Recruiting Pregnant Indigenous Women Who Smoke into a High Contact Incentivized Cessation Trial: A Feasibility Study

Family-centred interventions for Indigenous early childhood well-being by primary healthcare services

BACKGROUND

Primary healthcare, particularly Indigenous-led services, are well placed to deliver services that reflect the needs of Indigenous children and their families. Important characteristics identified by families for primary health care include services that support families, accommodate sociocultural needs, recognise extended family child-rearing practices, and Indigenous ways of knowing and doing business. Indigenous family-centred care interventions have been developed and implemented within primary healthcare services to plan, implement, and support the care of children, immediate and extended family and the home environment. The delivery of family-centred interventions can be through environmental, communication, educational, counselling, and family support approaches.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of family-centred interventions delivered by primary healthcare services in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the USA on a range of physical, psychosocial, and behavioural outcomes of Indigenous children (aged from conception to less than five years), parents, and families.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 22 September 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs, quasi-RCTs, controlled before-after studies, and interrupted time series of family-centred care interventions that included Indigenous children aged less than five years from Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the USA. Interventions were included if they met the assessment criteria for family-centred interventions and were delivered in primary health care. Comparison interventions could include usual maternal and child health care or one form of family-centred intervention versus another.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. overall health and well-being, 2. psychological health and emotional behaviour of children, 3. physical health and developmental health outcomes of children, 4. family health-enhancing lifestyle or behaviour outcomes, 5. psychological health of parent/carer. 6. adverse events or harms. Our secondary outcomes were 7. parenting knowledge and awareness, 8. family evaluation of care, 9. service access and utilisation, 10. family-centredness of consultation processes, and 11. economic costs and outcomes associated with the interventions. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for our primary outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine RCTs and two cluster-RCTs that investigated the effect of family-centred care interventions delivered by primary healthcare services for Indigenous early child well-being. There were 1270 mother-child dyads and 1924 children aged less than five years recruited. Seven studies were from the USA, two from New Zealand, one from Canada, and one delivered in both Australia and New Zealand. The focus of interventions varied and included three studies focused on early childhood caries; three on childhood obesity; two on child behavioural problems; and one each on negative parenting patterns, child acute respiratory illness, and sudden unexpected death in infancy. Family-centred education was the most common type of intervention delivered. Three studies compared family-centred care to usual care and seven studies provided some 'minimal' intervention to families such as education in the form of pamphlets or newsletters. One study provided a minimal intervention during the child's first 24 months and then the family-centred care intervention for one year. No studies had low or unclear risk of bias across all domains. All studies had a high risk of bias for the blinding of participants and personnel domain. Family-centred care may improve overall health and well-being of Indigenous children and their families, but the evidence was very uncertain. The pooled effect estimate from 11 studies suggests that family-centred care improved the overall health and well-being of Indigenous children and their families compared no family-centred care (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03 to 0.24; 2386 participants). We are very uncertain whether family-centred care compared to no family-centred care improves the psychological health and emotional behaviour of children as measured by the Infant Toddler Social Emotional Assessment (ITSEA) (Competence domain) (mean difference (MD) 0.04, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.11; 2 studies, 384 participants). We assessed the evidence as being very uncertain about the effect of family-centred care on physical health and developmental health outcomes of children. Pooled data from eight trials on physical health and developmental outcomes found there was little to no difference between the intervention and the control groups (SMD 0.13, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.26; 1961 participants). The evidence is also very unclear whether family-centred care improved family-enhancing lifestyle and behaviours outcomes. Nine studies measured family health-enhancing lifestyle and behaviours and pooled analysis found there was little to no difference between groups (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.39; 1969 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was very low-certainty evidence of little to no difference for the psychological health of parents and carers when they participated in family-centred care compared to any control group (SMD 0.10, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.22; 5 studies, 975 parents/carers). Two studies stated that there were no adverse events as a result of the intervention. No additional data were provided. No studies reported from the health service providers perspective or on outcomes for family's evaluation of care or family-centredness of consultation processes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence to suggest that family-centred care delivered by primary healthcare services improves the overall health and well-being of Indigenous children, parents, and families. However, due to lack of data, there was not enough evidence to determine whether specific outcomes such as child health and development improved as a result of family-centred interventions. Seven of the 11 studies delivered family-centred education interventions. Seven studies were from the USA and centred on two particular trials, the 'Healthy Children, Strong Families' and 'Family Spirit' trials. As the evidence is very low certainty for all outcomes, further high-quality trials are needed to provide robust evidence for the use of family-centred care interventions for Indigenous children aged less than five years.

