Mixed-Methods Assessment of Cdc's Rx Awareness Campaign: Results and Lessons Learned from the Pilot

Theoretical Background and research questions/hypothesis:  Surveillance data show that no U.S. region has been spared from the recent epidemic of prescription drug overdose (PDO).  To address this problem the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National Center for Injury Prevention and Control launched a pilot campaign to increase knowledge and awareness about the risks of opioid use and consequences of misuse.  The campaign was piloted in December 2016 in West Virginia, Ohio, Rhode Island and Oregon. Following the 14-week pilot, CDC conducted an assessment to examine consumers’ perceptions of campaign messages/materials designed to increase consumers’ knowledge and awareness about the risks of prescription opioid use and misuse. Research questions focused on determining consumers’ pilot campaign exposure; awareness of PDO; knowledge and awareness of the risks of prescription opioids; perceptions of campaign messages/materials; and likelihood that campaign messages motivates consumers’ to seek information about prescription opioids.

Methods:  We employed a mixed-methods approach to assess perceptions of the campaign by integrating data from in-depth interviews (IDIs), and an online survey with target audience members in pilot states. We conducted nine digital IDIs with consumers asking questions about campaign messages/materials, and an online survey using a Retrospective Post then Pretest (RPTP) design with approximately 700 respondents (consumers exposed and unexposed to the campaign).  The IDIs were conducted in April 2017 and the survey fielded in May 2017.

Results: Early survey results reveal that consumers are most commonly exposed to pilot campaign billboards and online ads. Most survey respondents reported that pilot campaign taglines were effective and ads are memorable, interesting, believable, attention getting, powerful, meaningful and convincing.  The IDIs assist explaining the survey results revealing that consumers think campaign ads are believable and taglines are clear.  Further, IDI respondents reported that the static pilot campaign images could be modified to better convey and stress the dangers of prescription opioids. Across IDIs, participants expressed concern that people may not understand the term “prescription opioids”. Finally, most respondents said that radio ads and video testimonials talking about prescription opioid addiction or family member loss were impactful.  Most participants said that they wanted to know more about what led the people in ads to take prescription opioids in the first place.  

Conclusions:  Results indicate that consumers believe the pilot campaign’s messages and are receptive to campaign materials, particularly campaign billboards and online media.  Further, early results show that campaign messages/materials are effective, attention-getting and meaningful to target audiences in pilot campaign states.  Finally, results indicate that improvements are needed to stress the highly addictive nature of opioids, the risks of prescription opioids use, and dangers of misuse.

Implications for research and/or practice:  There are three critical implications for research and practice: (1) mixed-method approaches provide opportunity for deeper insight into consumers’ perception of sensitive campaign messages; (2) it is critical to conduct testing and in-market assessments on sensitive issues (e.g., opioid use) prior to wide-scale campaign implementation; and (3) speaking directly to target audiences helps pinpoint specific changes needed to improve campaign messages/materials (e.g., strong risk messages about opioid use).