Randomised controlled trial of home based motivational interviewing by midwives to help pregnant smokers quit or cut down

D.M. Tappin, M.A. Lumsden, D.H. Gilmour, F. Crawford, D. McIntyre, D.H. Stone, R. Webber, S. MacIndoe, E. Mohammed

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Objective To determine whether motivational interviewing—a behavioural therapy for addictions—provided at home by specially trained midwives helps pregnant smokers to quit. Design Randomised controlled non-blinded trial analysed by intention to treat. Setting Clinics attached to two maternity hospitals in Glasgow. Participants 762/1684 pregnant women who were regular smokers at antenatal booking: 351 in intervention group and 411 in control group. Interventions All women received standard health promotion information. Women in the intervention group were offered motivational interviewing at home. All interviews were recorded. Main outcome measures Self reported smoking cessation verified by plasma or salivary cotinine concentration. Results 17/351 (4.8%) women in the intervention group stopped smoking (according to self report and serum cotinine concentration < 13.7 ng/ml) compared with 19/411(4.6%) in the control group. Fifteen (4.2%) women in the intervention group cut down (self report and cotinine concentration less than half that at booking) compared with 26 (6.3%) in the control group. Fewer women in the intervention group reported smoking more (18 (5.1%) v 44 (10.7%); relative risk 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.28 to 0.81). Birth weight did not differ significantly (mean 3078 g v 3048 g). Conclusion Good quality motivational interviewing did not significantly increase smoking cessation among pregnant women.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)373-377
Number of pages5
JournalThe BMJ
Volume331
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Motivational Interviewing
Midwifery
Randomized Controlled Trials
Cotinine
Smoking Cessation
Self Report
Control Groups
Pregnant Women
Smoking
Maternity Hospitals
Ego
Health Promotion
Birth Weight
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Confidence Intervals
Interviews
Serum

Cite this

Tappin, D.M. ; Lumsden, M.A. ; Gilmour, D.H. ; Crawford, F. ; McIntyre, D. ; Stone, D.H. ; Webber, R. ; MacIndoe, S. ; Mohammed, E. / Randomised controlled trial of home based motivational interviewing by midwives to help pregnant smokers quit or cut down. In: The BMJ. 2005 ; Vol. 331. pp. 373-377.
@article{8ebc44ab6d4742cfa9960fe7d9c4ee29,
title = "Randomised controlled trial of home based motivational interviewing by midwives to help pregnant smokers quit or cut down",
abstract = "Objective To determine whether motivational interviewing—a behavioural therapy for addictions—provided at home by specially trained midwives helps pregnant smokers to quit. Design Randomised controlled non-blinded trial analysed by intention to treat. Setting Clinics attached to two maternity hospitals in Glasgow. Participants 762/1684 pregnant women who were regular smokers at antenatal booking: 351 in intervention group and 411 in control group. Interventions All women received standard health promotion information. Women in the intervention group were offered motivational interviewing at home. All interviews were recorded. Main outcome measures Self reported smoking cessation verified by plasma or salivary cotinine concentration. Results 17/351 (4.8{\%}) women in the intervention group stopped smoking (according to self report and serum cotinine concentration < 13.7 ng/ml) compared with 19/411(4.6{\%}) in the control group. Fifteen (4.2{\%}) women in the intervention group cut down (self report and cotinine concentration less than half that at booking) compared with 26 (6.3{\%}) in the control group. Fewer women in the intervention group reported smoking more (18 (5.1{\%}) v 44 (10.7{\%}); relative risk 0.48, 95{\%} confidence interval 0.28 to 0.81). Birth weight did not differ significantly (mean 3078 g v 3048 g). Conclusion Good quality motivational interviewing did not significantly increase smoking cessation among pregnant women.",
author = "D.M. Tappin and M.A. Lumsden and D.H. Gilmour and F. Crawford and D. McIntyre and D.H. Stone and R. Webber and S. MacIndoe and E. Mohammed",
year = "2005",
doi = "10.1136/bmj.331.7513.373",
language = "English",
volume = "331",
pages = "373--377",
journal = "The BMJ",
issn = "0959-8138",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group Ltd",

