Effect of 3 months and 12 months of financial incentives on 12-month postpartum smoking cessation maintenance: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Offering financial incentives is effective for smoking cessation during pregnancy. We tested the effectiveness of financial incentives for maintaining postpartum cessation, comparing 12-month and 3-month incentives with each other and with usual care (UC). DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This study was a pragmatic, multi-centre, three-arm randomized controlled trial involving four English, National Health Service, stop smoking services. A total of 462 postpartum women (aged ≥ 16 years) took part, who stopped smoking during pregnancy with financial incentives, validated as abstinent from smoking at end of pregnancy or early postpartum. INTERVENTIONS: Interventions comprised (i) UC; (ii) UC plus up to £60 of financial voucher incentives offered to participants and £60 offered to an optional significant-other supporter, over 3 months postpartum, contingent upon validated abstinence ('3-month incentives'); or (iii) UC plus '3-month incentives' plus £180 of vouchers offered to participants over 9 months postpartum, contingent upon abstinence ('12-month incentives'). MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome: biochemically validated abstinence at 1 year postpartum. To adjust for testing all comparisons between groups with equal precision, P < 0.017 was necessary for significance. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: self-reported and validated abstinence at 3 months postpartum; self-reported abstinence at 1 year postpartum. FINDINGS: Primary outcome ascertainment: abstinence was 39.6% (63/159) 12 months incentives, 21.4% (33/154) 3 months incentives and 28.2% (42/149) UC. Adjusted odds ratios [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 12-month versus 3-month incentives OR = 2.41 (95% CI = 1.46-3.96), P = 0.001; 12 months versus UC 1.67 (1.04-2.70), P = 0.035; 3 months versus UC 0.69 (0.41-1.17), P = 0.174. Bayes factors indicated that for 12-month versus 3-month incentives and 12 months versus UC there was good evidence for the alternative hypothesis, and for 3 months versus UC there was good evidence for the null hypothesis. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized controlled trial provides weak evidence that up to £300 of voucher incentives over 12 months is effective for maintaining smoking abstinence postpartum compared with usual care. There was good evidence that 12-month incentives are superior to those over only 3 months, for which there was no evidence of effectiveness relative to usual care.

Helping pregnant smokers quit: a multi-centre randomised controlled trial of electronic cigarettes versus nicotine replacement therapy.

