Acceptability of financial incentives for health behaviour change to public health policymakers: a qualitative study

Abstract Background Providing financial incentives contingent on healthy behaviours is one way to encourage healthy behaviours. However, there remains substantial concerns with the acceptability of health promoting financial incentives (HPFI). Previous research has studied acceptability of HPFI to the public, recipients and practitioners. We are not aware of any previous work that has focused particularly on the views of public health policymakers. Our aim was to explore the views of public health policymakers on whether or not HPFI are acceptable; and what, if anything, could be done to maximise acceptability of HPFI. Methods We recruited 21 local, regional and national policymakers working in England via gatekeepers and snowballing. We conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews with participants exploring experiences of, and attitudes towards, HPFI. We analysed data using the Framework approach. Results Public health policymakers working in England acknowledged that HPFI could be a useful behaviour change tool, but were not overwhelmingly supportive of them. In particular, they raised concerns about effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, potential ‘gaming’, and whether or not HPFI address the underlying causes of unhealthy behaviours. Shopping voucher rewards, of smaller value, targeted at deprived groups were particularly acceptable to policymakers. Participants were particularly concerned about the response of other stakeholders to HPFI – including the public, potential recipients, politicians and the media. Overall, the interviews reflected three tensions. Firstly, a tension between wanting to trust individuals and promote responsibility; and distrust around the potential for ‘gaming the system’. Secondly, a tension between participants’ own views about HPFI; and their concerns about the possible views of other stakeholders. Thirdly, a tension between participants’ personal distaste of HPFI; and their professional view that they could be a valuable behaviour change tool. Conclusions There are aspects of design that influence acceptability of financial incentive interventions to public health policymakers. However, it is not clear that even interventions designed to maximise acceptability would be acceptable enough to be recommended for implementation. Further work may be required to help policymakers understand the potential responses of other stakeholder groups to financial incentive interventions

The Effectiveness of Financial Incentives for Health Behaviour Change: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Financial incentive interventions have been suggested as one method of promoting healthy behaviour change.To conduct a systematic review of the effectiveness of financial incentive interventions for encouraging healthy behaviour change; to explore whether effects vary according to the type of behaviour incentivised, post-intervention follow-up time, or incentive value.Searches were of relevant electronic databases, research registers, www.google.com, and the reference lists of previous reviews; and requests for information sent to relevant mailing lists.Controlled evaluations of the effectiveness of financial incentive interventions, compared to no intervention or usual care, to encourage healthy behaviour change, in non-clinical adult populations, living in high-income countries, were included.The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess all included studies. Meta-analysis was used to explore the effect of financial incentive interventions within groups of similar behaviours and overall. Meta-regression was used to determine if effect varied according to post-intervention follow up time, or incentive value.Seventeen papers reporting on 16 studies on smoking cessation (n = 10), attendance for vaccination or screening (n = 5), and physical activity (n = 1) were included. In meta-analyses, the average effect of incentive interventions was greater than control for short-term (≤ six months) smoking cessation (relative risk (95% confidence intervals): 2.48 (1.77 to 3.46); long-term (>six months) smoking cessation (1.50 (1.05 to 2.14)); attendance for vaccination or screening (1.92 (1.46 to 2.53)); and for all behaviours combined (1.62 (1.38 to 1.91)). There was not convincing evidence that effects were different between different groups of behaviours. Meta-regression found some, limited, evidence that effect sizes decreased as post-intervention follow-up period and incentive value increased. However, the latter effect may be confounded by the former.The available evidence suggests that financial incentive interventions are more effective than usual care or no intervention for encouraging healthy behaviour change.PROSPERO CRD42012002393

Early surgery versus initial conservative treatment in patients with traumatic intracerebral haemorrhage [STITCH(Trauma)] : the first randomized trial

Acknowledgements This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme (project number 07/37/16). The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the HTA programme, NIHR, NHS or the Department of Health.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Perceived influences on smoking behaviour and perceptions of dentist‐delivered smoking cessation advice: A qualitative interview study