}

Tappin, DM, Lumsden, MA, Gilmour, DH, Crawford, F, McIntyre, D, Stone, DH, Webber, R, MacIndoe, S & Mohammed, E 2005, 'Randomised controlled trial of home based motivational interviewing by midwives to help pregnant smokers quit or cut down' The BMJ, vol. 331, pp. 373-377. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.331.7513.373

Randomised controlled trial of home based motivational interviewing by midwives to help pregnant smokers quit or cut down. / Tappin, D.M.; Lumsden, M.A.; Gilmour, D.H.; Crawford, F.; McIntyre, D.; Stone, D.H.; Webber, R.; MacIndoe, S.; Mohammed, E.

In: The BMJ, Vol. 331, 2005, p. 373-377.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Randomised controlled trial of home based motivational interviewing by midwives to help pregnant smokers quit or cut down

AU - Tappin, D.M.

AU - Lumsden, M.A.

AU - Gilmour, D.H.

AU - Crawford, F.

AU - McIntyre, D.

AU - Stone, D.H.

AU - Webber, R.

AU - MacIndoe, S.

AU - Mohammed, E.

PY - 2005

Y1 - 2005

N2 - Objective To determine whether motivational interviewing—a behavioural therapy for addictions—provided at home by specially trained midwives helps pregnant smokers to quit. Design Randomised controlled non-blinded trial analysed by intention to treat. Setting Clinics attached to two maternity hospitals in Glasgow. Participants 762/1684 pregnant women who were regular smokers at antenatal booking: 351 in intervention group and 411 in control group. Interventions All women received standard health promotion information. Women in the intervention group were offered motivational interviewing at home. All interviews were recorded. Main outcome measures Self reported smoking cessation verified by plasma or salivary cotinine concentration. Results 17/351 (4.8%) women in the intervention group stopped smoking (according to self report and serum cotinine concentration < 13.7 ng/ml) compared with 19/411(4.6%) in the control group. Fifteen (4.2%) women in the intervention group cut down (self report and cotinine concentration less than half that at booking) compared with 26 (6.3%) in the control group. Fewer women in the intervention group reported smoking more (18 (5.1%) v 44 (10.7%); relative risk 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.28 to 0.81). Birth weight did not differ significantly (mean 3078 g v 3048 g). Conclusion Good quality motivational interviewing did not significantly increase smoking cessation among pregnant women.

AB - Objective To determine whether motivational interviewing—a behavioural therapy for addictions—provided at home by specially trained midwives helps pregnant smokers to quit. Design Randomised controlled non-blinded trial analysed by intention to treat. Setting Clinics attached to two maternity hospitals in Glasgow. Participants 762/1684 pregnant women who were regular smokers at antenatal booking: 351 in intervention group and 411 in control group. Interventions All women received standard health promotion information. Women in the intervention group were offered motivational interviewing at home. All interviews were recorded. Main outcome measures Self reported smoking cessation verified by plasma or salivary cotinine concentration. Results 17/351 (4.8%) women in the intervention group stopped smoking (according to self report and serum cotinine concentration < 13.7 ng/ml) compared with 19/411(4.6%) in the control group. Fifteen (4.2%) women in the intervention group cut down (self report and cotinine concentration less than half that at booking) compared with 26 (6.3%) in the control group. Fewer women in the intervention group reported smoking more (18 (5.1%) v 44 (10.7%); relative risk 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.28 to 0.81). Birth weight did not differ significantly (mean 3078 g v 3048 g). Conclusion Good quality motivational interviewing did not significantly increase smoking cessation among pregnant women.

U2 - 10.1136/bmj.331.7513.373

DO - 10.1136/bmj.331.7513.373

M3 - Article

VL - 331

SP - 373

EP - 377

JO - The BMJ

JF - The BMJ

SN - 0959-8138

ER -