45 research outputs found

    Pregnant smokers’ experiences and opinions of techniques aimed to address barriers and facilitators to smoking cessation: A qualitative study

    Get PDF
    Pregnant women experience certain barriers and facilitators (B&Fs) when trying to quit smoking. This study aimed to elicit women’s views on techniques that could help overcome or enhance these. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 pregnant women who had experience of smoking during pregnancy. Participants were prompted to discuss experiences of B&Fs and give suggestions of techniques that could address these appropriately. A thematic analysis was conducted using the one sheet of paper method. Four themes relating to suggested techniques were identified: accessing professional help, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), distraction, and social interactions. Experiences of accessing professional help were generally positive, especially if there was a good rapport with, and easy access to a practitioner. Most women were aware of NRT, those who had used it reported both negative and positive experiences. Praise and encouragement from others towards cessation attempts appeared motivating; peer support groups were deemed useful. Women reported experiencing B&Fs which fell under four themes: influence of others, internal motivation, cues to smoke, and health. Overall, accessing professional support generated positive changes in smoking habits. Establishing ways of how to encourage more women to seek help and raising awareness of different types of support available would seem beneficial

    Interventions for promoting smoking cessation during pregnancy.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Smoking remains one of the few potentially preventable factors associated with low birthweight, preterm birth and perinatal death. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of smoking cessation programs implemented during pregnancy on the health of the fetus, infant, mother, and family. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register and the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register (July 2003), MEDLINE (January 2002 to July 2003), EMBASE (January 2002 to July 2003), PsychLIT (January 2002 to July 2003), CINAHL (January 2002 to July 2003), and AUSTHEALTH (January 2002 to 2003). We contacted trial authors to locate additional unpublished data. We handsearched references of identified trials and recent obstetric journals. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of smoking cessation programs implemented during pregnancy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted data independently. MAIN RESULTS: This review included 64 trials. Fifty-one randomised controlled trials (20,931 women) and six cluster-randomised trials (over 7500 women) provided data on smoking cessation and/or perinatal outcomes. Despite substantial variation in the intensity of the intervention and the extent of reminders and reinforcement through pregnancy, there was an increase in the median intensity of both 'usual care' and interventions over time. There was a significant reduction in smoking in the intervention groups of the 48 trials included: (relative risk (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 0.95), an absolute difference of six in 100 women continuing to smoke. The 36 trials with validated smoking cessation had a similar reduction (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.92 to 0.95). Smoking cessation interventions reduced low birthweight (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.94) and preterm birth (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.98), and there was a 33 g (95% CI 11 g to 55 g) increase in mean birthweight. There were no statistically significant differences in very low birthweight, stillbirths, perinatal or neonatal mortality but these analyses had very limited power. One intervention strategy, rewards plus social support (two trials), resulted in a significantly greater smoking reduction than other strategies (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.82). Five trials of smoking relapse prevention (over 800 women) showed no statistically significant reduction in relapse. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: Smoking cessation programs in pregnancy reduce the proportion of women who continue to smoke, and reduce low birthweight and preterm birth. The pooled trials have inadequate power to detect reductions in perinatal mortality or very low birthweight

    Lessons learned from the London Exercise and Pregnant (LEAP) Smokers randomised controlled trial process evaluation : implications for the design of physical activity for smoking cessation interventions during pregnancy

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: The challenges of delivering interventions for pregnant smokers have been poorly documented. Also, the process of promoting a physical activity intervention for pregnant smokers has not been previously recorded. This study describes the experiences of researchers conducting a randomised controlled trial of physical activity as an aid to smoking cessation during pregnancy and explores how the effectiveness of future interventions could be improved. METHODS: Two focus groups, with independent facilitators, were conducted with six researchers who had enrolled pregnant smokers in the LEAP trial, provided the interventions, and administered the research measures. Topics included recruitment, retention and how the physical activity intervention for pregnant smokers was delivered and how it was adapted when necessary to suit the women. The focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and subjected to thematic analysis. RESULTS: Five themes emerged related to barriers or enablers to intervention delivery: (1) nature of the intervention; (2) personal characteristics of trial participants; (3) practical issues; (4) researchers' engagement with participants; (5) training and support needs. Researchers perceived that participants may have been deterred by the intensive and generic nature of the intervention and the need to simultaneously quit smoking and increase physical activity. Women also appeared hampered by pregnancy ailments, social deprivation, and poor mental health. Researchers observed that their status as health professionals was valued by participants but it was challenging to maintain contact with participants. Training and support needs were identified for dealing with pregnant teenagers, participants' friends and family, and post-natal return to smoking. CONCLUSIONS: Future exercise interventions for smoking cessation in pregnancy may benefit by increased tailoring of the intervention to the characteristics of the women, including their psychological profile, socio-economic background, pregnancy ailments and exercise preferences. Delivering an effective physical activity intervention for smoking cessation in pregnancy may require more comprehensive training for those delivering the intervention, particularly with regard to dealing with teenage smokers and smokers' friends and family, as well as for avoiding post-natal return to smoking. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN48600346 , date of registration: 21/07/2008

