Decoding behaviour change techniques in opioid deprescribing strategies following major surgery: a systematic review of interventions to reduce postoperative opioid use.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: METHODS: A structured search strategy encompassing databases including MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus, PsycINFO and Cochrane Library was implemented from inception to October 2023. Included studies focused on interventions targeting opioid reduction in adults following major surgeries. The risk of bias was evaluated using Cochrane risk-of-bias tool V.2 (RoB 2) and non-randomised studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tools, and Cohen's d effect sizes were calculated. BCTs were identified using a validated taxonomy. RESULTS: 22 studies, comprising 7 clinical trials and 15 cohort studies, were included, with varying risks of bias. Educational (n=12), guideline-focused (n=3), multifaceted (n=5) and pharmacist-led (n=2) interventions demonstrated diverse effect sizes (small-medium n=10, large n=12). A total of 23 unique BCTs were identified across studies, occurring 140 times. No significant association was observed between the number of BCTs and effect size, and interventions with large effect sizes predominantly targeted healthcare professionals. Key BCTs in interventions with the largest effect sizes included behaviour instructions, behaviour substitution, goal setting (outcome), social support (practical), social support (unspecified), pharmacological support, prompts/cues, feedback on behaviour, environmental modification, graded tasks, outcome goal review, health consequences information, action planning, social comparison, credible source, outcome feedback and social reward. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the dominant BCTs in highly effective interventions provides valuable insights for future opioid tapering strategy implementations. Further research and validation are necessary to establish associations between BCTs and effectiveness, considering additional influencing factors. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022290060.

An Age-Progression Intervention for Smoking Cessation: A Pilot Study Investigating the Influence of Two Sets of Instructions on Intervention Efficacy.

BACKGROUND: Research on age-progression facial morphing interventions for smoking cessation has not investigated the effect of different instructions for intervention delivery. The objective of this pilot study was to investigate the influence of two instruction types used to deliver the intervention on efficacy of the intervention. METHOD: Women were recruited and randomly allocated to an age-progression intervention session with (i) neutral instructions; (ii) instructions designed to reassure; or (iii) a condition that controlled for participant engagement ("control"). The conditions were delivered in a one-time procedure, after which primary (quitting intentions) and secondary (cigarettes/week, quit attempts) outcomes were measured immediately post-intervention, and at 1 and 3 months. RESULTS: Seventy-two women (M = 25.7; SD = 0.9) were recruited and randomly allocated to condition (Neutral n = 27, Reassuring n = 22, Control n = 23). Quitting intentions were higher in the Reassuring versus Control arm (3 months post-intervention, F = 4.37, p = 0.016, 95% CI [0.231, 2.539], eta2 = 0.11); quit attempts were greater in the two intervention arms (58%) versus Control (1-month post-intervention, 15%) (χ2 = 9.83, p < 0.05, OR 1.00 [0.28, 3.63]). CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the importance of optimising instructions to enhance intervention efficacy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Record: NCT03749382.

