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

Effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions among pregnant women: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To carry out a systematic review of systematic reviews with an update of the existing evidence relating to a broad range of smoking cessation interventions, including psycho-social, digital and pharmacologic interventions, for pregnant women.

DATA-SOURCES

Search was conducted in March 2022 in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane in two stages: 1) a search of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, published from January 2012 through January 2022; 2) an update of those that fulfilled eligibility criteria reproducing the primary search strategy.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We selected randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effectiveness of pharmacological, digital, and psychosocial interventions in aged 18 years and over who were daily smokers, and compared these with routine care, less intense interventions or placebo.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

Data from eligible studies were manually extracted by two authors and reviewed by a third. The quality of the reviews was evaluated using the AMSTAR scale, and risk of bias was measured with the Rob-2 tool and GRADE level of evidence.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 63 RCTs (n = 19849 women). The interventions found to be effective were: financial incentives (RR:1.77; 95%CI:1.21-2.58), counseling (RR:1.27; 95%CI:1.13-1.43) and long-term nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (RR:1.53; 95%CI:1.16-2.01). Short-term NRT, bupropion, digital interventions, feedback, social support, and exercise showed no effectiveness. The GRADE level of evidence was moderate-to-high for all interventions, with the exception of long-term NRT.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation are the most effective for pregnant women. The moderator analysis suggests that pregnant women of low socioeconomic status might benefit less from smoking cessation interventions than women of a high socioeconomic status. These women are usually heavier smokers that live in pro-smoking environments and could require more intensive and targeted interventions.

[Considerations for the design and implementation of interventions for the cessation of tobacco, alcohol and cannabis use in pregnancy: A qualitative study]

OBJECTIVE

To explore the opinion of different key stakeholders regarding the requirements that tobacco, alcohol and/or cannabis cessation interventions should meet to be implemented and to be acceptable and useful during pregnancy.

DESIGN

A qualitative study with phenomenological approach. SITE: The study was conducted in Spain in 2022.

PARTICIPANTS

Decision makers, health professionals, pregnant women using tobacco, alcohol and/or cannabis and their partners who are also users.

METHODS

Data were collected through focus groups and in-depth interviews, until discourse saturation was reached and accurately transcribed. Exploratory analysis and inductive open coding were conducted, codes were merged into categories and subcategories were identified.

RESULTS

Four categories and 18 subcategories were identified. The results suggest that interventions should be multicomponent. Among the interventions most accepted by pregnant women and their partners were specific cessation consultations, information, peer support (although they did not specify how) and financial incentives. Among other options to consider, co-oximetry, proposed by managers to obtain an objective register.

CONCLUSIONS

The conclusion is that this intervention should be carried out at the level of prenatal care in primary care. There are doubts regarding the frequency, purpose, and follow-up of this multicomponent intervention, as well as the possibility of incorporating couples.

Public attitudes to implementing financial incentives in stopsmoking services in Ireland

INTRODUCTION

Financial incentives improve stop-smoking service outcomes. Views on acceptability can influence implementation success. To inform implementation planning in Ireland, public attitudes on financial incentives to stop smoking were measured.

METHODS

A cross-sectional telephone survey was administered to 1000 people in Ireland aged ≥15 years in 2022, sampled through random digit dialing. The questionnaire included items on support for financial incentives under different conditions. Prevalence of support was calculated with 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) and multiple logistic regression identified associated factors using adjusted odds ratios (AORs) with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Almost half (47.0%, 95% CI: 43.9–50.1) of the participants supported at least one type of financial incentive to stop smoking, with support more prevalent for shopping vouchers (43.3%, 95% CI: 40.3–46.5) than cash payments (32.1%, 95% CI: 29.2–35.0). Support was similar for universal and income-restricted schemes. Of those who supported financial incentives, the majority (60.6%) believed the maximum amount given on proof of stopping smoking should be under €250 (median=100, range: 1–7000). Compared to their counterparts, those of lower education level (AOR=1.49; 95% CI: 1.10–2.03, p=0.010) and tobacco/e-cigarette users (AOR=1.43; 95% CI: 1.02–2.03, p=0.041) were significantly more likely to support either financial incentive type, as were younger people.

CONCLUSIONS

While views on financial incentives to stop smoking in Ireland were mixed, the intervention is more acceptable in groups experiencing the heaviest burden of smoking-related harm and most capacity to benefit. Engagement and communication must be integral to planning for successful implementation to improve stop-smoking service outcomes.

Smoking cessation in pregnant women using financial incentives: a feasibility study

BACKGROUND

The high prevalence of smoking pregnant women in Dutch areas with lower socioeconomic status and the consecutively harmful exposure to tobacco to both mother and child, depicted a high need for a novel intervention. According to other studies, the utilisation of financial incentives appeared to be a promising method for smoking cessation in pregnant women. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of implementing contingent financial incentives as smoking cessation support for pregnant women in the Netherlands.

METHODS

Feasibility study consisting of four developmental phases: (1) acceptability of Dutch population regarding financial-incentive-intervention by conducting an online questionnaire, (2) composing a pilot study utilising the financial-incentive-intervention in clinical practice, (3) execution of the composed pilot study and (4) evaluation of the executed pilot study utilising a mixed-methods approach. A financial-incentive-intervention, given in a contingent financial scheme (during five consequential appointments, respectively €25/€50/€100/€150/€250), if smoking abstinence was proven by the amount of cotinine in the urine of the pregnant women measured utilising a urine dipstick test. The public acceptability for the financial-incentive-intervention was assessed using 5-Likert scales. The number of pregnant women able to abstain from smoking during the pilot study and utilising the financial-incentive-intervention in clinical practice were used to assess the prosperity and practicality of the pilot study respectively. The pilot study was evaluated using a mixed-methods approach.

RESULTS

In total, 55.1% of the Dutch population sample (n = 328) found a financial incentive inappropriate for smoking cessation in pregnant women, while the healthcare professionals and pilot study participants thought the financial-incentive-intervention to be a helpful approach. Eleven vouchers were given during the pilot study, and one woman completed all test points and tested negative for cotinine at the end of the pilot study.

CONCLUSION

Although the financial-incentive-intervention appeared to be a promising approach for smoking cessation in pregnant women, the acceptability of the Dutch population and the number of pregnant women able to abstain smoking during this pilot study was low. Despite the limited study population, this study proved the concept of this financial-incentive-intervention to be feasible for implementation in the Netherlands.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not applicable since this is a feasibility study prior to a trial.

How and why do financial incentives contribute to helping people stop smoking? A realist review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Smoking is harmful to human health and programmes to help people stop smoking are key public health efforts that improve individual and population health outcomes. Research shows that financial incentives improve the success of stop smoking programmes. However, a better understanding of how they work is needed to better inform policy and to support building capability for implementation.The aims of this study: (1) To review the international literature to understand: How, why, in what circumstances and for whom financial incentives improve the success of stop smoking interventions among general population groups and among pregnant women. (2) To provide recommendations for how to best use financial incentives in efforts to promote smoking cessation.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A realist review of published international literature will be undertaken to understand how, why, for whom and in which circumstances financial incentives contribute to success in stopping smoking for general population groups and among pregnant women. Systematic searches were undertaken on 16 February 2022 of five academic databases: MEDLINE (ovid), Embase.com, CIHAHL, Scopus and PsycINFO. Iterative searching using citation tracking and of grey literature will be undertaken as needed. Using Pawson and Tilley's iterative realist review approach, data collected will be screened, selected, coded, analysed and synthesised into a set of explanatory theoretical findings.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required for this review as data sources to be included are previously published. The study will provide important findings for policy-makers and health system leaders to guide the development of stop smoking services which use incentives, for example, as part of the Health Service Executive's Tobacco Free Programme in Ireland. Understanding how contextual factors impact implementation and programmatic success is key to developing a more effective public health approach to stop smoking. Our dissemination strategy will be developed with our stakeholders.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022298941.

Financial incentives for smoking cessation in pregnancy: multicentre randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of financial incentives dependent on continuous smoking abstinence on smoking cessation and birth outcomes among pregnant smokers.

DESIGN

Single blind, randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Financial Incentive for Smoking Cessation in Pregnancy (FISCP) trial in 18 maternity wards in France.

PARTICIPANTS

460 pregnant smokers aged at least 18 years who smoked ≤5 cigarettes/day or ≤3 roll-your-own cigarettes/day and had a pregnancy gestation of <18 weeks were randomised to a financial incentives group (n=231) or a control group (n=229).

INTERVENTIONS

Participants in the financial incentives group received a voucher equivalent to €20 (£17; $23), and further progressively increasing vouchers at each study visit if they remained abstinent. Participants in the control group received no financial incentive for abstinence. All participants received a €20 show-up fee at each of six visits.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measure was continuous smoking abstinence from the first post-quit date visit to visit 6, before delivery. Secondary outcomes in the mothers were point prevalence abstinence, time to smoking relapse, withdrawal symptoms, blood pressure, and alcohol and cannabis use in past 30 days. Secondary outcomes in the babies were gestational age at birth, birth characteristics (birth weight, length, head circumference, Apgar score), and a poor neonatal outcome-a composite measure of transfer to the neonatal unit, congenital malformation, convulsions, or perinatal death.