Background: Some pregnant smokers try e-cigarettes, but effectiveness and safety of such use are unknown. Objectives: To compare effectiveness and safety of nicotine patches and e-cigarettes in pregnancy. Design: A pragmatic multi-centre randomised controlled trial. Setting: Twenty-three hospitals across England, and a Stop Smoking Service in Scotland. Participants: One thousand one hundred and forty pregnant daily smokers (12-24 weeks' gestation) motivated to stop smoking, with no strong preference for using nicotine patches or e-cigarettes. Interventions: Participants in the e-cigarette arm were posted a refillable e-cigarette device with two 10 ml bottles of tobacco-flavoured e-liquid (18 mg nicotine). Participants in the nicotine patches arm were posted a 2-week supply of 15 mg/16-hour nicotine patches. Supplies were provided for up to 8 weeks. Participants sourced further supplies themselves as needed. Participants in both arms received support calls prior to their target quit date, on the quit date, and weekly for the next 4 weeks. Outcome measures: The primary outcome was validated prolonged abstinence at the end of pregnancy. Participants lost to follow-up or not providing biochemical validation were included as non-abstainers. Secondary outcomes included self-reported abstinence at different time points, treatment adherence and safety outcomes. Results: Only 55% of self-reported abstainers mailed back useable saliva samples. Due to this, validated sustained abstinence rates were low (6.8% vs. 4.4% in the e-cigarettes and nicotine patches arms, respectively, risk ratio = 1.55, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 2.53; Bayes factor = 2.7). In a pre-specified sensitivity analysis that excluded abstainers using non-allocated products, the difference became significant (6.8% vs. 3.6%, risk ratio = 1.93, 95% confidence interval 1.14 to 3.26; Bayes factor = 10). Almost a third of the sample did not set a target quit date and the uptake of support calls was low, as was the initial product use. At end of pregnancy, 33.8% versus 5.6% of participants were using their allocated product in the e-cigarettes versus nicotine patches arm (risk ratio = 6.01, 95% confidence interval 4.21 to 8.58). Regular use of e-cigarettes in the nicotine patches arm was more common than use of nicotine replacement products in the e-cigarette arm (17.8% vs. 2.8%). Rates of adverse events and adverse birth outcomes were similar in the two study arms, apart from participants in the e-cigarette arm having fewer infants with low birthweight (<2500 g) (9.6% vs. 14.8%, risk ratio = 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.47 to 0.90; Bayes factor = 10.3). Limitations: Low rates of validation reduced the study power. A substantial proportion of participants did not use the support on offer sufficiently to test its benefits. Sample size may have been too small to detect differences in less frequent adverse effects. Conclusions: E-cigarettes were not significantly more effective than nicotine patches in the primary analysis, but when e-cigarettes use in the nicotine patches arm was accounted for, e-cigarettes were almost twice as effective as patches in all abstinence outcomes. In pregnant smokers seeking help, compared to nicotine patches, e-cigarettes are probably more effective, do not pose more risks to birth outcomes assessed in this study and may reduce the incidence of low birthweight. Future work: Routine monitoring of smoking cessation and birth outcomes in pregnant women using nicotine patches and e-cigarettes and further studies are needed to confirm these results. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN62025374 and Eudract 2017-001237-65. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 27, No. 13. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Like many other smokers in the UK, some pregnant smokers try to limit or stop smoking with the help of e-cigarettes. It is not known whether this helps with stopping smoking and whether using e-cigarettes has any bad effects on the baby. We recruited 1140 pregnant smokers who wanted to quit. A random half were given nicotine patches, which are commonly used to help smokers quit. The other half were given an e-cigarette. They also received six weekly phone calls to support them in stopping smoking. We then looked at how many in each group stopped smoking by the end of pregnancy. More women stopped smoking in the group that was given an e-cigarette, but the difference was small and could be due to chance. However, some of the women in the nicotine patch group who had successfully stopped smoking were using e-cigarettes rather than patches. When these (and women in the e-cigarette group who used patches) were not counted, e-cigarettes helped almost twice as many women stop smoking than patches. E-cigarettes were better than patches in preventing low birthweight (having babies who weigh less than 2.5 kg). Otherwise, women given patches and those given e-cigarettes (and their babies) had similar numbers of medical complications. For pregnant women who smoke and need help to quit, e-cigarettes are probably more helpful than nicotine patches, and do not pose any additional risks to women or their babies.

Validity and reliability of Raman spectroscopy for carotenoid assessment in cattle skin.

Carotenoids are powerful antioxidants capable of helping to protect the skin from the damaging effects of exposure to sun by reducing the free radicals in skin produced by exposure to ultraviolet radiation, and they may also have a physical protective effect in human skin. Since carotenoids are lipophilic molecules which can be ingested with the diet, they can accumulate in significant quantities in the skin. Several studies on humans have been conducted to evaluate the protective function of carotenoids against various diseases, but there is very limited published information available to understand the mechanism of carotenoid bioavailability in animals. The current study was conducted to investigate the skin carotenoid level (SCL) in two cattle skin sets - weaners with an unknown feeding regime and New Generation Beef (NGB) cattle with monitored feed at three different ages. Rapid analytical and sensitive Raman spectroscopy has been shown to be of interest as a powerful technique for the detection of carotenoids in cattle skin due to the strong resonance enhancement with 532 nm laser excitation. The spectral difference of both types of skin were measured and quantified using univariate and linear discriminant analysis. SCL was higher in NGB cattle than weaners and there is a perfect classification accuracy between weaners and NGB cattle skin using carotenoid markers as a basis. Further work carried out on carotenoid rich NGB cattle skin of 8, 12 and 24 months of age identified an increasing trend in SCL with age. The present work validated the ability of Raman spectroscopy to determine the skin carotenoid level in cattle by comparing it with established HPLC methods. There is an excellent correlation of R2 = 0.96 between the two methods that could serve as a model for future application for larger population studies.