Behavioral Activation Mobile App to Motivate Smokers to Quit: Feasibility and Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Behavioral activation (BA) is an evidence-based treatment for depression that fosters engagement in values-based activities to increase access to positive reinforcement. Depressed mood has been shown to hinder smoking cessation. OBJECTIVE: This study determined the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a mobile app to motivate smokers to quit by using BA and integrating motivational messages to quit smoking. METHODS: Adult smokers (N=56; mean age 34.5, SD 9.52 years) who were not ready to quit smoking within 30 days were recruited from advertisements and randomized to either 8 weeks of the BA app (set 2 values-based activities per week+motivational messages+feedback on changes in smoking, mood, and values-based activities) or the control group (no app; received resources for quitting smoking). All participants completed the baseline and end-of-treatment web-based questionnaires. Controls also completed weekly web-based assessments, and BA app participants completed assessments through the app. RESULTS: There were no dropouts and only 2 participants in each condition did not complete the end-of-treatment questionnaire. The results demonstrated that it is feasible to recruit smokers who are unmotivated to quit into a smoking cessation induction trial: 86% (57/66) of eligible participants were randomized (BA app: n=27; control: n=29). Participants reported high levels of satisfaction: 80% (20/25) of participants said they would recommend the BA app, there were moderate-to-high scores on the Mobile App Rating Scale, and 88% (22/25) of participants rated the app 3 stars or higher (out of 5). There were high levels of BA app engagement: 96% (26/27) of participants planned activities, and 67% (18/27) of participants planned 7 or more activities. High engagement was found even among those who were at the highest risk for continued smoking (low motivation to quit, low confidence to quit, and high negative affect). The results provided support for the hypothesized relationships between BA constructs: greater pleasant activity completion was associated with greater positive affect (b=0.37, SE 0.21; 95% CI -0.05 to 0.79; P=.08), and greater positive affect tended to predict fewer cigarettes smoked the next day (b=-0.19, SE 0.10; 95% CI -0.39 to 0.01; P=.06). Additionally, a greater number of activities planned was associated with lower negative affect (b=-0.26, SE 0.15; 95% CI -0.55 to 0.04; P=.09). Overall, 16% (4/25) of BA app participants set a quit date versus 4% (1/27) among controls, and there were promising (but not significant) trends for motivation and confidence to quit. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that a mobile app intervention can be made appealing to smokers who are unmotivated to quit by focusing on aspects most important to them, such as mood management. This theory-based intervention has shown some initial support for the underlying theoretical constructs, and further efficacy testing is warranted in a fully powered trial.

Pilot study of lung cancer screening for survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma.

Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) treatment increases the risk of lung cancer. Most HL survivors are not eligible for lung cancer screening (LCS) programmes developed for the general population, and the utility of these programmes has not been tested in HL survivors. We ran a LCS pilot in HL survivors to describe screening uptake, participant characteristics, impact of a decision aid and screen findings. HL survivors treated ≥5 years ago with mustine/procarbazine and/or thoracic radiation, were identified from a follow-up database and invited to participate. Participants underwent a low-dose CT (LDCT) reported using protocols validated for the general population. Two hundred and eighteen individuals were invited, 123 were eligible, 102 were screened (58% response rate): 58% female, median age 52 years, median 22 years since HL treatment. 91.4% were deemed to have made an informed decision; participation was not influenced by age, gender, years since treatment or deprivation. Only 3/35 ever-smokers met criteria for LCS through the programme aimed at the general population. Baseline LDCT results were: 90 (88.2%) negative, 10 (9.8%) indeterminate, 2 (2.0%) positive. Two 3-month surveillance scans were positive. Of 4 positive scans, 2 patients were diagnosed with small-cell lung cancer; 1 underwent curative surgery. Coronary artery calcification was detected in 36.3%, and clinically significant incidental findings in 2.9%. LDCT protocols validated in ever-smokers can detect asymptomatic early-stage lung cancers in HL survivors. This finding, together with screening uptake and low false positive rates, supports further research to implement LCS for HL survivors.

Protocol for a pre-post, mixed-methods feasibility study of the Brain Bootcamp behaviour change intervention to promote healthy brain ageing in older adults.

INTRODUCTION: Behaviour change interventions represent key means for supporting healthy ageing and reducing dementia risk yet brief, scalable behaviour change interventions targeting dementia risk reduction in older adults is currently lacking. Here we describe the aims and design of the three-month Brain Bootcamp initiative that seeks to target multiple dementia risk and protective factors (healthy eating, physical, social and cognitive inactivity), through the use of multiple behaviour change techniques, including goal-setting for behaviour, information about health consequences and physical prompts to change behaviours that reduce dementia risk among older adults. Our secondary aim is to understand participants' views of dementia prevention and explore the acceptability and integration of this campaign into daily life. METHODS: Brain Bootcamp is a pre-post feasibility trial conducted in Sydney, Australia beginning in January 2021 until late August. Participants aged ≥65 years living independently in the community (n = 252), recruited through social media and flyers, will provide information about their demographics, medical history, alcohol consumption, smoking habits, mental health, physical activity, cognitive activity, and diet to generate a dementia risk profile at baseline and assess change therein at three-month follow-up. During the intervention, participants will receive a resource pack containing their individual risk profile, educational booklet on dementia risk factors and four physical items designed to prompt physical, social and mental activity, and better nutrition. Outcome measures include change in dementia risk scores, dementia awareness and motivation. A qualitative process evaluation will interview a sample of participants on the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention. DISCUSSION: This will be the first short-term multi-domain intervention targeting dementia risk reduction in older adults. Findings will generate a new evidence base on how to best support efforts targeting lifestyle changes and to identify ways to optimise acceptability and effectiveness towards brain health for older adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN 381046 (registered 17/02/2021); Pre-results.

