Financial incentives for increasing uptake of HPV vaccinations: a randomized controlled trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Mantzari E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4312136 | biostudies-other | 2015 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundHPV vaccination reduces the risk of cervical cancer. Uptake however, of the 'catch-up' campaign in England for 17-18 year old girls is below the 80% NHS target. The aim of this randomized controlled trial is to assess the impact of financial incentives on (a) the uptake and completion of an HPV vaccination programme and (b) the quality of the decisions to undertake the vaccination.Method/designOne thousand (n = 1000) 16-18 year-old girls will be invited to participate in an HPV vaccination programme: Five-hundred (n = 500) will have received a previous invitation to get vaccinated but will have failed to do so (previous non-attenders) and 500 will not have previously received an invitation (first-time invitees). Girls will be randomly selected from eligible participants who are registered with a GP in areas covered by the Birmingham East and North (BEN) and Heart of Birmingham Primary Care Trusts. The two samples of girls will be randomised to receive either a standard vaccination invitation letter or an invitation letter including the offer of vouchers worth £45 for receiving three vaccinations. Girls will also complete a questionnaire to assess the quality of their decisions to be vaccinated. The primary outcome will be uptake of the 1st and 3rd vaccinations. The secondary outcome will be the quality of the decisions to undertake the vaccination, measured by assessing attitudes towards and knowledge of the HPV vaccination.DiscussionThe key results will be: a) the effectiveness of financial incentives in increasing uptake of the 1st and 3rd vaccinations; b) the role of participants' socio-economic status in the moderation of the impact of incentives on uptake; and c) the impact of incentives on the quality of decisions to undertake the HPV vaccinations.
| S-EPMC3471042 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Home wireless device monitoring could play an important role in improving the health of patients with poorly controlled chronic diseases, but daily engagement rates among these patients may be low.To test the effectiveness of two different magnitudes of financial incentives for improving adherence to remote-monitoring regimens among patients with poorly controlled diabetes.Randomized, controlled trial. (Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01282957).Seventy-five patients with a hemoglobin A1c greater than or equal to 7.5% recruited from a Primary Care Medical Home practice at the University of Pennsylvania Health System.Twelve weeks of daily home-monitoring of blood glucose, blood pressure, and weight (control group; n?=?28); a lottery incentive with expected daily value of $2.80 (n?=?26) for daily monitoring; and a lottery incentive with expected daily value of $1.40 (n?=?21) for daily monitoring.Daily use of three home-monitoring devices during the three-month intervention (primary outcome) and during the three-month follow-up period and change in A1c over the intervention period (secondary outcomes).Incentive arm participants used devices on a higher proportion of days relative to control (81% low incentive vs. 58%, P?=?0.007; 77% high incentive vs. 58%, P?=?0.02) during the three-month intervention period. There was no difference in adherence between the two incentive arms (P?=?0.58). When incentives were removed, adherence in the high incentive arm declined while remaining relatively high in the low incentive arm. In month 6, the low incentive arm had an adherence rate of 62% compared to 35% in the high incentive arm (P?=?0.015) and 27% in the control group (P?=?0.002).A daily lottery incentive worth $1.40 per day improved monitoring rates relative to control and had significantly better efficacy once incentives were removed than a higher incentive.
| S-EPMC4000326 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Colorectal cancer screening rates are suboptimal, particularly among sociodemographically disadvantaged groups. Objective:To examine whether guaranteed money or probabilistic lottery financial incentives conditional on completion of colorectal cancer screening increase screening uptake, particularly among groups with lower screening rates. Design, Setting, and Participants:This parallel, 3-arm randomized clinical trial was conducted from March 13, 2017, through April 12, 2018, at 21 medical centers in an integrated health care system in western Washington. A total of 838 age-eligible patients overdue for colorectal cancer screening who completed a questionnaire that confirmed eligibility and included sociodemographic and psychosocial questions were enrolled. Interventions:Interventions were (1) mail only (n = 284; up to 3 mailings that included information on the importance of colorectal cancer screening and screening test choices, a fecal immunochemical test [FIT], and a reminder letter if necessary), (2) mail and monetary (n = 270; mailings plus guaranteed $10 on screening completion), or (3) mail and lottery (n = 284; mailings plus a 1 in 10 chance of receiving $50 on screening completion). Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was completion of any colorectal cancer screening within 6 months of randomization. Secondary outcomes were FIT or colonoscopy completion within 6 months of randomization. Intervention effects were compared across sociodemographic subgroups and self-reported psychosocial measures. Results:A total of 838 participants (mean [SD] age, 59.7 [7.2] years; 546 [65.2%] female; 433 [52.2%] white race and 101 [12.1%] Hispanic ethnicity) were included in the study. Completion of any colorectal screening was not significantly higher for the mail and monetary group (207 of 270 [76.7%]) or the mail and lottery group (212 of 284 [74.6%]) than for the mail only group (203 of 284 [71.5%]) (P = .11). For FIT completion, interventions had a statistically significant effect (P = .04), with a net increase of 7.7% (95% CI, 0.3%-15.1%) in the mail and monetary group and 7.1% (95% CI, -0.2% to 14.3%) in the mail and lottery group compared with the mail only group. For patients with Medicaid insurance, the net increase compared with mail only in FIT completion for the mail and monetary or the mail and lottery group was 37.7% (95% CI, 11.0%-64.3%) (34.2% for the mail and monetary group and 40.4% for the mail and lottery group) compared with a net increase of only 5.6% (95% CI, -0.9% to 12.2%) among those not Medicaid insured (test for interaction P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance:Financial incentives increased FIT uptake but not overall colorectal cancer screening. Financial incentives may decrease screening disparities among some sociodemographically disadvantaged groups. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00697047.
