Dataset Information

Examining two different schedules of financial incentives for smoking cessation among pregnant women.

ABSTRACT: To examine whether an efficacious voucher-based incentives intervention for decreasing smoking during pregnancy and increasing fetal growth could be improved without increasing costs. The strategy was to redistribute the usual incentives so that higher values were available early in the quit attempt.118 pregnant smokers in greater Burlington, Vermont (studied December, 2006-June, 2012) were randomly assigned to the revised contingent voucher (RCV) or usual contingent voucher (CV) schedule of abstinence-contingent vouchers, or to a non-contingent voucher (NCV) control condition wherein vouchers were provided independent of smoking status. Smoking status was biochemically verified; serial sonographic estimates of fetal growth were obtained at gestational weeks 30-34.RCV and CV conditions increased point-prevalence abstinence above NCV levels at early (RCV: 40%, CV: 46%, NCV: 13%, p=.007) and late-pregnancy (RCV: 45%; CV: 36%; NCV, 18%; p=.04) assessments, but abstinence levels did not differ between the RCV and CV conditions. The RCV intervention did not increase fetal growth above control levels while the CV condition did so (p<.05).This trial further supports the efficacy of CV for increasing antepartum abstinence and fetal growth, but other strategies (e.g., increasing overall incentive values) will be necessary to improve outcomes further.

SUBMITTER: Higgins ST

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4183736 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Examining two different schedules of financial incentives for smoking cessation among pregnant women.

Higgins Stephen T ST Washio Yukiko Y Lopez Alexa A AA Heil Sarah H SH Solomon Laura J LJ Lynch Mary Ellen ME Hanson Jennifer D JD Higgins Tara M TM Skelly Joan M JM Redner Ryan R Bernstein Ira M IM

Preventive medicine 20140402

<h4>Objective</h4>To examine whether an efficacious voucher-based incentives intervention for decreasing smoking during pregnancy and increasing fetal growth could be improved without increasing costs. The strategy was to redistribute the usual incentives so that higher values were available early in the quit attempt.<h4>Method</h4>118 pregnant smokers in greater Burlington, Vermont (studied December, 2006-June, 2012) were randomly assigned to the revised contingent voucher (RCV) or usual contin ...[more]

PMID: 24704135

Similar Datasets

Project description:We report results from a single-blinded randomized controlled trial examining financial incentives for smoking cessation among 249 pregnant and newly postpartum women. Participants included 169 women assigned to best practices (BP) or BP plus financial incentives (BP + FI) for smoking cessation available through 12-weeks postpartum. A third condition included 80 never-smokers (NS) sociodemographically-matched to women who smoked. Trial setting was Burlington, Vermont, USA, January, 2014 through January, 2020. Outcomes included 7-day point-prevalence abstinence antepartum and postpartum, and birth and other infant outcomes during 1st year of life. Reliability and external validity of results were assessed using pooled results from the current and four prior controlled trials coupled with data on maternal-smoking status and birth outcomes for all 2019 singleton live births in Vermont. Compared to BP, BP + FI significantly increased abstinence early- (AOR = 9.97; 95%CI, 3.32-29.93) and late-pregnancy (primary outcome, AOR = 5.61; 95%CI, 2.37-13.28) and through 12-weeks postpartum (AOR = 2.46; CI,1.05-5.75) although not 24- (AOR = 1.31; CI,0.54-3.17) or 48-weeks postpartum (AOR = 1.33; CI,0.55-3.25). There was a significant effect of trial condition on small-for-gestational-age (SGA) deliveries (χ2 [2] = 9.01, P = .01), with percent SGA deliveries (+SEM) greatest in BP, intermediate in BP + FI, and lowest in NS (17.65 + 4.13, 10.81 + 3.61, and 2.53 + 1.77, respectively). Reliability analyses supported the efficacy of financial incentives for increasing abstinence antepartum and postpartum and decreasing SGA deliveries; external-validity analyses supported relationships between antepartum cessation and SGA risk. Adding financial incentives to Best Practice increases smoking cessation among antepartum and postpartum women and improves other maternal-infant outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02210832.