RESULTS

Mean age was 29 years. In the financial incentives and control groups, respectively, 137 (59%) and 148 (65%) were employed, 163 (71%) and 171 (75%) were in a relationship, and 41 (18%) and 31 (13%) were married. The participants had smoked a median of 60 cigarettes in the past seven days. The continuous abstinence rate was significantly higher in the financial incentives group (16%, 38/231) than control group (7%, 17/229): odds ratio 2.45 (95% confidence interval 1.34 to 4.49), P=0.004). The point prevalence abstinence rate was higher (4.61, 1.41 to 15.01, P=0.011), the median time to relapse was longer (visit 5 (interquartile range 3-6) and visit 4 (3-6), P<0.001)), and craving for tobacco was lower (β=-1.81, 95% confidence interval -3.55 to -0.08, P=0.04) in the financial incentives group than control group. Financial incentives were associated with a 7% reduction in the risk of a poor neonatal outcome: 4 babies (2%) in the financial incentives group and 18 babies (9%) in the control group: mean difference 14 (95% confidence interval 5 to 23), P=0.003. Post hoc analyses suggested that more babies in the financial incentives group had birth weights ≥2500 g than in the control group: unadjusted odds ratio 1.95 (95% confidence interval 0.99 to 3.85), P=0.055; sex adjusted odds ratio 2.05 (1.03 to 4.10), P=0.041; and sex and prematurity adjusted odds ratio 2.06 (0.90 to 4.71), P=0.086. As these are post hoc analyses, the results should be interpreted with caution.

CONCLUSIONS

Financial incentives to reward smoking abstinence compared with no financial incentives were associated with an increased abstinence rate in pregnant smokers. Financial incentives dependent on smoking abstinence could be implemented as a safe and effective intervention to help pregnant smokers quit smoking.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02606227.

The First 1000 Days: Impact of Prenatal Tobacco Smoke Exposure on Hospitalization Due to Preschool Wheezing

Preschool wheezing and related hospitalization rates are increasing. Prenatal tobacco smoke exposure (PTSE) increases the risk of wheezing, yet >20% of French women smoke during pregnancy. In this observational retrospective monocentric study, we assessed the link between PTSE and hospital admissions. We included infants <2 years of age admitted for acute wheezing. A phone interview with mothers was completed by electronic records. The primary endpoint was the ratio of cumulative duration of the hospitalization stays (days)/age (months). 129 children were included (36.4% exposed to PTSE vs. 63.6% unexposed). There was a significant difference in the duration of hospitalization/age: 0.9 days/month (exposed) vs. 0.58 days/month (unexposed) (p = 0.008). Smoking one cigarette/day during pregnancy was associated with an increase in hospitalization duration of 0.055 days/month (r = 0.238, p = 0.006). In the multi-variable analysis, this positive association persisted (β = 0.04, p = 0.04; standardized β = 0.27, p = 0.03). There was a trend towards a dose-effect relationship between PTSE and other important parameters associated with hospital admissions. We have demonstrated a dose-effect relationship, without a threshold effect, between PTSE and duration of hospitalization for wheezing in non-premature infants during the first 2 years of life. Prevention campaigns for future mothers should be enforced.

[N on-pharmacological management of smoking cessation during pregnancy- CNGOF-SFT Expert Report and Guidelines for Smoking Management during Pregnancy]

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefit of non-pharmacological intervention promoting on smoking cessation, obstetric and neonatal outcomes, to offer pregnant women who smoke (PWS) optimal care.

METHODS

We searched Medline Database, Cochrane Library and consulted international guidelines.

RESULTS

"Counselling" involving globally all kind of non-pharmacological interventions has a benefit on smoking cessation (NP1) and a moderate benefit on birth weight and prematurity (NP2). The brief intervention seems ineffective on smoking cessation (NP2). The effects of motivational interviewing have not been demonstrated during pregnancy (NP2). Cognitive-behavioral interventions do not show superiority (NP2). Financial incentives have a benefit for smoking cessation and possibly for neonatal outcomes (NP1). Feedback interventions (Co tester) provide heterogeneous results (NP2). Self-help interventions (NP2) and health education (NP2) seem effective on smoking cessation. Hypnotherapy and acupuncture have been little or not studied in PWS. Moderate physical activity did not show a significant effect (NP2) on smoking cessation but seem to reduce craving for tobacco (NP3).

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend asking all PWS about their smoking consumption and detailing their smoking history, offering them different types of counselling according to their preferences and involving them multidisciplinary (grade A). The systematic use of feedback is not recommended (grade C) but experience suggests that the CO tester is important in establishing a therapeutic alliance (professional consensus). The use of self-help interventions (grade C) and health education (grade B) are recommended.