Agreement and Disparities between Women and Stop-Smoking Specialists about How to Promote Adherence to Nicotine Replacement Therapy in Pregnancy.

Evidence for the effectiveness of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for smoking-cessation in pregnancy is weak. This has been attributed to insufficient dosing and low adherence. This study investigated the acceptability of key messages and delivery modes for a behavioral intervention to increase NRT adherence in pregnancy. Semi-structured telephone interviews were carried out with pregnant or postpartum women aged ≥16 from across England, who had been offered NRT during pregnancy as part of a quit attempt and who struggled to quit (n = 10), and a focus group with stop-smoking specialists from across England (n = 6). The two data sources were coded separately using a thematic approach and then integrated to compare perspectives. Women and specialists agreed on message tone and delivery modes. However, views diverged on the most influential sources for certain messages and whether some information should be given proactively or reactively. There was also disagreement over which messages were novel and which were routinely delivered. This study demonstrates the value of capturing and integrating different perspectives and informational requirements when developing behavior-change interventions. The findings provide useful insights for designing a pregnancy-specific NRT adherence intervention that is acceptable to both those who will deliver and receive it.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a tailored text-message programme (MiQuit) for smoking cessation in pregnancy: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Smoking in pregnancy is a major international public health problem. Self-help support (SHS) increases the likelihood of women stopping smoking in pregnancy and delivering this kind of support by text message could be a cost-effective way to deliver SHS to pregnant women who smoke. SHS delivered by text message helps non-pregnant smokers to stop but the currently available message programmes are not appropriate for use in pregnancy. A randomised controlled trial (RCT) has demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of using a programme called 'MiQuit' to text SHS support to pregnant women who smoke. Another pilot RCT has shown that it would be feasible to run a larger, multi-centre trial within the UK National Health Service (NHS). The aim of this third RCT is to complete MiQuit's evaluation, demonstrating whether or not this is efficacious for smoking cessation in pregnancy. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a multi-centre, parallel-group RCT. Pregnant women aged over 16 years, of less than 25 weeks' gestation who smoke one or more daily cigarettes but smoked at least five daily cigarettes before pregnancy and who understand written English and are being identified in 24 English antenatal care hospitals. Participants are randomised to control or intervention groups in a 1:1 ratio stratified by gestation (< 16 weeks versus ≥ 16 weeks). All participants receive a leaflet on stopping smoking during pregnancy; they are also able to access standard NHS smoking cessation support. Intervention group women also receive the 12-week MiQuit programme of tailored, interactive text message, and self-help cessation support. Women are followed up by telephone at 4 weeks after randomisation and 36 weeks' gestation. The RCT will recruit 692 women (346 per group), enabling a 95% confidence interval for the difference in quit rates to be estimated within ± 3%. To determine whether or not MiQuit helps pregnant smokers to stop, intervention group quit rates from this trial will be combined with those from the two earlier trials in a Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) meta-analysis to derive a pooled efficacy estimate. DISCUSSION: If effective, MiQuit will be a cheap, cost-effective method to help pregnant women to stop smoking. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03231553 . Registered on 20 July 2017.

Knowledge and Education as Barriers and Facilitators to Nicotine Replacement Therapy Use for Smoking Cessation in Pregnancy: A Qualitative Study with Health Care Professionals.

Smoking during pregnancy is a leading cause of negative pregnancy and perinatal outcomes. While UK guidelines recommend nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for smoking cessation during pregnancy, adherence to NRT is generally low and may partially explain why NRT appears less effective in pregnancy compared to non-pregnant smokers. This study aimed to identify and describe factors associated with NRT adherence from a health professional's perspective. Two focus groups and one expert group were conducted with 26 professionals involved in antenatal stop smoking services and the data were analysed thematically using a template methodology. From our analyses, we extracted two main themes: (i) 'Barriers to NRT use in pregnancy' explores the issues of how misinformation and unrealistic expectations could discourage NRT use, while (ii) 'Facilitators to NRT use in pregnancy' describes the different information, and modes of delivery, that stop smoking professionals believe will encourage correct and sustained NRT use. Understanding the barriers and facilitators to improve NRT adherence may aid the development of educational interventions to encourage NRT use and improve outcomes for pregnant women wanting to stop smoking.