Objectives: Many factors lead to the commencement and maintenance of smoking, and better understanding of these is relevant in the management of oral health, particularly as smoking cessation advice (SCA) from the dental team is a key component of patient care. Whereas most previous research has focused on dental professionals’ perceptions of providing SCA, and identified facilitators and barriers to its provision, there has been more limited research focusing on patients’ perceptions of receiving SCA in the dental context. Accordingly, this study aimed to explore the views of smokers with periodontitis receiving dentist-delivered SCA. Methods: One-to-one, semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 28 adults who smoked tobacco and had recently received SCA during dentist-delivered periodontal therapy. Participants were sampled to reflect a range of ages and smoking behaviours. The interview schedule was based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to explore perceived influences on smoking behaviour. Interviews also elicited participants’ views on dentist-delivered SCA. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically, drawing on the TDF. Results: A broad range of perceived influences on smoking behaviour emerged from the data. Influences were allocated into seven prominent TDF domains: (i) social influences (family and friends, social pressures); (ii) social/professional role and identity (secret smoking); (iii) knowledge (experiences/perceptions of smoking cessation medications); (iv) environmental context and resources (social, home and workplace environment, cost of smoking, resentment towards authority); (v) emotions (stress management, pleasure of smoking and fear of quitting); (vi) nature of the behaviour (habitual nature, link to other behaviours, smell); and (vii) beliefs about consequences (health). With regard to views on dentist-delivered SCA, five main themes emerged: (i) opportunistic nature; (ii) personal impact and tangible prompts; (iii) positive context of cessation attempt; (iv) lack of previous support; and (v) differences between dentist-delivered SCA and other setting SCA. Conclusions: Smokers with periodontitis consider that a wide range of factors influence their smoking behaviour. Dentist-delivered SCA was supported and positively received. Important aspects included the opportunistic nature, personal impact, use of tangible prompts and positive context (of the quit attempt). Future research should focus on optimizing dentist-led smoking cessation intervention based on the themes identified

Promoting Alcohol Reduction in Non-Treatment Seeking parents (PAReNTS):a protocol for a pilot feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial of alcohol screening and brief interventions to reduce parental alcohol use disorders in vulnerable families

Brief alcohol advice intervention. (DOCX 1500 kb

A feasibility study with embedded pilot randomised controlled trial and process evaluation of electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation in patients with periodontitis

Background Tobacco smoking is a major risk factor for several oral diseases, including periodontitis, and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are increasingly being used for smoking cessation. This study aimed to assess the viability of delivering and evaluating an e-cigarette intervention for smoking cessation within the dental setting, prior to a definitive study. Methods A feasibility study, comprising a pilot randomised controlled trial and qualitative process evaluation, was conducted over 22 months in the Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Dental Clinical Research Facility, UK. The pilot trial comprised a two-armed, parallel group, individually randomised, controlled trial, with 1:1 allocation. Participant eligibility criteria included being a tobacco smoker, having periodontitis and not currently using an e-cigarette. All participants received standard non-surgical periodontal therapies and brief smoking cessation advice. The intervention group additionally received an e-cigarette starter kit with brief training. Proposed outcomes for a future definitive trial, in terms of smoking behaviour and periodontal/oral health, were collected over 6 months to assess data yield and quality and estimates of parameters. Analyses were descriptive, with 95% confidence intervals presented, where appropriate. Results Eighty participants were successfully recruited from a range of dental settings. Participant retention was 73% (n = 58; 95% CI 62–81%) at 6 months. The e-cigarette intervention was well received, with usage rates of 90% (n = 36; 95% CI 77–96%) at quit date. Twenty percent (n = 8; 95% CI 11–35%) of participants in the control group used an e-cigarette at some point during the study (against advice). The majority of the outcome measures were successfully collected, apart from a weekly smoking questionnaire (only 30% of participants achieved ≥ 80% completion). Reductions in expired air carbon monoxide over 6 months of 6 ppm (95% CI 1–10 ppm) and 12 ppm (95% CI 8–16 ppm) were observed in the control and intervention groups, respectively. Rates of abstinence (carbon monoxide-verified continuous abstinence for 6 months) for the two groups were 5% (n = 2; 95% CI 1–17%; control group) and 15% (n = 6; 95% CI 7–29%; intervention group). Conclusions Data suggest that a definitive trial is feasible and that the intervention may improve smoking quit rates. Insights were gained into how best to conduct the definitive trial and estimates of parameters to inform design were obtained