The Role of Social Media in Enhancing Clinical Trial Recruitment: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Recruiting participants into clinical trials continues to be a challenge, which can result in study delay or termination. Recent studies have used social media to enhance recruitment outcomes. An assessment of the literature on the use of social media for this purpose is required.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to answer the following questions: (1) How is the use of social media, in combination with traditional approaches to enhance clinical trial recruitment and enrollment, represented in the literature? and (2) Do the data on recruitment and enrollment outcomes presented in the literature allow for comparison across studies?

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive literature search across 7 platforms to identify clinical trials that combined social media and traditional methods to recruit patients. Study and participant characteristics, recruitment methods, and recruitment outcomes were evaluated and compared.

RESULTS

We identified 2371 titles and abstracts through our systematic search. Of these, we assessed 95 full papers and determined that 33 studies met the inclusion criteria. A total of 17 studies reported enrollment outcomes, of which 9 achieved or exceeded their enrollment target. The proportion of participants enrolled from social media in these studies ranged from 0% to 49%. Across all 33 studies, the proportion of participants recruited and enrolled from social media varied greatly. A total of 9 studies reported higher enrollment rates from social media than any other methods, and 4 studies reported the lowest cost per enrolled participant from social media.

CONCLUSIONS

While the assessment of the use of social media to improve clinical trial participation is hindered by reporting inconsistencies, preliminary data suggest that social media can increase participation and reduce per-participant cost. The adoption of consistent standards for reporting recruitment and enrollment outcomes is required to advance our understanding and use of social media to support clinical trial success.

Using Facebook To Recruit Pregnant Women for Research

BACKGROUND

An estimated 80% of clinical trials fail to meet recruitment and enrollment goals. Recruitment can be even more challenging when vulnerable populations are the focus of the study. This problem may be mitigated with the use of contemporary and innovative methods such as Facebook recruitment.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this brief is to detail an account of diversifying recruitment strategies with the use of Facebook to recruit pregnant women into research.

METHODS

This brief was derived from a parent study that aimed to examine relationships among social determinants of health, psychophysiological stress, and mental health in pregnant women. A Facebook account was created in which the principal investigator (PI) sought permission and posted in private Facebook groups about the research study. All data reported and analyzed in this brief are frequencies of Facebook activity including, likes, shares, comments, referrals (i.e., tags), and participants enrolled.

RESULTS

Target enrollment for the parent study was met, with a total enrollment of 82 participants. The PI gained approval from 100% of the 61 private Facebook groups. Over 75% of the total sample was recruited in 48 days via Facebook. The greatest frequency of likes, shares, comments, and referrals by the recruitment flyer were generated from the sell/trade/jobs page. However, the greatest frequency of participants enrolled viewed the flyer in Facebook groups focused on parent discussion. Facebook groups classified as events, nonparent discussion, and miscellaneous were generally unsuccessful in yielding participants.

DISCUSSION

In order to decrease the time lag between research and practice, and to enroll more participants, innovative strategies are necessary. Although there is evidence that Facebook was useful in recruiting a sample of pregnant women into research, Facebook may also be a useful resource in recruiting other populations into research as well.

Feasibility and acceptability of Indigenous Counselling and Nicotine (ICAN) QUIT in Pregnancy multicomponent implementation intervention and study design for Australian Indigenous pregnant women: A pilot cluster randomised step-wedge trial

BACKGROUND

Many health providers (HPs) lack knowledge, confidence, optimism and skills in addressing smoking with pregnant women. This study aimed to explore the feasibility and acceptability of a) a co-designed multi-component intervention for HPs at Aboriginal Medical Services (AMSs) in culturally-targeted pregnancy-specific smoking cessation care and b) the study design.