Project description:IntroductionFinancial incentives effectively increase smoking cessation rates, but it is unclear via which psychological mechanisms incentives influence quit behavior. The current study examines how receiving financial incentives for smoking cessation leads to quitting smoking and investigates several mediators and moderators of that relationship.Aims and methodsThe study sample consisted of 604 tobacco-smoking employees from 61 companies in the Netherlands who completed a baseline and follow-up questionnaire. The current study is a secondary analysis from a cluster randomized trial where employees received smoking cessation group counseling at the workplace. Participants in the intervention group additionally received financial incentives of €350 in total for 12-month continuous smoking abstinence. We used a two-level path analysis to test a model that assesses the effects of financial incentives through smoking cessation program evaluation, medication use, nicotine replacement use, attitudes, self-efficacy, and social influences on quit success. We additionally tested whether an individual's reward responsiveness moderated the influence of incentives on quit success.ResultsThe effect of financial incentives on quit success was mediated by a higher self-efficacy. Financial incentives were also associated with a higher use of cessation medication. A more positive program evaluation was related to higher self-efficacy, more social influence to quit, and more positive attitudes about quitting. The results did not differ significantly by individual reward responsiveness.ConclusionsThe results of the current study suggest that financial incentives may be used to increase medication use and self-efficacy for quitting smoking, which offers an indirect way to increase successful smoking cessation.Implications(1) This is the first study investigating via which psychological pathways financial incentives for quitting smoking can lead to long-term quit success. (2) The results showed a path between financial incentives and a higher likelihood of medication use. Incentives may encourage smokers to use medication in order to increase their chance of quitting smoking and receive the reward. (3) There was a path from financial incentives to quit success via a higher self-efficacy. (4) The effects of financial incentives did not depend on individual reward responsiveness.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of financial incentives dependent on continuous smoking abstinence on smoking cessation and birth outcomes among pregnant smokers.DesignSingle blind, randomised controlled trial.SettingFinancial Incentive for Smoking Cessation in Pregnancy (FISCP) trial in 18 maternity wards in France.Participants460 pregnant smokers aged at least 18 years who smoked ≤5 cigarettes/day or ≤3 roll-your-own cigarettes/day and had a pregnancy gestation of <18 weeks were randomised to a financial incentives group (n=231) or a control group (n=229).InterventionsParticipants in the financial incentives group received a voucher equivalent to €20 (£17; $23), and further progressively increasing vouchers at each study visit if they remained abstinent. Participants in the control group received no financial incentive for abstinence. All participants received a €20 show-up fee at each of six visits.Main outcome measuresThe main outcome measure was continuous smoking abstinence from the first post-quit date visit to visit 6, before delivery. Secondary outcomes in the mothers were point prevalence abstinence, time to smoking relapse, withdrawal symptoms, blood pressure, and alcohol and cannabis use in past 30 days. Secondary outcomes in the babies were gestational age at birth, birth characteristics (birth weight, length, head circumference, Apgar score), and a poor neonatal outcome-a composite measure of transfer to the neonatal unit, congenital malformation, convulsions, or perinatal death.ResultsMean age was 29 years. In the financial incentives and control groups, respectively, 137 (59%) and 148 (65%) were employed, 163 (71%) and 171 (75%) were in a relationship, and 41 (18%) and 31 (13%) were married. The participants had smoked a median of 60 cigarettes in the past seven days. The continuous abstinence rate was significantly higher in the financial incentives group (16%, 38/231) than control group (7%, 17/229): odds ratio 2.45 (95% confidence interval 1.34 to 4.49), P=0.004). The point prevalence abstinence rate was higher (4.61, 1.41 to 15.01, P=0.011), the median time to relapse was longer (visit 5 (interquartile range 3-6) and visit 4 (3-6), P<0.001)), and craving for tobacco was lower (β=-1.81, 95% confidence interval -3.55 to -0.08, P=0.04) in the financial incentives group than control group. Financial incentives were associated with a 7% reduction in the risk of a poor neonatal outcome: 4 babies (2%) in the financial incentives group and 18 babies (9%) in the control group: mean difference 14 (95% confidence interval 5 to 23), P=0.003. Post hoc analyses suggested that more babies in the financial incentives group had birth weights ≥2500 g than in the control group: unadjusted odds ratio 1.95 (95% confidence interval 0.99 to 3.85), P=0.055; sex adjusted odds ratio 2.05 (1.03 to 4.10), P=0.041; and sex and prematurity adjusted odds ratio 2.06 (0.90 to 4.71), P=0.086. As these are post hoc analyses, the results should be interpreted with caution.ConclusionsFinancial incentives to reward smoking abstinence compared with no financial incentives were associated with an increased abstinence rate in pregnant smokers. Financial incentives dependent on smoking abstinence could be implemented as a safe and effective intervention to help pregnant smokers quit smoking.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02606227.