Likely uptake of a future a lung cancer screening programme in Hodgkin lymphoma survivors: a questionnaire study.

BACKGROUND: Many Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) survivors are at increased risk of subsequent malignant neoplasms (SMN), including lung cancer, due to previous treatment for HL. Lung cancer screening (LCS) detects early-stage lung cancers in ever smokers but HL survivors without a heavy smoking history are ineligible for screening. There is a rationale to develop a targeted LCS. The aim of this study was to investigate levels of willingness to undergo LCS in HL survivors, and to identify the psycho-social factors associated with screening hesitancy. METHODS: A postal questionnaire was sent to 281 HL survivors registered in a long-term follow-up database and at increased risk of SMNs. Demographic, lung cancer risk factors, psycho-social and LCS belief variables were measured. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the factors associated with lung cancer screening hesitancy, defined as those who would 'probably' or 'probably not' participate. RESULTS: The response rate to the questionnaire was 58% (n = 165). Participants were more likely to be female, older and living in a less deprived area than non-participants. Uptake (at any time) of breast and bowel cancer screening among those previously invited was 99% and 77% respectively. 159 participants were at excess risk of lung cancer. The following results refer to these 159. Around half perceived themselves to be at greater risk of lung cancer than their peers. Only 6% were eligible for lung cancer screening pilots aimed at ever smokers in the UK. 98% indicated they would probably or definitely participate in LCS were it available. Psycho-social variables associated with LCS hesitancy on multivariable analysis were male gender (OR 5.94 CI 1.64-21.44, p < 0.01), living in an area with a high index of multiple deprivation decile (deciles 6-10) (OR 8.22 CI 1.59-42.58, p < 0.05) and lower levels of self-efficacy (OR 1.64 CI 1.30-2.08 p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: HL survivors responding to this survey were willing to participate in a future LCS programme but there was some hesitancy. A future LCS trial for HL survivors should consider the factors associated with screening hesitancy in order to minimise barriers to participation.

The development of a decision aid to support Hodgkin lymphoma survivors considering lung cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Decisions aids (DA) can support patients to make informed decisions about screening tests. This study describes the development and initial evaluation of a lung cancer screening (LCS) DA targeted towards survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). METHODS: A prototype decision aid booklet was developed and subsequently reviewed by a steering group who provided feedback. Revisions were made to produce the DA tested in this study. HL survivors were recruited to an online survey and/or focus groups. Lymphoma practitioners were invited to an interview study. In the online survey, decisional conflict scales and knowledge scales were completed before and after accessing the DA. The focus groups and interviews explored acceptability and comprehensibility and the decisional needs of stakeholders. Focus groups and interviews were audio recorded. The framework method was used to analyse qualitative data. RESULTS: 38 HL survivors completed the online survey. Following exposure to the DA, knowledge of LCS and risk factors and decisional conflict scores (total score and subscale scores) improved significantly. 11 HL survivors took part in two focus groups (n = 5 and n = 6) and 11 practitioners were interviewed. Focus group and interview results: The language, format and length were considered acceptable. Both groups felt the DA was balanced and presented a choice. Icon arrays were felt to aid comprehension of absolute risk values and for some survivors, they reduced affective risk perceptions. Among survivors, the impact of radiation risk on decision making varied according to gender and screening interval, whilst practitioners did not anticipate it to be a major concern for patients. Both groups expressed that a screening offer could mitigate anxiety about lung cancer risk. As anticipated by practitioners, survivors expressed a desire to seek advice from their clinical team. Practitioners thought the DA would meet their informational needs regarding LCS  when supporting survivors. CONCLUSIONS: The DA is considered acceptable by HL survivors and practitioners. The DA reduces decisional conflict and improves knowledge in HL survivors, suggesting that it would support HL survivors to make informed decisions when considering LCS in a future clinical trial.