    Physical activity as an aid to smoking cessation during pregnancy (LEAP) trial: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Background: Many women try to stop smoking in pregnancy but fail. One difficulty is that there is insufficient evidence that medications for smoking cessation are effective and safe in pregnancy and thus many women prefer to avoid these. Physical activity (PA) interventions may assist cessation; however, trials examining these interventions have been too small to detect or exclude plausible beneficial effects. The London Exercise And Pregnant smokers (LEAP) trial is investigating whether a PA intervention is effective and cost-effective when used for smoking cessation by pregnant women, and will be the largest study of its kind to date. Methods/design: The LEAP study is a pragmatic, multi-center, two-arm, randomized, controlled trial that will target pregnant women who smoke at least one cigarette a day (and at least five cigarettes a day before pregnancy), and are between 10 and 24 weeks pregnant. Eligible patients are individually randomized to either usual care (that is, behavioral support for smoking cessation) or usual care plus a intervention (entailing supervised exercise on a treadmill plus PA consultations). The primary outcome of the trial is self-reported and biochemically validated continuous abstinence from smoking between a specified quit date and the end of pregnancy. The secondary outcomes, measured at 1 and 4 weeks after the quit date, and at the end of pregnancy and 6 months after childbirth, are PA levels, depression, self-confidence, and cigarette withdrawal symptoms. Smoking status will also be self-reported at 6 months after childbirth. In addition, perinatal measures will be collected, including antenatal complications, duration of labor, mode of delivery, and birth and placental weight. Outcomes will be analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis, and logistic regression models used to compare treatment effects on the primary outcome. Discussion: This trial will assess whether a PA intervention is effective when used for smoking cessation during pregnancy

    The London exercise and pregnant smokers (LEAP) trial: A randomised controlled trial of physical activity for smoking cessation in pregnancy with an economic evaluation

    Get PDF
    Background: Smoking during pregnancy is the main preventable cause of poor birth outcomes. Improved methods are needed to help women to stop smoking during pregnancy. Pregnancy provides a compelling rationale for physical activity (PA) interventions as cessation medication is contraindicated or ineffective, and an effective PA intervention could be highly cost-effective.  Objective: To examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a PA intervention plus standard behavioural support for smoking cessation relative to behavioural support alone for achieving smoking cessation at the end of pregnancy.  Design: Multicentre, two-group, pragmatic randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation with follow-up at the end of pregnancy and 6 months postnatally. Randomisation was tratified by centre and a computer-generated sequence was used to allocate participants using a 1: 1 ratio. Setting: 13 hospitals offering antenatal care in the UK.  Participants: Women between 10 and 24 weeks’ gestation smoking five or more cigarettes a day before pregnancy and one or more during pregnancy.  Interventions: Participants were randomised to behavioural support for smoking cessation (control) or behavioural support plus a PA intervention consisting of supervised treadmill exercise plus PA consultations. Neither participants nor researchers were blinded to treatment allocation.  Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was self-reported, continuous smoking abstinence between a quit date and end of pregnancy, validated by expired carbon monoxide and/or salivary cotinine. Secondary outcomes were maternal weight, depression, birth outcomes, withdrawal symptoms and urges to smoke. The economic evaluation investigated the costs of the PA intervention compared with the control intervention.  Results: In total, 789 women were randomised (n = 394 PA, n = 395 control). Four were excluded post randomisation (two had been enrolled twice in sequential pregnancies and two were ineligible and randomised erroneously). The intention-to-treat analysis comprised 785 participants (n = 392 PA, n = 393 control). There was no significant difference in the rate of abstinence at the end of pregnancy between the PA group (7.7%) and the control group (6.4%) [odds ratio for PA group abstinence 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 2.10]. For the PA group compared with the control group, there was a 33% (95% CI 14% to 56%), 28% (95% CI 7% to 52%) and 36% (95% CI 12% to 65%) significantly greater increase in self-reported minutes of moderate- and vigorous-intensity PA from baseline to 1 week, 4 weeks and 6 weeks respectively. Accelerometer data showed that there was no significant difference in PA levels between the groups. There were no significant differences between the groups for change in maternal weight, depression, withdrawal symptoms or urges to smoke. Adverse events and birth outcomes were similar between the groups except for there being significantly more caesarean births in the control group than in the PA group (28.7% vs. 21.3%; p < 0.023). The PA intervention was less costly than the control intervention by £35 per participant. This was mainly attributable to increased health-care usage in the control group. However, there was considerable statistical uncertainty around this estimate.  Conclusions: During pregnancy, offering an intervention combining supervised exercise and PA counselling does not add to the effectiveness of behavioural support for smoking cessation. Only 10% of participants had PA levels accessed by accelerometer and it is, therefore, unclear whether or not the lack of an effect on the primary outcome is the result of insufficient increases in PA. Research is needed to identify the smoking populations most suitable for PA interventions and methods for increasing PA adherence.  Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN48600346

