Influence of recruitment strategy on the reach and effect of a web-based multiple tailored smoking cessation intervention among Dutch adult smokers

Abstract

This study investigated the influence of two different recruitment strategies on the reach and effect of a web-based multiple tailored smoking cessation program. From May 2009 until June 2010, Dutch adult smokers were recruited via mass media or general practices. Those who completed the baseline questionnaire were followed up during 6 weeks (two follow-ups). Differences between the two samples were assessed regarding baseline characteristics, retention rates, quit attempts and 24-hour point prevalence abstinence. Smokers recruited via general practices (N = 409) were significantly lower educated, less addicted, more motivated to quit smoking and to maintain non-smoking, more often female and more often suffering from cardiovascular or respiratory diseases than mass media respondents (N = 1154). They showed higher retention rates and were more likely to report a quit attempt (64.3 versus 50.7%) and abstinence (43.3 versus 33.1%). More respondents could be recruited via mass media, while general practices respondents showed higher retention rates and were more successful in quitting smoking, though these effects became non-significant when controlling for experimental condition and baseline differences. The choice for a particular recruitment strategy appeared to determine the number and type of smokers recruited and might consequently influence the intervention's potential public health impact.

Exploring the “Active Ingredients” of an Online Smoking Intervention: A Randomized Factorial Trial

“…As mentioned previously, many participants failed to view the intervention, highlighting the importance of tracking and reporting program exposure in studies testing the effectiveness of online interventions. Additionally, follow-up retention rates were lower than ideal (68.6% at 2 months, 63.3% at 6 months, and 72.4% at 12 months) but higher than reported in other recent online smoking intervention studies (Pike, Rabius, McAlister, & Geiger, 2007;Richardson et al, 2013;Smit, Hoving, Cox, & de Vries, 2012;Stoddard, Augustson, & Moser, 2008;Swartz et al, 2006). This did not impact our treatment utilization outcomes, but it could have resulted in lower abstinence rates than actually occurred among participants because missing participants were counted as smokers.…”

Understanding and Promoting Effective Engagement With Digital Behavior Change Interventions

“…Clinician referral to a DBCI enhan-ces engagement, compared with interventions being simply made freely available over the Internet or as apps 66 ; this suggests that positive endorsement and follow-up by a familiar health professional promotes trust in the intervention. However, remote (telephone, e-mail, or text) coaching to help the user implement the intervention can also be effective, 67 even without the referral or endorsement of a clinician.…”

Usage and Effectiveness of a Fully Automated, Open-Access, Spanish Web-Based Smoking Cessation Program: Randomized Controlled Trial

“…For example, professional support from primary health care could prevent early dropout and reinforce adherence. It has been found that users of a Web-based smoking cessation program referred by general practitioners showed lower dropout rates compared to those who accessed the program directly [75]. Another therapeutic measure for increasing adherence to free-of-charge programs could be the payment of a fee to achieve higher commitment to the program, which would be reimbursable if completion is achieved.…”