UK women smokers' experiences of an age-progression smoking cessation intervention: Thematic analysis of accounts.

Objectives: Appearance-related interventions to promote healthy behaviour have been found effective to communicate health risks. The current study aimed to explore women smokers' experiences of age-progression software showing the effects of smoking on the face. Methods: A qualitative design was implemented, utilizing both individual interviews and focus groups within a critical realist framework. Fifteen, 19-52 year-old women smokers were administered an age-progression intervention. All participants responded to the intervention, engaged in semi-structured interviews, and were invited back to attend one of three focus groups. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Results: Four main themes were identified: Health versus Appearance, Shock Reaction, Perceived Susceptibility, and Intention to Quit. Participants found the intervention useful, voicing need for a comprehensive approach that includes both appearance and health. Despite increases in appearance-based apps which could diminish impact, women's accounts of shock induced by the aged smoking-morphed images were similar to previous work conducted more than ten years previously. Conclusions: The study provides novel insights in how women smokers currently perceive, and react to, an age-progression intervention for smoking cessation. Innovation: Findings emphasise the implementation of this intervention type accompanied by health information in a range of patient settings.

The perspectives of survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma on lung cancer screening: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Hodgkin lymphoma survivors (HLS) are at excess risk of lung cancer as a consequence of HL treatment. HLS without a heavy smoking history are currently unable to access lung cancer screening (LCS) programmes aimed at ever smokers, and there is an unmet need to develop a targeted LCS programme. In this study we prospectively explored HLS perspectives on a future LCS programme, including motivating factors and potential barriers to participation, with the aim of identifying ways to optimise uptake in a future programme. METHODS: Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted with HLS, aged 18-80 and lymphoma-free for ≥5 years, selected from a clinical database (ADAPT). Participants provided informed consent. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Despite awareness of other late effects, most participants were unaware of their excess risk of lung cancer. Most were willing to participate in a future LCS programme, citing the potential curability of early-stage lung cancer and reassurance as motivating factors, whilst prior experience of healthcare was a facilitator. Whilst the screening test (a low dose CT scan) was considered acceptable, radiation risk was a concern for some and travel and time off work were potential barriers to participation. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that most HLS would participate in a future LCS programme, motivated by perceived benefits. Their feedback identified a need to develop educational materials addressing lung cancer risk and concerns about screening, including radiation risk. Such materials could be provided upon an invitation to LCS. Uptake in a future programme may be further optimized by offering flexible screening appointments close to home.

Testing a breast cancer prevention and a multiple disease prevention weight loss programme amongst women within the UK NHS breast screening programme-a randomised feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Excess weight and unhealthy behaviours (e.g. sedentariness, high alcohol) are common amongst women including those attending breast screening. These factors increase the risk of breast cancer and other diseases. We tested the feasibility and acceptability of a weight loss/behaviour change programme framed to reduce breast cancer risk (breast cancer prevention programme, BCPP) compared to one framed to reduce risk of breast cancer, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes (T2D) (multiple disease prevention programme, MDPP). METHODS: Women aged 47-73 years with overweight or obesity (n = 1356) in the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) were randomised (1:2) to be invited to join a BCPP or a MDPP. The BCPP included personalised information on breast cancer risk and a web and phone weight loss/behaviour change intervention. The MDPP also included an NHS Health Check (lipids, blood pressure, HbA1c and personalised feedback for risk of CVD [QRISK2] and T2D [QDiabetes and HbA1c]). Primary outcomes were uptake and retention and other feasibility outcomes which include intervention fidelity and prevalence of high CVD and T2D risk. Secondary outcomes included change in weight. RESULTS: The BCPP and MDPP had comparable rates of uptake: 45/508 (9%) vs. 81/848 (10%) and 12-month retention; 33/45 (73%) vs. 53/81 (65%). Both programmes had a high fidelity of delivery with receipt of mean (95% CI) 90 (88-98% of scheduled calls, 91 (86-95%) of scheduled e-mails and 89 (76-102) website entries per woman over the 12-month period. The MDPP identified 15% of women with a previously unknown 10-year CVD QRISK2 of ≥ 10% and 56% with 10-year Qdiabetes risk of ≥ 10%. Both groups experienced good comparable weight loss: BCPP 26/45 (58%) and MDPP 46/81 (57%) with greater than 5% weight loss at 12 months using baseline observation carried forward imputation. CONCLUSIONS: Both programmes appeared feasible. The MDPP identified previously unknown CVD and T2D risk factors but does not appear to increase engagement with behaviour change beyond a standard BCPP amongst women attending breast screening. A future definitive effectiveness trial of BCPP is supported by acceptable uptake and retention, and good weight loss. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN91372184 , registered 28 September 2014.