| S-EPMC6789432 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction:Three-quarters of homeless people smoke cigarettes. Financial incentives for smoking abstinence have appeared promising in nonexperimental studies of homeless smokers, but randomized controlled trial (RCT) data are lacking. Methods:We conducted a pilot RCT of financial incentives for homeless smokers. Incentive arm participants (N = 25) could earn escalating $15-$35 rewards for brief smoking abstinence (exhaled carbon monoxide <8 parts per million) assessed 14 times over 8 weeks. Control arm participants (N = 25) were given $10 at each assessment regardless of abstinence. All participants were offered nicotine patches and counseling. The primary outcome was a repeated measure of brief smoking abstinence across 14 assessments. The secondary outcome was brief abstinence at 8 weeks. Exploratory outcomes were self-reported 1-day and 7-day abstinence from (1) any cigarette and (2) any puff of a cigarette. Other outcomes included 24-hour quit attempts, nicotine patch use, counseling attendance, and changes in alcohol and drug use. Results:Compared to control, incentive arm participants were more likely to achieve brief abstinence overall (odds ratio 7.28, 95% confidence interval 2.89 to 18.3) and at 8 weeks (48% vs. 8%, p = .004). Similar effects were seen for 1-day abstinence, but 7-day puff abstinence was negligible in both arms. Incentive arm participants made more quit attempts (p = .03). Nicotine patch use and counseling attendance were not significantly different between the groups. Alcohol and drug use did not change significantly in either group. Conclusions:Among homeless smokers, financial incentives increased brief smoking abstinence and quit attempts without worsening substance use. This approach merits further development focused on promoting sustained abstinence. Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02565381). Implications:Smoking is common among homeless people, and conventional tobacco treatment strategies have yielded modest results in this population. This pilot RCT suggests that financial incentives may be a safe way to promote brief smoking abstinence and quit attempts in this vulnerable group of smokers. However, further development is necessary to translate this approach into real-world settings and to promote sustained periods of smoking abstinence.
| S-EPMC6236071 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Data on the effectiveness of employer-sponsored financial incentives for employee weight loss are limited.To test the effectiveness of 2 financial incentive designs for promoting weight loss among obese employees.Randomized, controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01208350)Children's Hospital of Philadelphia.105 employees with a body mass index between 30 and 40 kg/m2.24 weeks of monthly weigh-ins (control group; n = 35); individual incentive, designed as $100 per person per month for meeting or exceeding weight-loss goals (n = 35); and group incentive, designed as $500 per month split among participants within groups of 5 who met or exceeded weight-loss goals (n = 35).Weight loss after 24 weeks (primary outcome) and 36 weeks and changes in behavioral mediators of weight loss (secondary outcomes).Group-incentive participants lost more weight than control participants (mean between-group difference, 4.4 kg [95% CI, 2.0 to 6.7 kg]; P < 0.001) and individual-incentive participants (mean between-group difference, 3.2 kg [CI, 0.9 to 5.5 kg]; P = 0.008). Twelve weeks after incentives ended and after adjustment for 3-group comparisons, group-incentive participants maintained greater weight loss than control group participants (mean between-group difference, 2.9 kg [CI, 0.5 to 5.3 kg]; P = 0.016) but not greater than individual-incentive participants (mean between-group difference, 2.7 kg [CI, 0.4 to 5.0 kg]; P = 0.024).Single employer and short follow-up.A group-based financial incentive was more effective than an individual incentive and monthly weigh-ins at promoting weight loss among obese employees at 24 weeks.National Institute on Aging.
