RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Eighty per cent of UK women have at least one baby, making pregnancy an opportunity to help women stop smoking before their health is irreparably compromised. Smoking cessation during pregnancy helps protect infants from miscarriage, still birth, low birth weight, asthma, attention deficit disorder and adult cardiovascular disease. UK national guidelines highlight lack of evidence for effectiveness of financial incentives to help pregnant smokers quit. This includes a research recommendation: within a UK context, are incentives an acceptable, effective and cost-effective way to help pregnant women who smoke to quit? METHODS: The Cessation in Pregnancy Incentives Trial (CPIT) III is a pragmatic, 42-month, multi-centre, parallel-group, individually randomised controlled superiority trial of the effect on smoking status of adding to usual Stop Smoking Services (SSS) support, the offer of up to £400 of financial voucher incentives, compared with usual support alone, to quit smoking during pregnancy. Participants (n = 940) are pregnant smokers (age > 16 years, < 24 weeks pregnant, English speaking), who consent via telephone to take part and are willing to be followed-up in late pregnancy and 6 months after birth. The primary outcome is cotinine/anabasine-validated abstinence from smoking in late pregnancy. Secondary outcomes include engagement with SSS, quit rates at 4 weeks from agreed quit date and 6 months after birth, and birth weight. Outcomes will be analysed by intention to treat, and regression models will be used to compare treatment effects on outcomes. A meta-analysis will include data from the feasibility study in Glasgow. An economic evaluation will assess cost-effectiveness from a UK NHS perspective. Process evaluation using a case-study approach will identify opportunities to improve recruitment and learning for future implementation. Research questions include: what is the therapeutic efficacy of incentives; are incentives cost-effective; and what are the potential facilitators and barriers to implementing incentives in different parts of the UK? DISCUSSION: This phase III trial in Scotland, England and Northern Ireland follows a successful phase II trial in Glasgow, UK. The participating sites have diverse SSS that represent most cessation services in the UK and serve demographically varied populations. If found to be acceptable and cost-effective, this trial could demonstrate that financial incentives are effective and transferable to most UK SSS for pregnant women. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN15236311. Registered on 9 October 2017.
Assuntos
Apoio Financeiro , Motivação , Cuidado Pré-Natal/métodos , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar/métodos , Fumar/terapia , Adolescente , Adulto , Ensaios Clínicos Fase III como Assunto , Análise Custo-Benefício , Inglaterra , Estudos de Equivalência como Asunto , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Estudos Multicêntricos como Assunto , Irlanda do Norte , Ensaios Clínicos Pragmáticos como Assunto , Gravidez , Cuidado Pré-Natal/psicologia , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Escócia , Fumar/efeitos adversos , Fumar/economia , Fumar/psicologia , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar/economia , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar/psicologia , Medicina Estatal/economia , Adulto JovemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: In the United Kingdom, men of Bangladeshi and Pakistani origin have higher smoking rates than the general population. This makes non-smokers in their households more vulnerable to second-hand smoke (SHS) exposure than the general population. AIMS: The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of implementing and pilot testing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a 'Smoke-free Homes' (SFH) intervention in Islamic religious settings to encourage families of Bangladeshi and Pakistani origin to apply smoking restrictions in their homes. METHODS: We allocated Islamic religious settings (clusters) to either receive SFH-an educational intervention-or to a control arm. Within each cluster, we recruited households with at least one smoker and one non-smoker. SHS exposure among non-smokers was measured using salivary cotinine. RESULTS: Seven (50%) clusters were randomised to each trial arm. A total of 468 households were assessed for eligibility and 62% (n=289) were eligible, of which 74% (n=213) agreed to participate in the trial. Six of the seven intervention clusters delivered the intervention, and all clusters were retained throughout the trial. In all, 81% (n=172) of households provided data at follow-up. No evidence of a difference in log cotinine level was observed (adjusted mean difference -0.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.28-1.23, P=0.97) between the two trial arms. The direct mean cost of delivering the intervention was £18.18 per household (range £3.55-42.20). CONCLUSIONS: It was possible to recruit, randomise and retain Islamic religious settings and participant households. However, some of the original assumptions, in particular our ability to collect primary outcome data, need to be revisited before a definitive trial.
Assuntos
Emigrantes e Imigrantes , Promoção da Saúde/métodos , Islamismo , Fumar , Poluição por Fumaça de Tabaco/prevenção & controle , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Bangladesh/etnologia , Análise Custo-Benefício , Cotinina/análise , Feminino , Promoção da Saúde/economia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Paquistão/etnologia , Projetos Piloto , Saliva/química , Reino Unido , Adulto JovemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Chronic neck pain is a common condition in the adult population. More research is needed to evaluate interventions aiming to facilitate beneficial long-term change. We propose to evaluate the effect of Alexander Technique lessons and acupuncture in a rigorously conducted pragmatic trial with an embedded qualitative study. METHODS/DESIGN: We will recruit 500 patients who have been diagnosed with neck pain in primary care, who have continued to experience neck pain for at least three months with 28% minimum cut-off score on the Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire (NPQ). We will exclude patients with serious underlying pathology, prior cervical spine surgery, history of psychosis, rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, osteoporosis, haemophilia, cancer, HIV or hepatitis, or with alcohol or drug dependency currently or in the last 12 months, or actively pursuing compensation or with pending litigation.The York Trials Unit will randomly allocate participants using a secure computer-based system. We will use block randomisation with allocation to each intervention arm being unambiguously concealed from anyone who might subvert the randomisation process.Participants will be randomised in equal proportions to Alexander Technique lessons, acupuncture or usual care alone. Twenty 30-minute Alexander Technique lessons will be provided by teachers registered with the Society of Teachers of the Alexander Technique and twelve 50-minute sessions of acupuncture will be provided by acupuncturists registered with the British Acupuncture Council. All participants will continue to receive usual GP care.The primary outcome will be the NPQ at 12 months, with the secondary time point at 6 months, and an area-under-curve analysis will include 3, 6 and 12 month time-points. Adverse events will be documented. Potential intervention effect modifiers and mediators to be explored include: self-efficacy, stress management, and the incorporation of practitioner advice about self-care and lifestyle. Qualitative material will be used to address issues of safety, acceptability and factors that impact on longer term outcomes. DISCUSSION: This study will provide robust evidence on whether there are significant clinical benefits to patients, economic benefits demonstrating value for money, and sufficient levels of acceptability and safety. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN15186354.