Large multi-centre pilot randomized controlled trial testing a low-cost, tailored, self-help smoking cessation text message intervention for pregnant smokers (MiQuit).

AIMS: To estimate the effectiveness of pregnancy smoking cessation support delivered by short message service (SMS) text message and key parameters needed to plan a definitive trial. DESIGN: Multi-centre, parallel-group, single-blinded, individual randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Sixteen antenatal clinics in England. PARTICIPANTS: Four hundred and seven participants were randomized to the intervention (n = 203) or usual care (n = 204). Eligible women were < 25 weeks gestation, smoked at least one daily cigarette (> 5 pre-pregnancy), were able to receive and understand English SMS texts and were not already using text-based cessation support. INTERVENTION: All participants received a smoking cessation leaflet; intervention participants also received a 12-week programme of individually tailored, automated, interactive, self-help smoking cessation text messages (MiQuit). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Seven smoking outcomes, including validated continuous abstinence from 4 weeks post-randomization until 36 weeks gestation, design parameters for a future trial and cost-per-quitter. FINDINGS: Using the validated, continuous abstinence outcome, 5.4% (11 of 203) of MiQuit participants were abstinent versus 2.0% (four of 204) of usual care participants [odds ratio (OR) = 2.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.93-9.35]. The Bayes factor for this outcome was 2.23. Completeness of follow-up at 36 weeks gestation was similar in both groups; provision of self-report smoking data was 64% (MiQuit) and 65% (usual care) and abstinence validation rates were 56% (MiQuit) and 61% (usual care). The incremental cost-per-quitter was £133.53 (95% CI = -£395.78 to 843.62). CONCLUSIONS: There was some evidence, although not conclusive, that a text-messaging programme may increase cessation rates in pregnant smokers when provided alongside routine NHS cessation care.

Adaptation and uptake evaluation of an SMS text message smoking cessation programme (MiQuit) for use in antenatal care.

OBJECTIVES: To adapt a tailored short message service (SMS) text message smoking cessation intervention (MiQuit) for use without active health professional endorsement in routine antenatal care settings, to estimate 'real-world' uptake and test the feasibility of its use. DESIGN: Single-site service evaluation. SETTING: A Nottinghamshire (UK) antenatal clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant women accessing the antenatal clinic (N=1750) over 6 months. INTERVENTION: A single-sheet A5 leaflet provided in the women's maternity notes folder describing the MiQuit text service. Similar materials were left on clinic desks and noticeboards. OUTCOME MEASURES: MiQuit activation requests and system interactions were logged for two time frames: 6 months (strict) and 8 months (extended). Local hospital data were used to estimate the denominator of pregnant smokers exposed to the materials. RESULTS: During the strict and extended time frames, 13 and 25 activation requests were received, representing 3% (95% CI 2% to 5%) and 4% (95% CI 3% to 6%) of estimated smokers, respectively. Only 11 (44%) of the 25 requesting activation sent a correctly formatted initiation text. Of those activating MiQuit, and invited to complete tailoring questions (used to tailor support), 6 (67%) completed all 12 questions by text or website and 5 (56%) texted a quit date to the system. Of the 11 activating MiQuit, 5 (45%, 95% CI 21% to 72%) stopped the programme prematurely. CONCLUSIONS: A low-intensity, cheap cessation intervention promoted at very low cost, resulted in a small but potentially impactful uptake rate by pregnant smokers.

Smoking in the home after childbirth: prevalence and determinants in an English cohort.

