A randomised controlled trial of financial incentives to increase hepatitis B vaccination completion among people who inject drugs in Australia
This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of modest financial incentives in increasing completion of an accelerated 3-dose hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination schedule (0, 7, 21 days) among people who inject drugs (PWID).
Randomised controlled trial. Participants were randomly allocated to receive $30 Australian Dollars cash following receipt of vaccine doses two and three (‘incentive condition’), or standard care (‘control condition’). Serologically confirmed HBV-susceptible PWID. Two inner-city health services and a field study site in Sydney, Australia. The primary outcome was completion of the vaccination series. Additional assessments included self-reported demographic, drug use and treatment, and risk-taking histories.
Compared to the control condition, significantly more participants in the incentive condition received all three vaccine doses, under intention-to-treat analyses (n = 139; 87% versus 66%; p = .004); and within the specified window periods under per protocol analyses (n = 107 received three vaccine doses; 92% versus 67%; p = .001). Multivariate analysis indicated that the incentive condition and longer injecting histories significantly increased the likelihood of series completion. Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islanders were significantly less likely to complete the series.
Modest financial incentives, per-dose, increased adherence to the accelerated HBV vaccination schedule among PWID. Results have implications for increasing HBV and, potentially, other vaccine-preventable infections, among PWID.
Full-textDOI: · Available from: Lisa Maher, Aug 14, 2014
SourceAvailable from: John Strang[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Poor adherence to treatment diminishes its individual and public health benefit. Financial incentives, provided on the condition of treatment attendance, could address this problem. Injecting drug users are a high-risk group for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection and transmission, but adherence to vaccination programmes is poor. We aimed to assess whether contingency management delivered in routine clinical practice increased the completion of HBV vaccination in individuals receiving opioid substitution therapy. In our cluster randomised controlled trial, we enrolled participants at 12 National Health Service drug treatment services in the UK that provided opioid substitution therapy and nurse-led HBV vaccination with a super-accelerated schedule (vaccination days 0, 7, and 21). Clusters were randomly allocated 1:1:1 to provide vaccination without incentive (treatment as usual), with fixed value contingency management (three £10 vouchers), or escalating value contingency management (£5, £10, and £15 vouchers). Both contingency management schedules rewarded on-time attendance at appointments. The primary outcome was completion of clinically appropriate HBV vaccination within 28 days. We also did sensitivity analyses that examined vaccination completion with full adherence to appointment times and within a 3 month window. The trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN72794493. Between March 16, 2011, and April 26, 2012, we enrolled 210 eligible participants. Compared with six (9%) of 67 participants treated as usual, 35 (45%) of 78 participants in the fixed value contingency management group met the primary outcome measure (odds ratio 12·1, 95% CI 3·7-39·9; p<0·0001), as did 32 (49%) of 65 participants in the escalating value contingency management group (14·0, 4·2-46·2; p<0·0001). These differences remained significant with sensitivity analyses. Modest financial incentives delivered in routine clinical practice significantly improve adherence to, and completion of, HBV vaccination programmes in patients receiving opioid substitution therapy. Achievement of this improvement in routine clinical practice should now prompt actual implementation. Drug treatment providers should employ contingency management to promote adherence to vaccination programmes. The effectiveness of routine use of contingency management to achieve long-term behaviour change remains unknown. National Institute for Health Research (RP-PG-0707-10149).The Lancet 04/2014; 384(9938). DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60196-3 · 39.21 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: BackgroundHepatitis B virus (HBV) is a vaccine preventable infection yet vaccination rates are low among injection drug users (IDUs) despite the high risk of infection and longstanding recommendations to promote vaccination. We sought to improve vaccination rates by reaching IDUs through syringe exchange programs (SEPs) in three U.S. cities.MethodsIDUs were randomized in a trial comparing the standard HBV vaccination schedule (0, 1, and 6 months) to an accelerated schedule (0, 1, and 2 months) and participation data were analyzed to identify determinants of completion of the three-dose vaccine series. Independent variables explored included sociodemographics, injection and syringe access behaviors, assessment of health beliefs, HBV-associated knowledge, and personal health status.ResultsCovariates associated with completion of the three-dose vaccine series were accelerated vaccine schedule (aOR 1.92, 95% CI 1.34, 2.58, p = <0.001), older age (aOR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03, 1.07, p = <0.001), and poorer self-rated health score (aOR 1.26, 95% CI 1.05, 1.5, p = 0.02). Completion was less likely for those getting syringes from SEP customers than for SEP customers (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.19, 0.58, p = <0.001).ConclusionsSEPs should offer hepatitis vaccination in a manner that minimizes time between first and last visits by accelerating the dosing schedule. Public health interventions should target younger, less healthy, and non-SEP customer participants. Other health interventions at SEPs may benefit from similar approaches that reach out beyond regular SEP customers.BMC Public Health 08/2014; 14(1):820. DOI:10.1186/1471-2458-14-820 · 2.32 Impact Factor
Sexual Health 03/2014; 11(1):1-4. DOI:10.1071/SH13166 · 1.58 Impact Factor