    Psychosocial interventions for supporting women to stop smoking in pregnancy

    Get PDF
    Background: Tobacco smoking remains one of the few preventable factors associated with complications in pregnancy, and has serious long-term implications for women and babies. Smoking in pregnancy is decreasing in high-income countries, but is strongly associated with poverty and is increasing in low- to middle-income countries. Objectives: To assess the effects of smoking cessation interventions during pregnancy on smoking behaviour and perinatal health outcomes. Search methods: In this sixth update, we searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (13 November 2015), checked reference lists of retrieved studies and contacted trial authors. Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials, cluster-randomised trials, and quasi-randomised controlled trials of psychosocial smoking cessation interventions during pregnancy. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and trial quality, and extracted data. Direct comparisons were conducted in RevMan, with meta-regression conducted in STATA 14. Main results: The overall quality of evidence was moderate to high, with reductions in confidence due to imprecision and heterogeneity for some outcomes. One hundred and two trials with 120 intervention arms (studies) were included, with 88 trials (involving over 28,000 women) providing data on smoking abstinence in late pregnancy. Interventions were categorised as counselling, health education, feedback, incentives, social support, exercise and dissemination. In separate comparisons, there is high-quality evidence that counselling increased smoking cessation in late pregnancy compared with usual care (30 studies; average risk ratio (RR) 1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.73) and less intensive interventions (18 studies; average RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.47). There was uncertainty whether counselling increased the chance of smoking cessation when provided as one component of a broader maternal health intervention or comparing one type of counselling with another. In studies comparing counselling and usual care (largest comparison), it was unclear whether interventions prevented smoking relapse among women who had stopped smoking spontaneously in early pregnancy. However, a clear effect was seen in smoking abstinence at zero to five months postpartum (11 studies; average RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.01) and 12 to 17 months (two studies, average RR 2.20, 95% CI 1.23 to 3.96), with a borderline effect at six to 11 months (six studies; average RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.77). In other comparisons, the effect was unclear for most secondary outcomes, but sample sizes were small. Evidence suggests a borderline effect of health education compared with usual care (five studies; average RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.55), but the quality was downgraded to moderate as the effect was unclear when compared with less intensive interventions (four studies; average RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.70), alternative interventions (one study; RR 1.88, 95% CI 0.19 to 18.60), or when smoking cessation health education was provided as one component of a broader maternal health intervention. There was evidence feedback increased smoking cessation when compared with usual care and provided in conjunction with other strategies, such as counselling (average RR 4.39, 95% CI 1.89 to 10.21), but the confidence in the quality of evidence was downgraded to moderate as this was based on only two studies and the effect was uncertain when feedback was compared to less intensive interventions (three studies; average RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.20). High-quality evidence suggests incentive-based interventions are effective when compared with an alternative (non-contingent incentive) intervention (four studies; RR 2.36, 95% CI 1.36 to 4.09). However pooled effects were not calculable for comparisons with usual care or less intensive interventions (substantial heterogeneity, I2 = 93%). High-quality evidence suggests the effect is unclear in social support interventions provided by peers (six studies; average RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.07), in a single trial of support provided by partners, or when social support for smoking cessation was provided as part of a broader intervention to improve maternal health. The effect was unclear in single interventions of exercise compared to usual care (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.01) and dissemination of counselling (RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.62 to 4.32). Importantly, high-quality evidence from pooled results demonstrated that women who received psychosocial interventions had a 17% reduction in infants born with low birthweight, a significantly higher mean birthweight (mean difference (MD) 55.60 g, 95% CI 29.82 to 81.38 g higher) and a 22% reduction in neonatal intensive care admissions. However the difference in preterm births and stillbirths was unclear. There did not appear to be adverse psychological effects from the interventions. The intensity of support women received in both the intervention and comparison groups has increased over time, with higher-intensity interventions more likely to have higher-intensity comparisons, potentially explaining why no clear differences were seen with increasing intervention intensity in meta-regression analyses. Among meta-regression analyses: studies classified as having 'unclear' implementation and unequal baseline characteristics were less effective than other studies. There was no clear difference between trials implemented by researchers (efficacy studies), and those implemented by routine pregnancy staff (effectiveness studies), however there was uncertainty in the effectiveness of counselling in four dissemination trials where the focus on the intervention was at an organisational level. The pooled effects were similar in interventions provided for women classified as having predominantly low socio-economic status, compared to other women. The effect was significant in interventions among women from ethnic minority groups; however not among indigenous women. There were similar effect sizes in trials with biochemically validated smoking abstinence and those with self-reported abstinence. It was unclear whether incorporating use of self-help manuals or telephone support increased the effectiveness of interventions. Authors' conclusions: Psychosocial interventions to support women to stop smoking in pregnancy can increase the proportion of women who stop smoking in late pregnancy and the proportion of infants born low birthweight. Counselling, feedback and incentives appear to be effective, however the characteristics and context of the interventions should be carefully considered. The effect of health education and social support is less clear. New trials have been published during the preparation of this review and will be included in the next update
    corecore