OBJECTIVES: Children's exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) is causally linked to childhood morbidity and mortality. Over 38% of English children (aged 4-15) whose parents are smokers are exposed to SHS in the home. Little is known about the prevalence of SHS exposure in the homes of young infants (≤3 months). This study aimed to estimate maternal self-reported prevalence of SHS exposure among infants of women who smoked just before or during pregnancy, and identify factors associated with exposure. SETTING: Primary Care, Nottingham, England. PARTICIPANTS: Current and recent ex-smoking pregnant women (n=850) were recruited in Nottingham, England. Women completed questionnaires at 8-26 weeks gestation and 3 months after childbirth. Data on smoking in the home 3 months after childbirth was available for 471 households. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Maternal-reported smoking in the home 3 months after childbirth. RESULTS: The prevalence of smoking in the home 3 months after childbirth was 16.3% (95% CI 13.2% to 19.8%) and after multiple imputation controlling for non-response 18.2% (95% CI 14.0% to 22.5%). 59% of mothers were current smokers; of these, 24% reported that smoking occurred in their home compared to 4.7% of non-smokers. In multivariable logistic regression, mothers smoking ≥11 cigarettes per day were 8.2 times (95% CI 3.4 to 19.6) more likely to report smoking in the home. Younger age, being of non-white ethnicity, increased deprivation and less negative attitudes towards SHS were also associated with smoking in the home. CONCLUSIONS: This survey of smoking in the home 3 months after childbirth found a lower prevalence than has been reported in older children. Interventions to support smoking mothers to quit, or to help them restrict smoking in the home, should target attitudinal change and address inequality relating to social disadvantage, younger age and non-white ethnic groups.

Cost-Effectiveness of Nicotine Patches for Smoking Cessation in Pregnancy: A Placebo Randomized Controlled Trial (SNAP).

INTRODUCTION: Smoking during pregnancy is the most important, preventable cause of adverse pregnancy outcomes including miscarriage, premature birth, and low birth weight with huge financial costs to the National Health Service. However, there are very few published economic evaluations of smoking cessation interventions in pregnancy and previous studies are predominantly U.S.-based and do not present incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). A number of studies have demonstrated cost-effectiveness of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in the general population, but this has yet to be tested among pregnant smokers. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken alongside the smoking, nicotine, and pregnancy trial to compare NRT patches plus behavioral support to behavioral support alone, for pregnant women who smoked. RESULTS: At delivery, biochemically verified quit rates were slightly higher at 9.4% in the NRT group compared to 7.6% in the control group (odds ratio = 1.26, 95% CI = 0.82-1.96), at an increased cost of around £90 per participant. Higher costs in the NRT group were mainly attributable to the cost of NRT patches (mean = £46.07). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio associated with NRT was £4,926 per quitter and a sensitivity analysis including only singleton births yielded an ICER of £4,156 per quitter. However, wide confidence intervals indicated a high level of uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: Without a specific willingness to pay threshold, and due to high levels of statistical uncertainty, it is hard to determine the cost-effectiveness of NRT in this population. Furthermore, future research should address compliance issues, as these may dilute any potential effects of NRT, thus reducing the cost-effectiveness.

Predictors of children's secondhand smoke exposure at home: a systematic review and narrative synthesis of the evidence.

BACKGROUND: Children's exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) has been causally linked to a number of childhood morbidities and mortalities. Over 50% of UK children whose parents are smokers are regularly exposed to SHS at home. No previous review has identified the factors associated with children's SHS exposure in the home. AIM: To identify by systematic review, the factors which are associated with children's SHS exposure in the home, determined by parent or child reports and/or biochemically validated measures including cotinine, carbon monoxide or home air particulate matter. METHODS: Electronic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, CINAHL and Web of Knowledge to July 2014, and hand searches of reference lists from publications included in the review were conducted. FINDINGS: Forty one studies were included in the review. Parental smoking, low socioeconomic status and being less educated were all frequently and consistently found to be independently associated with children's SHS exposure in the home. Children whose parents held more negative attitudes towards SHS were less likely to be exposed. Associations were strongest for parental cigarette smoking status; compared to children of non-smokers, those whose mothers or both parents smoked were between two and 13 times more likely to be exposed to SHS. CONCLUSION: Multiple factors are associated with child SHS exposure in the home; the best way to reduce child SHS exposure in the home is for smoking parents to quit. If parents are unable or unwilling to stop smoking, they should instigate smoke-free homes. Interventions targeted towards the socially disadvantaged parents aiming to change attitudes to smoking in the presence of children and providing practical support to help parents smoke outside the home may be beneficial.