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine effectiveness, cost effectiveness, generalisability, and acceptability of financial incentives for smoking cessation during pregnancy in addition to variously organised UK stop smoking services.DesignPragmatic, multicentre, single blinded, phase 3, randomised controlled trial (Cessation in Pregnancy Incentives Trial phase 3 (CPIT III)).SettingSeven UK stop smoking services provided in primary and secondary care facilities in Scotland, Northern Ireland, and England.Participants944 pregnant women (age ≥16 years) who self-reported as being smokers (at least one cigarette in the past week) when asked at first maternity visit, less than 24 weeks' gestation, and notified to the trial team by routine stop smoking services.InterventionsParticipants in the control group were offered the standard stop smoking services, which includes the offer of counselling by specially trained workers using withdrawal orientated therapy and the offer of free nicotine replacement therapy. The intervention was the offer of usual support from the stop smoking services and the addition of up to £400 ($440; €455) of LoveToShop financial voucher incentives for engaging with current stop smoking services or to stop smoking, or both, during pregnancy.Main outcome measuresSelf-reported smoking cessation in late pregnancy (between 34 and 38 weeks' gestation) corroborated by saliva cotinine (and anabasine if using nicotine replacement products). Results were adjusted for age, smoking years, index of multiple deprivation, Fagerström score, before or after covid, and recruitment site. Secondary outcomes included point and continuous abstinence six months after expected date of delivery, engagement with stop smoking services, biochemically validated abstinence from smoking at four weeks after stop smoking date, birth weight of baby, cost effectiveness, generalisability documenting formats of stop smoking services, and acceptability to pregnant women and their carers.ResultsFrom 9 January 2018 to 4 April 2020, of 4032 women screened by stop smoking services, 944 people were randomly assigned to the intervention group (n=471) or the control group (n=470). Three people asked for their data to be removed. 126 (27%) of 471 participants stopped smoking from the intervention group and 58 (12%) of 470 from the control group (adjusted odds ratio 2.78 (1.94 to 3.97) P<0.001). Serious adverse events were miscarriages and other expected pregnancy events requiring hospital admission; all serious adverse events were unrelated to the intervention. Most people who stopped smoking from both groups relapsed after their baby was born.ConclusionsThe offer of up to £400 of financial voucher incentives to stop smoking during pregnancy as an addition to current UK stop smoking services is highly effective. This bolt-on intervention supports new guidance from the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, which includes the addition of financial incentives to support pregnant women to stop smoking. Continuing incentives to 12 months after birth is being examined to prevent relapse.Trial registrationISRCTN Registry ISRCTN15236311.

Project description:Cigarette smoking during pregnancy increases risk for pregnancy complications, growth restriction, and other adverse health outcomes. The most effective intervention for reducing smoking during pregnancy is financial incentives contingent on biochemically-verified smoking abstinence. The present study examined the efficacy of a smartphone-based intervention whereby smoking monitoring and incentive delivery occurred remotely using a mobile app. If efficacious, this remote intervention would allow pregnant women residing in geographically remote areas to benefit from incentives-based cessation interventions. Sixty U.S. pregnant smokers were recruited between May 2018 to May 2019 via obstetrical clinics, Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) offices, and Facebook. Participants were assigned sequentially to one of two treatments: best practices alone (N = 30) or best practices plus financial incentives (N = 30). Outcomes were analyzed using repeated measures analysis based on generalized estimating equations (GEE). Seven-day point prevalence abstinence rates were greater in the incentives versus best practices arms early- (46.7% vs 20.0%, OR = 3.50, 95%CI = 1.11,11.02) and late-antepartum (36.7% vs 13.3%, OR = 3.76, 95%CI = 1.04,13.65), and four- (36.7% vs 10.0%, OR = 5.21, 95%CI = 1.28,21.24) and eight-weeks postpartum (40.0% vs 6.7%, OR = 9.33, 95%CI = 1.87,46.68), although not at the 12- (23.3% vs 10.0%, OR = 2.74, 95%CI = 0.63,11.82) or 24-week (20.0% vs 6.7%, OR = 3.50, 95%CI = 0.65,18.98) postpartum assessments likely due to this pilot study being underpowered for discerning differences at the later assessments, especially 24-weeks postpartum which was three months after treatment completion. These results support the efficacy of this remote, incentives-based intervention for pregnant smokers. Further research evaluating its efficacy and cost-effectiveness in a well-powered, randomized controlled trial appears warranted.

Dataset Information

Examining two different schedules of financial incentives for smoking cessation among pregnant women.

Publications

Examining two different schedules of financial incentives for smoking cessation among pregnant women.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets