PERSonalised Incentives for Supporting Tobacco cessation (PERSIST) among healthcare employees: evaluation and lessons learned 365 11 guide ensured that the same topics (such as awareness of the program, opinion on incentives, etc.) were discussed in every interview. All interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Data analysis The transcripts were analysed using NVivo software. First, open coding was used, followed by axial coding, where open codes were connected and categorized. The final step was selective coding, in which the different categories were integrated into the four dimensions of non-participation. NWB and LB independently coded the data and after each step the codes were compared and differences were discussed until consensus was reached. Hence, all relevant topics were included. Ethics and privacy The Erasmus MC Medical Ethics Committee reviewed the protocol and qualitative study (MEC-2019-0140, MEC-2021-0711). All respondents were informed of the aim of the study and signed an informed consent form. Results Trial Participants were randomized into the intervention (n=17) or control (n=14) group (Figure 2). Due to low recruitment rates, a decision was made after 24 months to terminate the trial before the sample size requirement was met. Trial participant characteristics The average monthly income of the intervention group was slightly higher than that of the control group. No other relevant demographic differences were observed between the intervention and control groups (Table 1). Most participants started smoking before the age of 18 years, almost all tried to quit at least once prior to the trial, and approximately 50% of the participants used nicotine replacement therapy prior to the trial.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw