Barriers and Facilitators to Staying Smoke-Free after Having a Baby, a Qualitative Study: Women's Views on Support Needed to Prevent Returning to Smoking Postpartum.

BACKGROUND: Postpartum return to smoking (PPRS) is a common and important public health problem. Interventions to prevent PPRS have not been shown to be effective. We aimed to qualitatively explore the barriers and facilitators to staying smoke-free after having a baby, and women's views on the support needed to avoid PPRS to inform future intervention development. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews (n = 26) with pregnant women who quit smoking (n = 9), and postpartum women who were abstinent at delivery and returned to smoking (n = 7) or stayed smoke-free (n = 10). Inductive thematic analysis was used. RESULTS: Five overarching themes were identified: (i) smoking intentions; (ii) facilitators to staying smoke-free; (iii) barriers to staying smoke-free; (iv) support to avoid relapse; and (v) e-cigarettes, nicotine replacement therapy, and varenicline. Facilitators to staying smoke-free were the health benefits to their baby, whilst barriers included stress, cravings, and being in environments where they would previously have smoked. Women wanted continuous offers of support to stay smoke-free throughout the extended postpartum period, with a particular interest in support for partners to quit smoking and self-help support. Women expressed safety concerns for e-cigarettes, nicotine replacement therapy, and varenicline. CONCLUSIONS: Offers of support to stay smoke-free should continue throughout the postpartum and engage with partners or other household members who smoke. Reassuring women about the relative safety of nicotine replacement therapy and e-cigarettes by a health professional, particularly for those who are breastfeeding, could be beneficial.

Addressing and Overcoming Barriers to E-Cigarette Use for Smoking Cessation in Pregnancy: A Qualitative Study.

E-cigarettes may have a role in supporting pregnant women who would otherwise smoke to stop smoking. The study aimed to understand pregnant women's vaping experiences, in particular how vaping to stop smoking is facilitated and how barriers to this are overcome. We conducted semi structured telephone interviews (n = 15) with pregnant or postpartum women who vaped during pregnancy, either exclusively (n = 10) or dual-used (n = 5) (smoked and vaped). Thematic analysis was used to analyse the interviews. Two themes emerged. First, 'facilitating beliefs': inherent beliefs that helped women overcome barriers to vaping. These included understanding the relative safety of vaping and economic gains compared with smoking and pregnancy being a motivator to stop smoking. Second, 'becoming a confident vaper': accumulating sufficient skill and confidence to comfortably vape. This included experimentation with e-cigarettes to ensure nicotine dependence and sensory needs were met. Seeking social support and employing strategies to address social stigma were also important. Positive beliefs about vaping and becoming proficient at vaping were viewed as ways to overcome barriers to vaping. The theoretical domain framework informed intervention recommendations to assist pregnant smokers who have tried but cannot stop smoking to switch to vaping.

Feasibility and Acceptability of 'Opt-In' Referrals for Stop Smoking Support in Pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend that following an early-pregnancy 'opt-out' referral for smoking cessation support, pregnant women who smoke should also be offered referrals at subsequent antenatal appointments ('opt-in' referrals). We assessed feasibility and acceptability of introducing 'opt-in' self-referral forms to stop smoking services (SSS) in antenatal clinics. METHOD: A 'before-after' service evaluation and qualitative interviews. 'Opt-in' self-referral forms were distributed by reception staff to women attending antenatal ultrasound appointments. We collected hospital/SSS data for the study period and a comparison period 12 months prior. Reception staff were interviewed and data analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Over 6500 women entered antenatal care in each period; ~15% smoked and ~50% of those who smoked were referred to SSS at their first appointment. In the study period, 17.4% of women completed 'opt-in' forms. Of these 17.3% smoked, and 23.1% of those who smoked requested a referral. The staff thought new procedures had minimal impact on workload, but were easy to forget. They believed the pathway would be better delivered by midwifery staff, with additional information/advice to improve engagement. CONCLUSIONS: 'Opt-in' referrals in later pregnancy result in significant numbers of women who smoke indicating interest in smoking cessation support. Additional training and support is necessary to motivate reception staff to oversee self-referral pen-and-paper procedures effectively.

Comparison of nicotine exposure during pregnancy when smoking and abstinent with nicotine replacement therapy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Smoking during pregnancy is strongly associated with negative pregnancy and perinatal outcomes. Some guidelines recommend nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for smoking cessation during pregnancy, but adherence with NRT is generally poor and could be partially explained by nicotine-related safety concerns. We compared pregnant women's cotinine and nicotine exposures from smoking with those when they were abstinent from smoking and using NRT. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis and narrative reporting. Twelve studies were included: in most, only one type of NRT was used. Seven were quality-assessed and judge of variable quality. SETTING: Studies from any setting that reported nicotine or cotinine levels when smoking and later when abstinent and using NRT. PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant women who smoked and became abstinent but used NRT either in a cessation study or in a study investigating other impacts of NRT. MEASUREMENTS: We quality-assessed longitudinal cohort studies using a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. For meta-analysis, we used mean within-person differences in cotinine or nicotine levels when smoking and at later follow-up when abstinent and using NRT. Where such data were not available, we calculated differences in group mean levels and reported these narratively, indicating where data were not completely longitudinal. FINDINGS: Of the 12 included studies, four cotinine-measuring studies (n = 83) were combined in a random effects meta-analysis; the pooled estimate for the mean difference (95% confidence intervals) in cotinine levels between when women were smoking and abstinent but using NRT was 75.3 (57.1 to 93.4) ng/ml (I2  = 42.1%, P = 0.11). Of eight narratively-described studies, six reported lower cotinine and/or nicotine levels when abstinent and using NRT; two had mixed findings, with higher levels when abstinent but using NRT reported from at least one assay time-point. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women who use nicotine replacement therapy instead of smoking reduce their nicotine exposure.

Antenatal Clinic and Stop Smoking Services Staff Views on "Opt-Out" Referrals for Smoking Cessation in Pregnancy: A Framework Analysis.

Introduction: UK guidance recommends routine exhaled carbon monoxide (CO) screening for pregnant women and "opt-out" referrals to stop smoking services (SSS) of those with CO ≥ 4 ppm. We explored staff views on this referral pathway when implemented in one UK hospital Trust. Methods: Seventeen semi-structured interviews with staff involved in the implementation of the new referral pathway: six antenatal clinic staff (before and after implementation); five SSS staff (after). Data were analyzed using framework analysis. Results: Two themes were identified: (1) views on implementation of the pathway and (2) impact of the pathway on the women. Generally, staff felt that following training, referrals were less arduous to implement and better received than expected. The majority believed this pathway helped engage women motivated to quit and offered a unique chance to impart smoking cessation knowledge to hard-to-reach women, who might not otherwise contact SSS. An unexpected issue arose during implementation-dealing with non-smokers with high CO readings. Conclusions: According to staff, the "opt-out" referral pathway is an acceptable addition to routine antenatal care. It can help engage hard-to-reach women and educate them about the dangers of smoking in pregnancy. Incorporating advice on dealing with non-smokers with high CO into routine staff training could help future implementations.