What health policy makers need to know about mismatches between public perceptions of disease risk, prevalence and severity: a national survey.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess people's perceptions of their personal risk, population prevalence and perceived severity in relation to three key health conditions (cancer, heart disease and hearing loss), gauge the size of any misperceptions, and identify correlates of such misperceptions. DESIGN: This study was a cross-sectional survey. STUDY SAMPLE: A total of 10,401 adults representative of the UK population were participated in the study. RESULTS: Clear majorities of people incorrectly believe that they are at greater personal risk of cancer (>75%), that cancer is more prevalent in the population (>50%) and that cancer is more disabling (>65%), than either heart disease or hearing loss. In turn, people consistently regard their personal risk of hearing loss, the population prevalence of hearing loss and the severity of hearing loss as lower than either cancer or heart disease. Multiple regression analyses showed inconsistent patterns of relationships between people's beliefs, sociodemographic characteristics and their health behaviours. CONCLUSIONS: Accuracy in beliefs about cancer, heart disease and hearing loss is low, and the relationships between these beliefs, their potential antecedents and consequences are complex. Policy makers should ensure close adherence to evidence or risk-making decisions that are costly both in financial terms and in terms of suboptimal population subjective well-being.

Association between age at first reported e-cigarette use and subsequent regular e-cigarette, ever cigarette and regular cigarette use.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Association of electronic cigarette use and subsequent smoking has received considerable attention, although age of first use has not. This study tested differences in regular (e-cigarettes, cigarettes) and ever (cigarettes) use between e-cigarette user groups: early versus never users, late versus never users, early versus late users and effects of controlling for covariates. DESIGN: Prospective study with 12- and 24-month follow-up of e-cigarette/cigarette ever/regular use with data from an intervention. SETTING: Forty-five schools in England (Staffordshire and Yorkshire). PARTICIPANTS: Never smokers (3289 13-14-year-olds) who were part of a cluster randomized controlled trial. MEASUREMENTS: The sample was divided into groups of e-cigarette users: early users (at 13-14 years), late users (at 14-15 years) and never users (at 13-14 and 14-15 years). Dependent variables were self-reported regular e-cigarette and cigarette use and ever cigarette use at 15-16 years. Covariates were assessed. FINDINGS: Early and late users compared with never users were significantly more likely to be regular e-cigarette users [early: odds ratio (OR) = 9.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 5.38, 16.49, P < 0.001; late: OR = 6.89, 95% CI = 4.11, 11.54, P < 0.001], ever cigarette users (early: OR = 7.96, 95% CI = 6.02, 10.53, P < 0.001; late: OR = 5.13, 95% CI = 3.85, 6.84, P < 0.001) and regular cigarette users (early: OR = 7.80, 95% CI = 3.99, 15.27, P < 0.001; late: OR = 4.34, 95% CI = 1.93, 9.77, P < 0.001) at age 15-16 years. Late users compared with early users had significantly lower rates of ever use of cigarettes at 15-16 years (OR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.35, 0.66, P < 0.001), although this difference was non-significant at 12 months after first use of e-cigarettes (OR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.64, 1.25, P = 0.498). Controlling for covariates did not change the findings. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescents in England who report using e-cigarettes at age 13-14 years have higher rates of subsequently initiating cigarette use than adolescents who report using e-cigarettes at age 14-15 years, a difference that may be attributable to a longer period of time to initiate cigarette use in former group.

