Background and purpose: Women's health behaviours during pregnancy can affect their children's lifetime outcomes. Inactivity, poor diet, alcohol, and smoking during pregnancy are linked to maternal stress and distress. Mindfulness-based interventions can improve health behaviours and mental health. The purpose of the study was to develop and evaluate the feasibility of a mindfulness-based maternal behaviour change intervention. Materials and methods: The eight-week 'Mind the Bump' intervention integrated mindfulness training with behaviour change techniques. It aimed to improve mindfulness, mental health, and adherence to UK maternal health behaviour guidance. Acceptability, practicability, effectiveness/costeffectiveness, affordability, safety/side-effects, and equity were evaluated from baseline to post-course and follow-up. Results: Mindfulness, positive affect, and wellbeing improved.Stress, negative affect, depression, anxiety, and adherence to guidance did not improve. The intervention was practicable and safe, but the other implementability criteria were not satisfied. Conclusion:The intervention was not fully feasible; recommendations to address its limitations are discussed.

The main causes of non-communicable diseases (NCDs), health inequalities and health inequity include consumption of unhealthy commodities such as tobacco, alcohol and/or foods high in fat, salt and/or sugar. These exposures are preventable, but the commodities involved are highly profitable. The economic interests of ‘Unhealthy Commodity Producers’ (UCPs) often conflict with health goals but their role in determining health has received insufficient attention. In order to address this gap, a new research consortium has been established. This open letter introduces the SPECTRUM (Shaping Public hEalth poliCies To Reduce ineqUalities and harM) Consortium: a multi-disciplinary group comprising researchers from 10 United Kingdom (UK) universities and overseas, and partner organisations including three national public health agencies in Great Britain (GB), five multi-agency alliances and two companies providing data and analytic support. Through eight integrated work packages, the Consortium seeks to provide an understanding of the nature of the complex systems underlying the consumption of unhealthy commodities, the role of UCPs in shaping these systems and influencing health and policy, the role of systems-level interventions, and the effectiveness of existing and emerging policies. Co-production is central to the Consortium’s approach to advance research and achieve meaningful impact and we will involve the public in the design and delivery of our research. We will also establish and sustain mutually beneficial relationships with policy makers, alongside our partners, to increase the visibility, credibility and impact of our evidence. The Consortium’s ultimate aim is to achieve meaningful health benefits for the UK population by reducing harm and inequalities from the consumption of unhealthy commodities over the next five years and beyond.

BackgroundEffective interventions are required to reduce alcohol consumption and its associated harms at the population level. Reducing the alcohol content of beverages has the potential to reduce alcohol consumption through non-conscious processes. Before implementing a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to assess the effect of alcohol strength on alcohol consumption, its feasibility needs to be established. This study aims to pilot a RCT and obtain data to estimate key parameters required when designing a RCT. These key parameters include the direction and size of the intervention effect, the efficacy and efficiency of the study processes and the rates of licenced premises recruitment, participant recruitment and attrition.MethodsA double-blind randomised controlled cross-over pilot trial comparing the number of units of reduced strength lager consumed and the number of units of regular strength lager consumed in a single drinking occasion within licenced premises in the UK.Descriptive statistics will report the efficacy and efficiency of the study processes and the rates of licenced premises recruitment, participant recruitment and attrition. Mean and 95% confidence intervals will be used to compare the consumption of alcohol and the duration of participation in study sessions, between the intervention arm and the control arm. The mean and standard deviation of UK units of alcohol consumed will be used to calculate a sample size for a definitive RCT.DiscussionThis is the first naturalistic experimental study to assess the effect of alcohol strength on alcohol consumption in a single drinking occasion within licenced premises. Results from this pilot study will establish the feasibility of, and inform key data parameters for, a larger scale study.Trial registrationThe trial is registered in the American Economic Association (AEA) Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) Registry as of 16 June 2017. The unique identifying number is AEARCTR-0002266.

Background Reducing the alcohol content of drinks has the potential to reduce population level alcohol consumption. This pilot study aimed to (1) test the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to assess the effect of alcohol strength on alcohol consumption within licensed premises in the United Kingdom (UK); and (2) provide data to estimate key parameters for a RCT. MethodsA double-blind randomised controlled cross-over pilot trial was based within four licensed premises in the UK. Participants (n=36) purchased and consumed ad libitum a 3.5% lager (intervention), and a taste matched 4.8% lager (control) during two separate study sessions. Descriptive statistics reported the efficacy and efficiency of the study processes, and the rates of licensed premises recruitment, and participant recruitment and attrition. Mean and the 95% confidence interval (CI) compared alcohol consumption between study conditions. The mean, standard deviation (SD) and CI of UK units of alcohol consumed were used to calculate a sample size for a RCT. Responses to participant questionnaires and duration of participation in study sessions between conditions were analysed.ResultsComponents of the study protocol were effective and efficient. The venue recruitment rate was less than anticipated whilst the participant recruitment rate was greater than anticipated. The rate of attrition was 23% and varied by less than 1% according to the arm of the trial. There was a reduction of alcohol consumed under the intervention conditions. Estimated mean difference, and 95% CI (UK units): -3.76 (-5.01 to -2.52). Based on a conservative estimate, using the smallest effect size in the CI (-2.52) and allowing for 23% attrition, the sample size required for a RCT powered at 95% is 53. Participants did not find one lager notably more pleasant in taste than the other: (on a scale of one to 10) -0.95 (-2.11 to 0.21). However, participants found the reduced-strength lager notably less enjoyable than the regular-strength lager: (on a scale of one to 10) -1.44 (-2.64 to -0.24) and they perceived themselves to be notably less intoxicated after consuming the reduced-strength lager: (on a scale of one to 10) -1.00 (-1.61 to -0.40).ConclusionA RCT is feasible with minor alterations to the study protocol and prior scoping work to establish different brands of alcohol that are more alike and more enjoyable than the intervention and control products used in the pilot trial. Trial registrationThe trial is registered in the American Economic Association (AEA) Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) Registry as of 16 June 2017: https://www.socialscienceregistry.org/trials/2266. The unique identifying number is: AEARCTR-0002266.

Background Internationally, there is an ‘evidence-practice gap’ in the rate healthcare professionals assess tobacco use and offer cessation support in clinical practice, including primary care. Evidence is needed for implementation strategies enacted in the ‘real-world’. Aim: To identify implementation strategies aiming to increase smoking cessation treatment provision in primary care, their effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and any perceived facilitators and barriers for effectiveness. Methods ‘Embase’, ‘Medline’, ‘PsycINFO’, ‘CINAHL’, ‘Global Health’, ‘Social Policy & Practice’, ‘ASSIA Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts’ databases, and grey literature sources were searched from inception to April 2021. Studies were included if they evaluated an implementation strategy implemented on a nation-/state-wide scale, targeting any type of healthcare professional within the primary care setting, aiming to increase smoking cessation treatment provision. Primary outcome measures: implementation strategy identification, and effectiveness (practitioner-/patient-level). Secondary outcome measures: perceived facilitators and barriers to effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness. Studies were assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. A narrative synthesis was conducted using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) compilation and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Results Of 49 included papers, half were of moderate/low risk of bias. The implementation strategy domains identified involved utilizing financial strategies, changing infrastructure, training and educating stakeholders, and engaging consumers. The first three increased practitioner-level smoking status recording and cessation advice provision. Interventions in the utilizing financial strategies domain also appeared to increase smoking cessation (patient-level). Key facilitator: external policies/incentives (tobacco control measures and funding for public health and cessation clinics). Key barriers: time and financial constraints, lack of free cessation medications and follow-up, deprioritisation and unclear targets in primary care, lack of knowledge of healthcare professionals, and unclear messaging to patients about available cessation support options. No studies assessed cost-effectiveness. Conclusions Some implementation strategy categories increased the rate of smoking status recording and cessation advice provision in primary care. We found some evidence for interventions utilizing financial strategies having a beneficial impact on cessation. Identified barriers to effectiveness should be reduced. More pragmatic approaches are recommended, such as hybrid effectiveness-implementation designs and utilising Multiphase Optimization Strategy methodology. Protocol registration PROSPERO:CRD42021246683