METHODS

Using a randomised step-wedge cluster design, the Indigenous Counselling And Nicotine (ICAN) QUIT in Pregnancy Trial was evaluated across six AMSs in three Australian states. HPs were provided educational resource packages including live interactive webinars, treatment manuals, patient resources, carbon monoxide (CO) meters, and oral Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT). Feasibility was assessed through recruitment and retention rates of both pregnant women (12-weeks) and HPs (end of study) as well as the potential to improve women's quit rates. Qualitative interviews with staff post-trial explored acceptability of the intervention and study, based on capability, opportunity and motivation from the Behaviour Change Wheel.

RESULTS

Pregnant women (n = 22; 47% (95% CI: 32%, 63%) eligible) and HPs (n = 50; 54% (95% CI: 44%, 64%) eligible) were recruited over 6 months with retention rates of 77% (95% CI: 57%, 90%) and 40% (95% CI: 28%, 54%) respectively. Self-reported 12-week 7-day point-prevalence abstinence was 13.6% (n = 3) and validated abstinent with CO readings ≤6 ppm. Staff interviewed regarding intervention implementation highlighted the importance of provision and use of resources, including training materials, patient resources, CO meters and oral NRT. Resources helped increase capability and opportunity, restructure the environment, and provided social comparison and modelling. Staff were motivated by greater engagement with pregnant women and seeing the women's reductions in CO readings. Having the intervention at the AMSs improved organisational capacity to engage with pregnant women. Staff reported changes to their routine practice that were potentially sustainable. Recommendations for improvement to the implementation of the intervention and research included reducing training length and the tasks related to conducting the study.

CONCLUSION

ICAN QUIT in Pregnancy was a pilot study with the ability to enrol Indigenous women. It was feasible to implement and acceptable to most staff of the AMSs in three states, with modifications recommended. Smoking in pregnancy is a key challenge for Indigenous health. The intervention needs to be evaluated through a methodologically rigorous fully-powered study to determine the efficacy of outcomes for women.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12616001603404. Registered 21 November 2016 - retrospectively registered, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=371778.

Competitions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Competitions might encourage people to undertake and/or reinforce behaviour change, including smoking cessation. Competitions involve individuals or groups having the opportunity to win a prize following successful cessation, either through direct competition or by entry into a lottery or raffle.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether competitions lead to higher long-term smoking quit rates. We also aimed to examine the impact on the population, the costs, and the unintended consequences of smoking cessation competitions.

SEARCH METHODS

This review has merged two previous Cochrane reviews. Here we include studies testing competitions from the reviews 'Competitions and incentives for smoking cessation' and 'Quit & Win interventions for smoking cessation'. We updated the evidence by searching the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register in June 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomized controlled trials (RCTs), allocating individuals, workplaces, groups within workplaces, or communities to experimental or control conditions. We also considered controlled studies with baseline and post-intervention measures in which participants were assigned to interventions by the investigators. Participants were smokers, of any age and gender, in any setting. Eligible interventions were contests, competitions, lotteries, and raffles, to reward cessation and continuous abstinence in smoking cessation programmes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For this update, data from new studies were extracted independently by two review authors. The primary outcome measure was abstinence from smoking at least six months from the start of the intervention. We performed meta-analyses to pool study effects where suitable data were available and where the effect of the competition component could be separated from that of other intervention components, and report other findings narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty studies met our inclusion criteria. Five investigated performance-based reward, where groups of smokers competed against each other to win a prize (N = 915). The remaining 15 used performance-based eligibility, where cessation resulted in entry into a prize draw (N = 10,580). Five of these used Quit & Win contests (N = 4282), of which three were population-level interventions. Fourteen studies were RCTs, and the remainder quasi-randomized or controlled trials. Six had suitable abstinence data for a meta-analysis, which did not show evidence of effectiveness of performance-based eligibility interventions (risk ratio (RR) 1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 1.74, N = 3201, I2 = 57%). No trials that used performance-based rewards found a beneficial effect of the intervention on long-term quit rates.The three population-level Quit & Win studies found higher smoking cessation rates in the intervention group (4% to 16.9%) than the control group at long-term follow-up, but none were RCTs and all had important between-group differences in baseline characteristics. These studies suggested that fewer than one in 500 smokers would quit because of the contest.Reported unintended consequences in all sets of studies generally related to discrepancies between self-reported smoking status and biochemically-verified smoking status. More serious adverse events were not attributed to the competition intervention.Using the GRADE system we rated the overall quality of the evidence for smoking cessation as 'very low', because of the high and unclear risk of bias associated with the included studies, substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity, and the limited population investigated.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At present, it is impossible to draw any firm conclusions about the effectiveness, or a lack of it, of smoking cessation competitions. This is due to a lack of well-designed comparative studies. Smoking cessation competitions have not been shown to enhance long-term cessation rates. The limited evidence suggesting that population-based Quit & Win contests at local and regional level might deliver quit rates above baseline community rates has not been tested adequately using rigorous study designs. It is also unclear whether the value or frequency of possible cash reward schedules influence the success of competitions. Future studies should be designed to compensate for the substantial biases in the current evidence base.