Healthcare professionals' implementation of national guidelines with patients who self-harm.

BACKGROUND: National guidelines for the short-term management of self-harm are aimed at healthcare professionals who may be involved in the care of people who have self-harmed. However, evidence from small-scale studies globally suggest there is a lack of awareness of such guidelines among some groups of healthcare professionals. For the first time in a large representative sample of patient-facing healthcare professionals, we aimed to identify: (a) which healthcare professionals are aware of guidelines for the management of self-harm; (b) the perceived availability of training; (c) the use of risk screening tools; and (d) the extent to which healthcare professionals implement guidelines for the management of self-harm. METHODS: 1020 UK healthcare professionals completed a cross-sectional survey online. RESULTS: 85.6% (873/1020) of the sample had heard of the national guidelines, but only 24.3% (248/1020) knew "a fair amount" or more about them. Of the respondents who had previously encountered a patient who had self-harmed or was at risk of repeat self-harm, the guidelines were implemented in fewer than 50% (M = 43.89%, SD = 38.79) of encounters. 31% (312/1020) of the sample had received training in managing self-harm and, contrary to guidelines, 2.25% (23/1020) of the sample had used self-harm risk screening tools. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight a need to improve knowledge of self-harm management guidelines, and identifies professional groups where awareness and knowledge is currently low. Further work is required to develop interventions to change healthcare professional practice with respect to the implementation of self-harm management guidelines.

Delivering Opportunistic Behavior Change Interventions: a Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews.

Opportunities for healthcare professionals to deliver health behavior change interventions are often missed, but understanding the barriers and enablers to this activity is limited by a focus on defined specialisms/health conditions. This systematic review of systematic reviews collates all the evidence across professional groups to provide guidance to policy makers for implementing healthcare professional delivery of behavior change interventions. Eight electronic databases were searched for systematic reviews reporting patient-facing healthcare professionals' (e.g., general practitioners, nurses) barriers and enablers to delivering behavior change interventions (diet, physical activity, alcohol reduction, smoking cessation, and weight management). A narrative synthesis was conducted. Thirty-six systematic reviews were included. Four themes emerged as both barriers and enablers: (1) perceptions of the knowledge or skills needed to support behavior change with patients, (2) perceptions of the healthcare professional role, (3) beliefs about resources and support needed, and (4) healthcare professionals' own health behavior. There were four cross-disciplinary barriers: (1) perceived lack of time, (2) perceived lack of prioritization of health behavior change, (3) negative attitudes towards patients and perceptions of patient risk, and (4) perceptions of patient motivation. The three enablers were as follows: (1) training, (2) context, and (3) attitudes towards delivering interventions. To enhance healthcare professionals' delivery of behavior change interventions, policy makers should (a) address perceptions about patient need for interventions, (b) support diverse professional groups to identify opportunities to deliver interventions, and (c) encourage professionals to focus on prevention and management of health conditions.

The role of neuropsychological mechanisms in implementation intentions to reduce alcohol consumption among heavy drinkers: a randomized trial.

Implementation intention formation, which involves identifying triggers and linking them with coping strategies, has proven effective at reducing alcohol consumption in general populations. For the first time, the present study tested the ability of implementation intentions to reduce alcohol consumption among heavy drinkers and to explore potential neuropsychological mechanisms. At baseline, participants were randomized to form implementation intentions or to an active control group. There was a 5.7 unit (1 unit = 10 ml or 8 g ethanol) per week reduction ([95%CI 0.15, 11.19], p = 0.048) in alcohol consumption at 1 month follow-up among participants who formed implementation intentions, which was significantly more than controls F(1, 91) = 3.95, p = 0.048, a medium effect size (d = 0.47, Cohen, 1992). No significant differences in performance on the neuropsychological tasks were found between groups. The present study demonstrates for the first time that implementation intentions reduce alcohol consumption among heavy drinkers.