| S-EPMC3994977 | biostudies-literature
Project description:More than half of adults in the United States do not attain the minimum recommended level of physical activity to achieve health benefits. The optimal design of financial incentives to promote physical activity is unknown.To compare the effectiveness of individual versus team-based financial incentives to increase physical activity.Randomized, controlled trial comparing three interventions to control.Three hundred and four adult employees from an organization in Philadelphia formed 76 four-member teams.All participants received daily feedback on performance towards achieving a daily 7000 step goal during the intervention (weeks 1- 13) and follow-up (weeks 14- 26) periods. The control arm received no other intervention. In the three financial incentive arms, drawings were held in which one team was selected as the winner every other day during the 13-week intervention. A participant on a winning team was eligible as follows: $50 if he or she met the goal (individual incentive), $50 only if all four team members met the goal (team incentive), or $20 if he or she met the goal individually and $10 more for each of three teammates that also met the goal (combined incentive).Mean proportion of participant-days achieving the 7000 step goal during the intervention.Compared to the control group during the intervention period, the mean proportion achieving the 7000 step goal was significantly greater for the combined incentive (0.35 vs. 0.18, difference: 0.17, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.07-0.28, p <0.001) but not for the individual incentive (0.25 vs 0.18, difference: 0.08, 95 % CI: -0.02-0.18, p?=?0.13) or the team incentive (0.17 vs 0.18, difference: -0.003, 95 % CI: -0.11-0.10, p?=?0.96). The combined incentive arm participants also achieved the goal at significantly greater rates than the team incentive (0.35 vs. 0.17, difference: 0.18, 95 % CI: 0.08-0.28, p?<?0.001), but not the individual incentive (0.35 vs. 0.25, difference: 0.10, 95 % CI: -0.001-0.19, p?=?0.05). Only the combined incentive had greater mean daily steps than control (difference: 1446, 95 % CI: 448-2444, p ? 0.005). There were no significant differences between arms during the follow-up period (weeks 14- 26).Financial incentives rewarded for a combination of individual and team performance were most effective for increasing physical activity.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02001194.
| S-EPMC4907949 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundExcessive gestational weight gain (GWG) is common and can result in maternal and child health complications. Pragmatic behavioral interventions that can be incorporated into standard obstetric care are needed, and financial incentives are a promising approach.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of recruitment, randomization, and retention, as well as treatment engagement and intervention satisfaction, in a behavioral program. The program provided small incentives for meeting behavioral goals of self-weighing and physical activity as well as larger outcome incentives for meeting GWG goals.MethodsWe recruited 40 adult women in their first trimester of pregnancy from February 2019 to September 2019 at an obstetric clinic. Participants were randomized to 3 intervention components using a 2×2×2 factorial design: daily incentives for self-weighing (lottery vs certain loss), incentives for adhering to the Institute of Medicine's GWG guidelines based on BMI category (monthly vs overall), and incentives for reaching physical activity goals (yes vs no). Participants were asked to complete daily weigh-ins using the Withings Body wireless scale provided by the study, as well as wear a physical activity tracker (Fitbit Flex 2). Feasibility outcomes of recruitment, randomization, and retention, as well as treatment engagement and intervention satisfaction, were assessed. Weight assessments were conducted at baseline, 32-week gestation, and 36-week gestation.ResultsParticipants were enrolled at, on average, 9.6 (SD 1.8) weeks' gestation. Of the 39 participants who were oriented to their condition and received the intervention, 24 (62%) were Black or African American, 30 (77%) were not married, and 29 (74%) had an annual household income of less than US $50,000. Of the 39 participants, 35 (90%) completed the follow-up data collection visit. Participants were generally quite positive about the intervention components, with a particular emphasis on the helpfulness of, and the enjoyment of using, the e-scale in both the quantitative and qualitative feedback. Participants who received the loss incentive, on average, had 2.86 times as many days of self-weighing as those who received the lottery incentive. Participants had a relatively low level of activity, with no difference between those who received a physical activity incentive and those who did not.ConclusionsA financial incentive-based pragmatic intervention was feasible and acceptable for pregnant women for promoting self-weighing, physical activity, and healthy GWG. Participants were successfully recruited early in their first trimester of pregnancy and retained for follow-up data collection in the third trimester. Participants demonstrated promising engagement in self-weighing, particularly with loss-based incentives, and reported finding the self-weighing especially helpful. This study supports further investigation of pragmatic, clinic-based financial incentive-based interventions for healthy GWG behaviors.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03834194; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03834194.
