Protecting children from secondhand smoke: a mixed-methods feasibility study of a novel smoke-free home intervention

Marsh, John and McNeill, Ann and Lewis, Sarah and Coleman, Tim and Bains, Manpreet and Larwood, Alexandra and Purdy, Jacqueline and Jones, Laura L. (2016) Protecting children from secondhand smoke: a mixed-methods feasibility study of a novel smoke-free home intervention. Pilot and Feasibility Studies, 2 . 53/1-53/12. ISSN 2055-5784

[img]
Preview
PDF (Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International) - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Available under Licence Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

Background: Globally, 40 % of children under 14 years are regularly exposed to secondhand smoke (SHS), typically in their homes. There is limited evidence of the effectiveness of interventions to reduce children’s SHS exposure,and so the aim of this study was to test the feasibility and acceptability of a novel intervention to help parents and carers (caregivers) to reduce their children’s exposure to SHS at home.

Methods: A novel multi-component intervention to support caregivers to reduce their children’s SHS exposure athome was tested in a two-phase feasibility study. The 12-week intensive intervention delivered in the homeconsisted of three components: behavioural support, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for temporary abstinenceand feedback on levels of SHS exposure in the form of children’s salivary cotinine (phase 1) or home air quality (PM2.5) (phase 2). Participants were caregivers who smoked inside their homes and had at least one child under the age of 5 years living with them the majority of the time. Mixed-methods were used to explore the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention as well as processes, particularly around recruitment and retention, for an exploratory efficacy trial.

Results: Twelve caregivers completed the study, all received personalised feedback on SHS exposure and behavioural support to help them to make their homes smoke-free and the majority at least tried NRT. Saliva cotinine results were variable in phase 1, and therefore, measures of PM2.5 were used for feedback in phase 2.Behavioural support was well received with personalised feedback reported as being the key motivator for initiating and maintaining behaviour change.

Conclusions: Recruiting disadvantaged caregivers was labour intensive, but once recruited, this novel intervention was both feasible and acceptable in supporting caregivers to reduce their children’s exposure to SHS at home. It is appropriate to test the efficacy of this novel intervention in an exploratory randomised controlled trial.

Item Type: Article
Keywords: Secondhand smoke, Smoke-free homes, Complex intervention, PM2.5, Feasibility study, Acceptability, Mixed-methods, Recruitment
Schools/Departments: University of Nottingham UK Campus > Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > School of Medicine > Division of Primary Care
University of Nottingham UK Campus > Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > School of Medicine > Division of Epidemiology and Public Health
Identification Number: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-016-0094-7
Depositing User: Claringburn, Tara
Date Deposited: 16 Sep 2016 12:52
Last Modified: 18 Sep 2016 02:08
URI: http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/id/eprint/36563

Actions (Archive Staff Only)

Edit View Edit View