Beyond "planning": A meta-analysis of implementation intentions to support smoking cessation.

OBJECTIVE: Implementation intentions support behavior change by encouraging people to link critical situations with appropriate responses. Overall effectiveness for smoking cessation is unknown. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of implementation intentions for smoking cessation. METHOD: Using PRISMA guidelines, 6 electronic databases were searched (updated February 2018) using key terms. Data were pooled for smoking cessation (categorical variable; yes/no) and entered into random effects models. Analyses assessed: (a) effectiveness as a single intervention, and (b) effectiveness when included as one of multiple intervention components. RESULTS: Twelve studies were identified. Implementation intentions were effective for smoking cessation at follow up, OR = 1.70, CI [1.32, 2.20], p < .001, average 10.7% quit rate for intervention participants (4.9% in controls). Implementation intentions as a single intervention were effective for smoking cessation, OR = 5.69, 95% CI [1.39, 23.25], p = .02 (average quit rate 14.3% in intervention participants vs. 3.6% in controls) and as part of multicomponent interventions, OR = 1.67, 95% CI [1.29, 1.66], p < .001 (average quit rate 8.2% in intervention participants vs. 5.8% in controls). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation intentions are effective at helping smokers quit although the review reported substantial heterogeneity across the limited number of included studies. The present review sets the agenda for future research in this area including longer term objectively verified abstinence and identification of potential moderators of effectiveness including population characteristics. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Patterns and predictors of e-cigarette, cigarette and dual use uptake in UK adolescents: evidence from a 24-month prospective study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To assess prevalence and predictors of e-cigarettes/cigarettes patterns of use in adolescents in England. DESIGN: Prospective study with 24-month follow-up of e-cigarette/cigarette ever/regular use with data from an intervention evaluation. SETTING: Forty-five schools in England (Staffordshire and Yorkshire). PARTICIPANTS: A total of 3210 adolescents who, at baseline, were aged 13-14 years and had never used e-cigarettes/cigarettes. MEASUREMENTS: Based on e-cigarette/cigarette ever use at follow-up, six groups were created: (a) never user, (b) e-cigarette only, (c) cigarette only, (d) dual use-order of use unclear, (e) dual use-e-cigarettes used first and (f) dual use-cigarettes used first. Baseline measures were: gender, ethnicity, socio-economic status, impulsivity, family plus friend smoking and smoking-related beliefs (attitude and perceived behavioural control). FINDINGS: In groups (a) to (f), there were 71.5, 13.3, 3.3, 5.7, 2.9 and 3.4% adolescents, respectively. Among groups using cigarettes, regular smoking was more prevalent in group (f) (dual use-cigarettes used first) [17.6%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 10.4, 24.8] than in groups (c), (d) and (e) combined (7.3%, 95% CI = 4.7, 9.9). Among groups using e-cigarettes, regular use was less prevalent in group (b) (e-cigarette only) (1.9%, 95% CI = 0.6, 3.2) than in groups (d), (e) and (f) combined (12.2%, 95% CI = 8.9, 15.5). Higher impulsivity plus friends and family smoking were predictive of being in groups (b) to (f) compared with group (a) (never users). Males were more likely to be in group (b) compared to group (a); females were more likely to be in groups (c) to (f) compared to group (a). CONCLUSIONS: Regular use of e-cigarettes/cigarettes varies across groups defined by ever use of e-cigarettes/cigarettes. Interventions targeted at tackling impulsivity or adolescents whose friends and family members smoke may represent fruitful avenues for future research.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of repeated implementation intention formation on adolescent smoking initiation: A cluster randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Forming implementation intentions (if-then plans) about how to refuse cigarette offers plus antismoking messages was tested for reducing adolescent smoking. METHOD: Cluster randomized controlled trial with schools randomized (1:1) to receive implementation intention intervention and messages targeting not smoking (intervention) or completing homework (control). Adolescents (11-12 years at baseline) formed implementation intentions and read messages on 8 occasions over 4 years meaning masking treatment allocation was not possible. Outcomes were: follow-up (48 months) ever smoking, any smoking in last 30 days, regular smoking, and breath carbon monoxide levels. Analyses excluded baseline ever smokers, controlled for clustering by schools and examined effects of controlling for demographic variables. Economic evaluation (incremental cost effectiveness ratio; ICER) was conducted. Trial is registered (ISRCTN27596806). RESULTS: Schools were randomly allocated (September-October 2012) to intervention (n = 25) or control (n = 23). At follow-up, among 6,155 baseline never smokers from 45 retained schools, ever smoking was significantly lower (RR = 0.83, 95% CI [0.71, 0.97], p = .016) in intervention (29.3%) compared with control (35.8%) and remained so controlling for demographics. Similar patterns observed for any smoking in last 30 days. Less consistent effects were observed for regular smoking and breath carbon monoxide levels. Economic analysis yielded an ICER of $134 per ever smoker avoided at age 15-16 years. CONCLUSIONS: This pragmatic trial supports the use of repeated implementation intentions about how to refuse the offer of a cigarette plus antismoking messages as an effective and cost-effective intervention to reduce smoking initiation in adolescents. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

