Evaluating the effectiveness of behavior change techniques in health-related behavior: a scoping review of methods used.

Behavior change interventions typically contain multiple potentially active components: behavior change techniques (BCTs). Identifying which specific BCTs or BCT combinations have the potential to be effective for a given behavior in a given context presents a major challenge. The aim of this study was to review the methods that have been used to identify effective BCTs for given behaviors in given contexts and evaluate their strengths and limitations. A scoping review was conducted of studies that had sought to identify effective BCTs. Articles referring to "behavio(u)r change technique(s)" in the abstract/text were located, and ones that involved identification of effective BCTs were selected. The methods reported were coded. The methods were analyzed in general terms using "PASS" criteria: Practicability (facility to apply the method appropriately), Applicability (facility to generalize from findings to contexts and populations of interest), Sensitivity (facility to identify effective BCTs), and Specificity (facility to rule out ineffective BCTs). A sample of 10% of the studies reviewed was then evaluated using these criteria to assess how far the strengths and limitations identified in principle were borne out in practice. One hundred and thirty-five studies were identified. The methods used in those studies were experimental manipulation of BCTs, observational studies comparing outcomes in the presence or absence of BCTs, meta-analyses of BCT comparisons, meta-regressions evaluating effect sizes with and without specific BCTs, reviews of BCTs found in effective interventions, and meta-classification and regression trees. The limitations of each method meant that only weak conclusions could be drawn regarding the effectiveness of specific BCTs or BCT combinations. Methods for identifying effective BCTs linked to target behavior and context all have important inherent limitations. A strategy needs to be developed that can systematically combine the strengths of the different methods and that can link these constructs in an ontology of behavior change interventions.

National guidelines for smoking cessation in primary care: a literature review and evidence analysis.

National guidelines for smoking cessation in primary care can be effective in improving clinical practice. This study assessed which parties are involved in the development of such guidelines worldwide, which national guidelines address primary care, what recommendations are made for primary care settings, and how these recommendations correlate with each other and with current evidence. We identified national guidelines using an online resource. Only the most recent version of a guideline was included. If an English version was not available, we requested a translation or summary of the recommendations from the authors. Two researchers independently extracted data on funding sources, development methodologies, involved parties, and recommendations made within the guidelines. These recommendations were categorised using the pile-sort method. Each recommendation was cross-checked with the latest evidence and was awarded an evidence-rating. We identified 43 guidelines from 39 countries and after exclusion, we analysed 26 guidelines (22 targeting general population, 4 targeted subpopulations). Twelve categories of recommendations for primary care were identified. There was almost universal agreement regarding the need to identify smokers, advice them to quit and offer behavioural and pharmacological quit smoking support. Discrepancies were greatest for specific recommendations regarding behavioural and pharmacological support, which are likely to be due to different interpretations of evidence and/or differences in contextual health environments. Based on these findings, we developed a universal checklist of guideline recommendations as a practice tool for primary care professionals and future guideline developers. SMOKING CESSATION SUPPORT IN PRIMARY CARE: UNIVERSAL GUIDELINES SOUGHT: An international team call for a universal guideline for primary-care practitioners who help patients to stop smoking. Although many nations have such guidelines, no studies have examined whether these guidelines are consistent with the current evidence. Marjolein Verbiest at the National Institute for Health Innovation, The University of Auckland, New Zealand, and co-workers of the International Primary Care Respiratory Group and the National Centre for Smoking Cessation and Training reviewed, evaluated and compared 26 national guidelines. Almost all guidelines place importance on identifying smokers, advising them to quit and providing behavioural and medication-based support. However, there were discrepancies in the support offered, which could be due to different interpretations of evidence, costs of medication and cultural differences. The authors offer a checklist for primary care that can inform future universal guidelines suitable for primary care.

