Leiden University Scholarly Publications

Persistent URL of this record https://hdl.handle.net/1887/4261537

Documents

In Collections

This item can be found in the following collections:

Boderie, N.W.; Lenthe, F.J. van; Bieleman, L.; Brand, F.A. van den; Burdorf, A.; Chavannes, N.H.; ... ; Been, J.V. (2025)

PERSonalised incentives for supporting tobacco cessation (PERSIST) among healthcare employees: evaluation and lessons learned

Article / Letter to editor
The effectiveness of financial incentives for smoking cessation can be further enhanced by personalising incentives. We aimed to investigate the effect of personalised incentives on abstinence among health care employees who participated in a group-based smoking cessation training, but prematurely terminated the trial due to recruitment issues. All participants (n = 31; 14% of n = 220 required) underwent group-based smoking cessation training. Based on individual characteristics, each intervention group participant was recommended one of four incentive schemes, though each participant could choose one of the other schemes. Incentives were provided following the completion of the training and at 3, 6, and 12 months. The control group received no incentives. In the intervention arm, 14 out of 17 participants followed the recommended incentive scheme, and ten chose a deposit scheme. Twelve month-abstinence was 41% in the intervention group and 43% in the control group. Dropouts were...Show moreThe effectiveness of financial incentives for smoking cessation can be further enhanced by personalising incentives. We aimed to investigate the effect of personalised incentives on abstinence among health care employees who participated in a group-based smoking cessation training, but prematurely terminated the trial due to recruitment issues. All participants (n = 31; 14% of n = 220 required) underwent group-based smoking cessation training. Based on individual characteristics, each intervention group participant was recommended one of four incentive schemes, though each participant could choose one of the other schemes. Incentives were provided following the completion of the training and at 3, 6, and 12 months. The control group received no incentives. In the intervention arm, 14 out of 17 participants followed the recommended incentive scheme, and ten chose a deposit scheme. Twelve month-abstinence was 41% in the intervention group and 43% in the control group. Dropouts were categorized as having relapsed. Following the premature closing of the trial, we conducted interviews with potentially eligible participants (health care employees who smoke) who did not participate in exploring considerations for non-participation. Interviews (n = 15) revealed that reasons for non-participation included unawareness that incentives could be earned, not being ready to quit, and not feeling the need for a cessation programme to quit. A better understanding of reasons for non-participation in incentive-based smoking cessation programs or trials is required.Show less
Prevention
health behaviour
tobacco control
All authors
Boderie, N.W.; Lenthe, F.J. van; Bieleman, L.; Brand, F.A. van den; Burdorf, A.; Chavannes, N.H.; Nagelhout, G.E.; Schayck, O.C.P. van; Kippersluis, H. van; Been, J.V.
Date
2025-12-31
Journal
Critical Public Health
Volume
35
Issue
1
DOI
doi:10.1080/09581596.2025.2540674
Link
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09581596.2025.2540674