'I didn't realise I was such a sausage': men's accounts of whole-body scanning, body image, and expected changes in health-related behaviours.

OBJECTIVE: Whole-body scanning is now available in stores to assist buyers in choosing well-fitting clothes. This study was designed to investigate men's accounts of scanning, body image and expectations of behaviour change. DESIGN: Ten men aged 18-39 years without histories of eating disorders or previous experience of whole-body scanning, took part in semi-structured interviews before and after scanning. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Pre-scan, men's body ideals were tall, slender and relatively muscular. Post-scan, seven reported looking shorter, fatter, thinner and/or less symmetrical than they hoped; three were pleasantly surprised by the images. Men were interested in scans as an objective view of their bodies and as a 'wake-up call' to motivate healthy behaviours. Five men intended to change their behaviour as a result of scanning, and repeat scanning was seen as a good way to monitor behavioural changes. Participants suggested that scanning may raise body concerns in other men, though downplayed impacts on their own body image. CONCLUSION: Whole-body scanning may encourage men to exercise and eat more healthily. However, men became more negative about their bodies as a result of seeing their body scans, so scanning needs to be carried out with supervision and support.

Self-Incentives Uniquely Boost Cessation in Community-Based Stop Smoking Programs: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Self-incentives offer a plausible alternative to paying smokers to quit but have not yet been tested in a randomized controlled trial. PURPOSE: The present study tested whether, compared with a control group, prompting smokers explicitly to self-incentivize if they abstain from smoking for a week or a month encouraged sustained abstinence. METHOD: One hundred and fifty-nine smokers were recruited from stop smoking clinics and randomized to an active control condition (asked to form a plan to quit, n = 65) or one of two intervention conditions in which they were asked to form implementation intentions designed to ensure that they incentivized themselves if they had not smoked at all by the end of (a) the week (n = 44) or (b) the month (n = 50). The main outcome measure was self-reported abstinence at 3- and 6-month follow-ups, which was biochemically verified at baseline and in a subsample at 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: At 3-month follow-up, 34% (15/44; p < .05, d = 0.45) and 36% (18/50; p < .05, d = 0.49) of smokers abstained in the weekly and monthly self-incentivizing conditions respectively, compared with 15% (10/65) in the control. The same pattern of findings was observed at 6-month follow-up: 30% (13/44; p < .05, d = 0.35), 34% (17/50; p < .05, d = 0.45) and 15% (10/65) of smokers remained abstinent in the two intervention groups and control group, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Ensuring that smokers self-incentivized boosted significantly the effectiveness of the stop smoking program. Self-incentivizing implementation intentions could be implemented at low cost with high public health "reach" to change many health behaviors beyond smoking. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN11610200.