Acceptability of financial incentives for health-related behavior change: An updated systematic review

Despite the successes of financial incentives in increasing uptake of evidence-based interventions, acceptability is polarized. Given widespread interest in the use of financial incentives, we update findings from Giles and colleagues' 2015 systematic review (n = 81). The objectives of this systematic review are to identify what is known about financial incentives directed to patients for health-related behavior change, assess how acceptability varies, and address which aspects and features of financial incentives are potentially acceptable and not acceptable, and why. PRISMA guidelines were used for searching peer-reviewed journals across 10 electronic databases. We included empirical and non-empirical papers published between 1/1/14 and 6/1/18. After removal of duplicates, abstract screening, and full-text reviews, 47 papers (n = 31 empirical, n = 16 scholarly) met inclusion criteria. We assessed empirical papers for risk of bias and conducted a content analysis of extracted data to synthesize key findings. Five themes related to acceptability emerged from the data: fairness, messaging, character, liberty, and tradeoffs. The wide range of stakeholders generally preferred rewards over penalties, vouchers over cash, smaller values over large, and certain rewards over lotteries. Deposits were viewed unfavorably. Findings were mixed on acceptability of targeting specific populations. Breastfeeding, medication adherence, smoking cessation, and vaccination presented as more complicated incentive targets than physical activity, weight loss, and self-management. As researchers, clinicians, and policymakers explore the use of financial incentives for challenging health behaviors, additional research is needed to understand how acceptability influences uptake and ultimately health outcomes.

Incentives for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Financial incentives, monetary or vouchers, are widely used in an attempt to precipitate, reinforce and sustain behaviour change, including smoking cessation. They have been used in workplaces, in clinics and hospitals, and within community programmes.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the long-term effect of incentives and contingency management programmes for smoking cessation.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). The most recent searches were conducted in July 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered only randomised controlled trials, allocating individuals, workplaces, groups within workplaces, or communities to smoking cessation incentive schemes or control conditions. We included studies in a mixed-population setting (e.g. community, work-, clinic- or institution-based), and also studies in pregnant smokers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. The primary outcome measure in the mixed-population studies was abstinence from smoking at longest follow-up (at least six months from the start of the intervention). In the trials of pregnant women we used abstinence measured at the longest follow-up, and at least to the end of the pregnancy. Where available, we pooled outcome data using a Mantel-Haenzel random-effects model, with results reported as risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using adjusted estimates for cluster-randomised trials. We analysed studies carried out in mixed populations separately from those carried out in pregnant populations.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-three mixed-population studies met our inclusion criteria, covering more than 21,600 participants; 16 of these are new to this version of the review. Studies were set in varying locations, including community settings, clinics or health centres, workplaces, and outpatient drug clinics. We judged eight studies to be at low risk of bias, and 10 to be at high risk of bias, with the rest at unclear risk. Twenty-four of the trials were run in the USA, two in Thailand and one in the Phillipines. The rest were European. Incentives offered included cash payments or vouchers for goods and groceries, offered directly or collected and redeemable online. The pooled RR for quitting with incentives at longest follow-up (six months or more) compared with controls was 1.49 (95% CI 1.28 to 1.73; 31 RCTs, adjusted N = 20,097; I² = 33%). Results were not sensitive to the exclusion of six studies where an incentive for cessation was offered at long-term follow up (result excluding those studies: RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.69; 25 RCTs; adjusted N = 17,058; I² = 36%), suggesting the impact of incentives continues for at least some time after incentives cease.Although not always clearly reported, the total financial amount of incentives varied considerably between trials, from zero (self-deposits), to a range of between USD 45 and USD 1185. There was no clear direction of effect between trials offering low or high total value of incentives, nor those encouraging redeemable self-deposits.We included 10 studies of 2571 pregnant women. We judged two studies to be at low risk of bias, one at high risk of bias, and seven at unclear risk. When pooled, the nine trials with usable data (eight conducted in the USA and one in the UK), delivered an RR at longest follow-up (up to 24 weeks post-partum) of 2.38 (95% CI 1.54 to 3.69; N = 2273; I² = 41%), in favour of incentives.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall there is high-certainty evidence that incentives improve smoking cessation rates at long-term follow-up in mixed population studies. The effectiveness of incentives appears to be sustained even when the last follow-up occurs after the withdrawal of incentives. There is also moderate-certainty evidence, limited by some concerns about risks of bias, that incentive schemes conducted among pregnant smokers improve smoking cessation rates, both at the end of pregnancy and post-partum. Current and future research might explore more precisely differences between trials offering low or high cash incentives and self-incentives (deposits), within a variety of smoking populations.