| S-EPMC8742213 | biostudies-literature
Project description:American Indians (AI) have high prevalence of diabetes in youth and may benefit from increasing physical activity as a strategy to improve metabolic health. We tested whether financial incentives would elicit greater frequency and/or duration of exercise in AI youth at high risk for developing diabetes. Overweight/obese AI boys and girls, 11-20 years old, were instructed to exercise on 3 days/week for 48 weeks at a tribal wellness center. The program was divided into three, 16-week-long phases to test different financial incentive strategies. Within each phase participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups that received different payments for exercise. Phase 1 was designed to test whether the size of the incentive would affect exercise frequency. In Phase 1, the number of exercise sessions did not differ between the group receiving a modest fixed-value payment per exercise session and the group receiving enhanced incentives to exercise more frequently (26 ± 3 versus 28 ± 2 sessions, respectively, p = 0.568). In Phase 2, the provision of an enhanced financial incentive to increase exercise duration resulted longer sessions, as the incentivized and standard payment groups exercised 38 ± 2 versus 29 ± 1 minutes per session (p = 0.002), respectively. In Phase 3, the effect of reducing the incentives on maintenance of exercise behaviors was inconclusive due to high participant withdrawal. Aerobic fitness increased 10% during Phase 1 but was unchanged thereafter. Insulin sensitivity and body composition were unchanged during the study. In conclusion, enhanced financial incentives increased the duration of exercise sessions, but had minimal effects on exercise participation. These results indicate that financial incentives hold promise in motivating previously sedentary, overweight/obese adolescents to exercise longer, but motivating them to sustain an exercise program remains the major challenge. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01848353.
| S-EPMC5983431 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Behavioral economic approaches could increase uptake for colorectal cancer screening. We performed a randomized controlled trial of 2245 employees to determine whether an email containing a phone number for scheduling (control), an email with the active choice to opt in or opt out (active choice), or the active choice email plus a $100 incentive (financial incentive) increased colonoscopy completion within 3 months. Higher proportions of participants in the financial incentive group underwent screening (3.7%) than in the control (1.6%) or active choice groups (1.5%) (P = .01 and P < .01). We found no difference in uptake of screening between the active choice and control groups (P = .88). The $100 conditional incentive modestly but significantly increased colonoscopy use. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02660671.
| S-EPMC5669820 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesFinancial incentive programs are effective in increasing physical activity for overweight, ambulatory adults. We sought to determine the potential effect size and direction of financial incentives on ambulation after radical cystectomy.Materials and methodsWe performed a pilot randomized controlled trial of daily financial incentives to meet postoperative step goals among adults with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤2 who underwent radical cystectomy for bladder cancer at a single center. Step counts were measured over a 3- to 14-day preoperative period and 30-day postoperative period using a wearable activity monitor. Postoperative daily step goals of 10%, 25%, 40%, and 55% of mean preoperative daily step counts were set for postoperative weeks 1 through 4, respectively. The primary outcome was the number of postoperative days on which the step goals were met. Secondary outcomes included the number of daily postoperative steps taken and the length of stay. Participants randomized to the intervention arm received $1.50 for every day the goal was met with a 20% chance of a $100 reward if the step goal was met on >75% of the first 30 postoperative days. Questionnaires assessing self-reported physical activity, disability, and social support were administered preoperatively at 30 days postoperatively.ResultsThirty-three patients were analyzed, 11 in the control and 22 in the intervention arms. There were no statistically significant differences between incentive and control arms for the primary outcome (4.5/30 days vs. 9/30 days, P = 0.53). Results after adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics were similar (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.24-4.19, P = 1.00). There were also no differences in average daily postoperative steps (median 979 vs. 1191, 95% CI -810 to 1,400, P = 0.59), length of stay (7.5 vs. 7, 95% CI -2.7 to 5.1, P = 0.56), or self-reported measures of disability, activity, and social support.ConclusionsWhile this trial was a pilot study and not powered to detect a difference between groups, there was no suggestion of any clinically important impact of this financial incentive on postoperative ambulation. While a fully-powered trial is feasible, given the small range of plausible benefit, such a trial would be unlikely to influence clinical practice.
| S-EPMC8184881 | biostudies-literature