A mixed-method systematic review and meta-analysis of mental health professionals' attitudes toward smoking and smoking cessation among people with mental illnesses.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: People with mental illnesses and substance abuse disorders are important targets for smoking cessation interventions. Mental health professionals (MHPs) are ideally placed to deliver interventions, but their attitudes may prevent this. This systematic review therefore aimed to identify and estimate quantitatively MHPs attitudes towards smoking and main barriers for providing smoking cessation support and to explore these attitudes in-depth through qualitative synthesis. METHODS: The online databases AMED, EMBASE, Medline, PsychINFO, HMIC and CINAHL were searched in March 2015 using terms relating to three concepts: 'attitudes', 'mental health professionals' and 'smoking cessation'. Quantitative or qualitative studies of any type were included. Proportions of MHPs' attitudes towards smoking and smoking cessation were pooled across studies using random effects meta-analysis. Qualitative findings were evaluated using thematic synthesis. RESULTS: Thirty-eight studies including 16 369 participants were eligible for inclusion. Pooled proportions revealed that 42.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 35.7-48.8] of MHPs reported perceived barriers to smoking cessation interventions, 40.5% (95% CI = 30.4-51.0) negative attitudes towards smoking cessation and 45.0% (95% CI = 31.9-58.4) permissive attitudes towards smoking. The most commonly held beliefs were that patients are not interested in quitting (51.4%, 95% CI = 33.4-69.2) and that quitting smoking is too much for patients to take on (38%, 95% CI = 16.4-62.6). Qualitative findings were consistent with quantitative results, revealing a culture of smoking as 'the norm' and a perception of cigarettes as a useful tool for patients and staff. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of mental health professionals hold attitudes and misconceptions that may undermine the delivery of smoking cessation interventions; many report a lack of time, training and confidence as main barriers to addressing smoking in their patients.

Comparison of the characteristics of long-term users of electronic cigarettes versus nicotine replacement therapy: A cross-sectional survey of English ex-smokers and current smokers.

BACKGROUND: Electronic cigarettes (ECs) and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) are non-combustible nicotine delivery devices being widely used as a partial or a complete long-term substitute for smoking. Little is known about the characteristics of long-term users, their smoking behaviour, attachment to smoking, experience of nicotine withdrawal symptoms, or their views on these devices. This study aimed to provide preliminary evidence on this and compare users of the different products. METHODS: UK participants were recruited from four naturally occurring groups of long-term (≥6 months) users of either EC or NRT who had stopped or continued to smoke (N=36 per group, total N=144). Participants completed a questionnaire assessing socio-demographic and smoking characteristics, nicotine withdrawal symptoms, smoker identity and attitudes towards the products they were using. RESULTS: Adjusting for relevant confounders, EC use was associated with a stronger smoker identity (Wald X(2)(1)=3.9, p=0.048) and greater product endorsement (Wald X(2)(1)=4.6, p=0.024) than NRT use, irrespective of smoking status. Among ex-smokers, EC users reported less severe mood and physical symptoms (Wald X(2)(1)=6.1, p=0.014) and cravings (Wald X(2)(1)=8.5, p=0.003), higher perceived helpfulness of the product (Wald X(2)(1)=4.8, p=0.028) and lower intentions to stop using the product (Wald X(2)(1)=17.6, p<0.001) than NRT users. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with people who use NRT for at least 6 months, those who use EC over that time period appear to have a stronger smoker identity and like their products more. Among long-term users who have stopped smoking, ECs are perceived as more helpful than NRT, appear more effective in controlling withdrawal symptoms and continued use may be more likely.

Putting habit into practice, and practice into habit: a process evaluation and exploration of the acceptability of a habit-based dietary behaviour change intervention.

BACKGROUND: Forming 'habit' - defined as a learned process that generates automatic responses to contextual cues - has been suggested as a mechanism for behaviour maintenance, but few studies have applied habit theory to behaviour change. This study used process evaluation data, taken from a randomised controlled trial of a healthy child-feeding intervention for parents previously shown to be effective, to explore the applicability to dietary behaviour change of predictions and recommendations drawn from habit theory. The intervention supported parents in pursuing child-feeding habit goals in three domains (giving fruit and vegetables, water, healthy snacks), over four fortnightly home visits. We explored whether (a) the habit-formation model was acceptable to participants, (b) better-specified habit-formation goals yielded greater habit gains, and (c) habit gains were sustained (d) even when subsequent, new habit goals were pursued. METHODS: Qualitative and quantitative data were taken from 57 parents randomised to the intervention arm, and so analyses presented here used a pre-post intervention design. Thematic analysis of post-intervention qualitative interviews evaluated acceptability, and self-reported habit goals were content-analysed. ANOVAs explored changes in habit strength, recorded at home visits and one- and two-month follow-ups, across time and goals. RESULTS: Participants understood and engaged positively with the habit-formation approach. Although many seemingly poorly-specified habit goals were set, goal characteristics had minimal impact on habit strength, which were achieved within two weeks for all behaviours (p's < .001), and were maintained or had increased further by the final follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The habit-formation model appears to be an acceptable and fruitful basis for dietary behaviour change.