (known as PPI). Some studies formally invite patients and the public to participate in interviews and focused group discussions to collect views about topics (known as qualitative research). In our study on financial incentives for giving up smoking in pregnancy and breastfeeding, we combined both PPI and qualitative research to include the views of women with a range of experiences of smoking and breastfeeding. We involved two mother and baby groups in disadvantaged areas of North East Scotland and North West England as research partners on our team. First, we asked members to comment on our research plans and documents, which is standard PPI. Second, we asked members to participate in voice recorded discussions, contributing to qualitative research data. These discussions revealed different views from those that we heard through research interviews. They allowed us to develop more relevant research tools and resources. Members also helped us to identify people outside the groups who we could interview. Combining involvement and participation helped us to include the views of a wide range of women from 'harder-to-reach' groups who don't usually take part in research. This was important because the research was intended for women who could benefit from incentives to stop smoking in pregnancy and breastfeed, often present in such groups. Positive continuing relationships and trust improved on involvement or participation alone.

BACKGROUND

Patient and public involvement (PPI) in all research studies is recommended from the earliest point and in as many stages as possible. Qualitative research is also recommended in the early stages of designing complex intervention trials. Combining both together might enable inclusion of 'harder-to-reach' perspectives from the target population(s), particularly when the research is intended for their benefit. However, the interface between PPI and qualitative research has received little attention. In a multi-disciplinary, mixed methods study to inform the design of incentive trials for smoking cessation in pregnancy and breastfeeding, we combined PPI and qualitative research, with some overlap. Mother and baby groups from two geographically separate disadvantaged areas, with diverse experiences of the smoking and breastfeeding, but no training or previous involvement in research, were recruited as PPI research grant co-applicants. An iterative partnership approach facilitated involvement in research conduct and design across all project phases. Group PPI members were also invited to contribute to more formal qualitative data collection, as and when indicated by the research questions, and emerging analysis.

RESULTS

We engaged with 'harder-to-reach' women in mother and baby group settings, rather than in academic or home environments. These settings were relaxed and informal, which facilitated rapport-building, disclosures of unexpected information and maintained trust. Twenty-one women participated in standard PPI activities: feedback on study protocols and documents; piloting questionnaires and interview schedules. PPI members voiced some different perspectives from those captured within the qualitative dataset. Nineteen participated in focused qualitative research. Novel aspects were audio recorded PPI discussions, which contributed qualitative data; first, to interpret systematic review findings and construct intervention vignettes for use in the qualitative research; second, to assist with recruitment to improve sample diversity in the formal qualitative dataset; and third, to translate theory and findings presented in a researcher generated logic model into a lay tool. This had face validity for potential trial participants and used the metaphor of a ladder.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining and overlapping PPI and qualitative research added 'harder-to-reach' contributions, sample diversity, trust and engagement in creative approaches beyond what could be achieved through PPI or qualitative research alone.

Perspectives on financial incentives to health service providers for increasing breast feeding and smoking quit rates during pregnancy: a mixed methods study

OBJECTIVE

To explore the acceptability, mechanisms and consequences of provider incentives for smoking cessation and breast feeding as part of the Benefits of Incentives for Breastfeeding and Smoking cessation in pregnancy (BIBS) study.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey and qualitative interviews.

SETTING

Scotland and North West England.

PARTICIPANTS

Early years professionals: 497 survey respondents included 156 doctors; 197 health visitors/maternity staff; 144 other health staff. Qualitative interviews or focus groups were conducted with 68 pregnant/postnatal women/family members; 32 service providers; 22 experts/decision-makers; 63 conference attendees.

METHODS

Early years professionals were surveyed via email about the acceptability of payments to local health services for reaching smoking cessation in pregnancy and breastfeeding targets. Agreement was measured on a 5-point scale using multivariable ordered logit models. A framework approach was used to analyse free-text survey responses and qualitative data.

RESULTS

Health professional net agreement for provider incentives for smoking cessation targets was 52.9% (263/497); net disagreement was 28.6% (142/497). Health visitors/maternity staff were more likely than doctors to agree: OR 2.35 (95% CI 1.51 to 3.64; p<0.001). Net agreement for provider incentives for breastfeeding targets was 44.1% (219/497) and net disagreement was 38.6% (192/497). Agreement was more likely for women (compared with men): OR 1.81 (1.09 to 3.00; p=0.023) and health visitors/maternity staff (compared with doctors): OR 2.54 (95% CI 1.65 to 3.91; p<0.001). Key emergent themes were 'moral tensions around acceptability', 'need for incentives', 'goals', 'collective or divisive action' and 'monitoring and proof'. While provider incentives can focus action and resources, tensions around the impact on relationships raised concerns. Pressure, burden of proof, gaming, box-ticking bureaucracies and health inequalities were counterbalances to potential benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

Provider incentives are favoured by non-medical staff. Solutions which increase trust and collaboration towards shared goals, without negatively impacting on relationships or increasing bureaucracy are required.

A new era for intervention development studies

This editorial introduces a new special series on intervention development in the on-line open access journal Pilot and Feasibility Studies. An intervention development study reports the rationale, decision-making processes, methods and findings which occur between the idea or inception of an intervention until it is ready for formal feasibility, pilot or efficacy testing prior to a full trial or evaluation. This editorial begins to explore some of the challenges associated with this early research stage. It commences a debate about how to produce novel interventions which are fit for purpose and which solve important health and social care problems. By transparently reporting more intervention development studies, scientific rigour will be improved and everyone can learn from the experiences of others.