Background: Smoking is the primary preventable risk factor for disease and premature mortality. It is highly addictive and cessation attempts are often unsuccessful. Incentive-based programmes may be an effective method to reach sustained abstinence. Individualisation of incentives based on personal characteristics yields potential to further increase the effectiveness of incentive-based programmes.
Method: A randomised controlled trial among healthcare workers recruited through their employer and signed up for a group-based smoking cessation programme. The intervention under study is the provision of personalised incentives on validated smoking cessation at several time points after the smoking cessation programme. A total of 220 participants are required. Participants are randomised 1:1 into intervention (personalised incentives) or control (no incentives). All participants join the group-based programme. Incentives are provided on validated abstinence directly after the smoking cessation programme and after 3, 6 and 12 months.Incentives are provided according to four schemes:(1) Standard: total reward size €350, pay-out scheme: €50 (t=0), €50 (t=3 months), €50 (t=6 months) and €200 (t=12 months), (2) descending: total reward size €300, pay-out scheme: €150, €100, €50 and €0, (3) ascending: total reward size: €400, pay-out scheme: €0, €0, €50 and €350 and (4) deposit: total reward size €450, pay-out scheme: €50, €50, €150, €200; participants pay a €100 deposit, returned conditional on abstinence after 6 months.Advice on which incentive scheme suits participants best is based on willingness to provide a deposit, readiness to quit, nicotine dependency and long-term or short-term reward preference. Participants are free to deviate from this advice. Abstinence is validated at each time point, with 15 months of total follow-up. The primary end point is validated abstinence at 12 months. Effectiveness will be determined by intention-to-treat analysis.
Ethics And Dissemination: The Erasmus MC Medical Ethics Committee decided that according to the Dutch Human Research Law (WMO), the protocol required no formal ethical approval. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal and communicated to the participants.
Trial Registration Number: Netherlands Trial Register NL7711.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7482494 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037799 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Optimal Pathways to Lung Cancer Screening in Primary Care Settings: A Scoping Review.
Curr Oncol
December 2024
Department of Social Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Crete, 71500 Heraklion, Greece.
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, and delayed detection contributes to poor outcomes. Primary care plays a crucial role in early diagnosis, but detecting lung cancer early remains challenging for general practitioners (GPs). Therefore, the aim of this scoping review was to identify optimal strategies and pathways for lung cancer screening (LCS) in primary care settings globally.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFThe Connection Between Stress and Women's Smoking During the Perinatal Period: A Systematic Review.
Brain Sci
December 2024
Department of Clinical Psychology and Psychobiology, Faculty of Psychology, Institute of Psychology (IPsiUS), University of Santiago de Compostela, Campus Vida, 15782 Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Introduction: In women, smoking during pregnancy and the postpartum period has important consequences for maternal and infant health, and interventions to assist smoking cessation during this period are essential. Although smoking has been associated with the presence of mental health problems, few studies addressing the factors associated with perinatal smoking have examined the role of stress. The aim of this review was to identify the relationships between the presence of stress and smoking during pregnancy and the postpartum period.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFInvestigating Risk Factors for Racial Disparity in E-Cigarette Use with PATH Study.
Stats (Basel)
September 2024
Biostatistics and Data Sciences, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center School of Public Health, New Orleans, LA 70122, USA.
Background: Previous research has identified differences in e-cigarette use and socioeconomic factors between different racial groups However, there is little research examining specific risk factors contributing to the racial differences.
Objective: This study sought to identify racial disparities in e-cigarette use and to determine risk factors that help explain these differences.
Methods: We used Wave 5 (2018-2019) of the Adult Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study.
Implementation of stop smoking support by mental healthcare professionals: cross-sectional analysis of why nothing much happens.
Discov Ment Health
January 2025
Public Health and Primary Care, Leiden University Medical Center, Hippocratespad 21, PO Box 9600, 2300 RC, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Smoking is highly prevalent and persistent among people with mental illness, but implementation of smoking cessation care by mental healthcare professionals (MHCPs) is lagging behind. This study took a broad approach to understanding implementation of stop smoking support (SSS) by MHCPs (N = 220 for main analyses), incorporating background characteristics, psychosocial factors, client factors, and organizational/environmental factors. Variable selection was based on previous work and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFSupport for and likely impacts of endgame measures in the Smokefree Aotearoa Action Plan: findings from the 2020-2021 International Tobacco Control New Zealand (EASE) surveys.
N Z Med J
January 2025
Professor, Department of Public Health, University of Otago Wellington, Wellington.
Aim: In February 2024, the Aotearoa New Zealand Government repealed legislation to mandate very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs), greatly reduce the number of tobacco retailers and disallow sale of tobacco products to people born after 2008 (smokefree generation). We investigated acceptability and likely impacts of these measures among people who smoke or who recently (≤2 years) quit smoking.
Method: We analysed data from 1,230 participants from Wave 3 (conducted in late 2020 and early 2021) and 615 participants from Wave 3.
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!