The effectiveness of smoking cessation, physical activity/diet and alcohol reduction interventions delivered by mobile phones for the prevention of non-communicable diseases: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a systematic review to assess the effectiveness of smoking cessation, physical activity (PA), diet, and alcohol reduction interventions delivered by mobile technology to prevent non-communicable diseases (NCDs). METHODS: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of mobile-based NCD prevention interventions using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Global Health, CINAHL (Jan 1990-Jan 2016). Two authors extracted data. FINDINGS: 71 trials were included: smoking cessation (n = 18); PA (n = 15), diet (n = 3), PA and diet (n = 25); PA, diet, and smoking cessation (n = 2); and harmful alcohol consumption (n = 8). 4 trials had low risk of bias. The effect of SMS-based smoking cessation support on biochemically verified continuous abstinence was pooled relative risk [RR] 2.19 [95% CI 1.80-2.68], I2 = 0%) and on verified 7 day point prevalence of smoking cessation was pooled RR 1.51 [95% CI 1.06-2.15], I2 = 0%, with no reported adverse events. There was no difference in peak oxygen intake at 3 months in a trial of an SMS-based PA intervention. The effect of SMS-based diet and PA interventions on: incidence of diabetes was pooled RR 0.67 [95% CI 0.49, 0.90], I2 = 0.0%; end-point weight was pooled MD -0.99Kg [95% CI -3.63, 1.64] I2 = 29.4%; % change in weight was pooled MD -3.1 [95%CI -4.86- -1.3] I2 0.3%; and on triglyceride levels was pooled MD -0.19 mmol/L [95% CI -0.29, -0.08], I2 = 0.0%. The results of other pooled analyses of the effect of SMS-based diet and PA interventions were heterogenous (I2 59-90%). The effects of alcohol reduction interventions were inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking cessation support delivered by SMS increases quitting rates. Trials of PA interventions reporting outcomes ≥3 months showed no benefits. There were at best modest benefits of diet and PA interventions. The effects of the most promising SMS-based smoking, diet and PA interventions on morbidity and mortality in high-risk groups should be established in adequately powered RCTs.

Internet-accessed sexually transmitted infection (e-STI) testing and results service: A randomised, single-blind, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Internet-accessed sexually transmitted infection testing (e-STI testing) is increasingly available as an alternative to testing in clinics. Typically this testing modality enables users to order a test kit from a virtual service (via a website or app), collect their own samples, return test samples to a laboratory, and be notified of their results by short message service (SMS) or telephone. e-STI testing is assumed to increase access to testing in comparison with face-to-face services, but the evidence is unclear. We conducted a randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of an e-STI testing and results service (chlamydia, gonorrhoea, HIV, and syphilis) on STI testing uptake and STI cases diagnosed. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The study took place in the London boroughs of Lambeth and Southwark. Between 24 November 2014 and 31 August 2015, we recruited 2,072 participants, aged 16-30 years, who were resident in these boroughs, had at least 1 sexual partner in the last 12 months, stated willingness to take an STI test, and had access to the internet. Those unable to provide consent and unable to read English were excluded. Participants were randomly allocated to receive 1 text message with the web link of an e-STI testing and results service (intervention group) or to receive 1 text message with the web link of a bespoke website listing the locations, contact details, and websites of 7 local sexual health clinics (control group). Participants were free to use any other services or interventions during the study period. The primary outcomes were self-reported STI testing at 6 weeks, verified by patient record checks, and self-reported STI diagnosis at 6 weeks, verified by patient record checks. Secondary outcomes were the proportion of participants prescribed treatment for an STI, time from randomisation to completion of an STI test, and time from randomisation to treatment of an STI. Participants were sent a £10 cash incentive on submission of self-reported data. We completed all follow-up, including patient record checks, by 17 June 2016. Uptake of STI testing was increased in the intervention group at 6 weeks (50.0% versus 26.6%, relative risk [RR] 1.87, 95% CI 1.63 to 2.15, P < 0.001). The proportion of participants diagnosed was 2.8% in the intervention group versus 1.4% in the control group (RR 2.10, 95% CI 0.94 to 4.70, P = 0.079). No evidence of heterogeneity was observed for any of the pre-specified subgroup analyses. The proportion of participants treated was 1.1% in the intervention group versus 0.7% in the control group (RR 1.72, 95% CI 0.71 to 4.16, P = 0.231). Time to test, was shorter in the intervention group compared to the control group (28.8 days versus 36.5 days, P < 0.001, test for difference in restricted mean survival time [RMST]), but no differences were observed for time to treatment (83.2 days versus 83.5 days, P = 0.51, test for difference in RMST). We were unable to recruit the planned 3,000 participants and therefore lacked power for the analyses of STI diagnoses and STI cases treated. CONCLUSIONS: The e-STI testing service increased uptake of STI testing for all groups including high-risk groups. The intervention required people to attend clinic for treatment and did not reduce time to treatment. Service innovations to improve treatment rates for those diagnosed online are required and could include e-treatment and postal treatment services. e-STI testing services require long-term monitoring and evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN13354298.