The SNAP trial: a randomised placebo-controlled trial of nicotine replacement therapy in pregnancy--clinical effectiveness and safety until 2 years after delivery, with economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Smoking during pregnancy causes many adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes. Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is effective for cessation outside pregnancy but efficacy and safety in pregnancy are unknown. We hypothesised that NRT would increase smoking cessation in pregnancy without adversely affecting infants. OBJECTIVES: To compare (1) at delivery, the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness for achieving biochemically validated smoking cessation of NRT patches with placebo patches in pregnancy and (2) in infants at 2 years of age, the effects of maternal NRT patch use with placebo patch use in pregnancy on behaviour, development and disability. DESIGN: Randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial and economic evaluation with follow-up at 4 weeks after randomisation, delivery and until infants were 2 years old. Randomisation was stratified by centre and a computer-generated sequence was used to allocate participants using a 1 : 1 ratio. Participants, site pharmacies and all study staff were blind to treatment allocation. SETTING: Seven antenatal hospitals in the Midlands and north-west England. PARTICIPANTS: Women between 12 and 24 weeks' gestation who smoked ≥ 10 cigarettes a day before and ≥ 5 during pregnancy, with an exhaled carbon monoxide (CO) reading of ≥ 8 parts per million (p.p.m.). INTERVENTIONS: NRT patches (15 mg per 16 hours) or matched placebo as an 8-week course issued in two equal batches. A second batch was dispensed at 4 weeks to those abstinent from smoking. PARTICIPANTS: self-reported, prolonged abstinence from smoking between a quit date and childbirth, validated at delivery by CO measurement and/or salivary cotinine (COT) (primary outcome). Infants, at 2 years: absence of impairment, defined as no disability or problems with behaviour and development. Economic: cost per 'quitter'. RESULTS: One thousand and fifty women enrolled (521 NRT, 529 placebo). There were 1010 live singleton births and 12 participants had live twins, while there were 14 fetal deaths and no birth data for 14 participants. Numbers of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes were similar in trial groups, except for a greater number of caesarean deliveries in the NRT group. Smoking: all participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses; those lost to follow-up (7% for primary outcome) were assumed to be smoking. At 1 month after randomisation, the validated cessation rate was higher in the NRT group {21.3% vs. 11.7%, odds ratio [OR], [95% confidence interval (CI)] for cessation with NRT, 2.05 [1.46 to 2.88]}. At delivery, there was no difference between groups' smoking cessation rates: 9.4% in the NRT and 7.6% in the placebo group [OR (95% CI), 1.26 (0.82 to 1.96)]. Infants: at 2 years, analyses were based on data from 888 out of 1010 (87.9%) singleton infants (including four postnatal infant deaths) [445/503 (88.5%) NRT, 443/507 (87.4%) placebo] and used multiple imputation. In the NRT group, 72.6% (323/445) had no impairment compared with 65.5% (290/443) in placebo (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.86). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for NRT use was £4156 per quitter (£4926 including twins), but there was substantial uncertainty around these estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Nicotine replacement therapy patches had no enduring, significant effect on smoking in pregnancy; however, 2-year-olds born to women who used NRT were more likely to have survived without any developmental impairment. Further studies should investigate the clinical effectiveness and safety of higher doses of NRT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN07249128. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 54. See the NIHR Journals Library programme website for further project information.

Effect of nicotine patches in pregnancy on infant and maternal outcomes at 2 years: follow-up from the randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled SNAP trial.