Interventions to encourage smoke-free homes in remote indigenous Australian communities: a study protocol to evaluate the effects of a community-inspired awareness-raising and motivational enhancement strategy

INTRODUCTION

Rates of secondhand smoke exposure are currently significantly higher among remote indigenous communities in the top end of Australia. By implementing a 'smoke-free home' rule, secondhand smoke exposure can be reduced. Smoke-free homes encourage quit attempts and improve the health of children. The prevalence of indigenous smoking rates in remote, discrete communities in Australia is elevated compared with their non-indigenous counterparts. The primary aim of this project is to examine the feasibility of conducting a health-driven intervention to encourage community members to make their homes a smoke-free zone.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study uses mixed-methods exploratory evaluation design to obtain data from key informants and community householders to assess their willingness to implement a 'smoke-free' rule in their homes. Initial focus groups will provide guidance on intervention content and deliver evaluation procedures and community requirements. A rapid survey will be conducted to ascertain interest from community members in having the project team visit to discuss study objectives further and to have a particle meter (with consent) placed in the house. Focus groups recordings will be transcribed and analysed thematically. Rapid surveys will be analysed using frequency distributions and tabulations of responses.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The National Health and Medical Research Council guidelines on ethical research approaches to indigenous studies will be adhered to. The James Cook University Human Research Ethics Committee has provided ethics approval.

Systematic review on costs and resource use of randomized clinical trials shows a lack of transparent and comprehensive data

OBJECTIVES

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are costly. We aimed to provide a systematic overview of the available evidence on resource use and costs for RCTs to support budget planning.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and HealthSTAR from inception until November 30, 2016 without language restrictions. We included any publication reporting empirical data on resource use and costs of RCTs and categorized them depending on whether they reported (i) resource and costs of all aspects at all study stages of an RCT (including conception, planning, preparation, conduct, and all tasks after the last patient has completed the RCT); (ii) on several aspects, (iii) on a single aspect (e.g., recruitment); or (iv) on overall costs for RCTs. Median costs of different recruitment strategies were calculated. Other results (e.g., overall costs) were listed descriptively. All cost data were converted into USD 2017.

RESULTS

A total of 56 articles that reported on cost or resource use of RCTs were included. None of the articles provided empirical resource use and cost data for all aspects of an entire RCT. Eight articles presented resource use and cost data on several aspects (e.g., aggregated cost data of different drug development phases, site-specific costs, selected cost components). Thirty-five articles assessed costs of one specific aspect of an RCT (i.e., 30 on recruitment; five others). The median costs per recruited patient were USD 409 (range: USD 41-6,990). Overall costs of an RCT, as provided in 16 articles, ranged from USD 43-103,254 per patient, and USD 0.2-611.5 Mio per RCT but the methodology of gathering these overall estimates remained unclear in 12 out of 16 articles (75%).

CONCLUSION

The usefulness of the available empirical evidence on resource use and costs of RCTs is limited. Transparent and comprehensive resource use and cost data are urgently needed to support budget planning for RCTs and help improve sustainability.