BACKGROUND: The SNAP (Smoking and Nicotine in Pregnancy) trial compared nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) patches with placebo in pregnant smokers; although NRT doubled cessation rates in the first 4 weeks, by delivery no differences in maternal smoking or birth outcomes were noted. As a result, NRT used in standard doses during pregnancy is considered ineffective for smoking cessation. Subsequent effects of NRT on the children of treated mothers are unknown because no trials have investigated the effect of gestational NRT use beyond birth. To assess whether NRT use in pregnancy might cause harm to infants, we aimed to compare effects of NRT and placebo on infant development 2 years after delivery. METHODS: 1050 pregnant smokers aged 16-45 years, at 12-24 weeks' gestation, and smoking at least five cigarettes per day were recruited from seven hospitals in England between May 1, 2007, and Feb 26, 2010, and followed up until their infants were 2 years old. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive up to 8-weeks treatment with NRT (15 mg/16 h transdermal patches) or identically packaged and visually matched placebo patches (all patches manufactured by and purchased at market rate from United Pharmaceuticals, Amman, Jordan), issued as two 4-week supplies (521 for NRT group, 529 for placebo group) [Corrected]. Randomisation was stratified by site with participants, health-care professionals, and research staff masked to treatment allocation. The primary results for participants and infants at delivery were published in 2012; we present results from the trial cohort 2 years after birth. After delivery, questionnaires were posted to participants and, if there was no response, to family physicians. The primary outcome at 2 years was infants' survival without developmental impairment (ie, no disability or problems with behaviour or development). Treatment groups were compared on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered with Controlled-Trials.com, number ISRCTN07249128. FINDINGS: Questionnaires were returned at 2 years for 891 (88%) of 1010 live singleton births (445 of (88%) 503 given NRT and 446 (88%) of 507 given placebo). Because of missing data, developmental outcomes, including four infant deaths, were documented for 888 of (88%) 1010 singleton infants; 445 (88%) of 503 infants in NRT group and 443 (87%) of 507 infants in placebo. In the NRT group, 323 (73%) of 445 infants had no impairment compared with 290 (65%) of 443 infants in the placebo group (odds ratio [OR] 1.40, 95% CI 1.05-1.86, p=0.023). At 2 years, 15 (3%) of 521 mothers in the NRT group and nine (2%) of 529 mothers in the placebo groups self-reported prolonged smoking abstinence since a quit date set in pregnancy (OR 1.71, 95% CI 0.74-3.94, p=0.20). Adverse events were not collected after delivery, but previously reported adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes were similar in the two groups. INTERPRETATION: Infants born to women who used NRT for smoking cessation in pregnancy were more likely to have unimpaired development. NRT had no effect on prolonged abstinence from smoking but did cause a temporary doubling of smoking cessation shortly after randomisation during pregnancy, which could explain findings. If findings are confirmed by subsequent research, this has potential implications for the management of smoking in pregnancy. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

A randomized trial of nicotine-replacement therapy patches in pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Nicotine-replacement therapy is effective for smoking cessation outside pregnancy and its use is widely recommended during pregnancy. We investigated the efficacy and safety of nicotine patches during pregnancy. METHODS: We recruited participants from seven hospitals in England who were 16 to 50 years of age with pregnancies of 12 to 24 weeks' gestation and who smoked five or more cigarettes per day. Participants received behavioral cessation support and were randomly assigned to 8 weeks of treatment with active nicotine patches (15 mg per 16 hours) or matched placebo patches. The primary outcome was abstinence from the date of smoking cessation until delivery, as validated by measurement of exhaled carbon monoxide or salivary cotinine. Safety was assessed by monitoring for adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes. RESULTS: Of 1050 participants, 521 were randomly assigned to nicotine-replacement therapy and 529 to placebo. There was no significant difference in the rate of abstinence from the quit date until delivery between the nicotine-replacement and placebo groups (9.4% and 7.6%, respectively; unadjusted odds ratio with nicotine-replacement therapy, 1.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.82 to 1.96), although the rate was higher at 1 month in the nicotine-replacement group than in the placebo group (21.3% vs. 11.7%). Compliance was low; only 7.2% of women assigned to nicotine-replacement therapy and 2.8% assigned to placebo used patches for more than 1 month. Rates of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Adding a nicotine patch (15 mg per 16 hours) to behavioral cessation support for women who smoked during pregnancy did not significantly increase the rate of abstinence from smoking until delivery or the risk of adverse pregnancy or birth outcomes. However, low compliance rates substantially limited the assessment of safety. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN07249128.).