Dataset Information

A multi-level analysis of non-significant counseling effects in a randomized smoking cessation trial.

ABSTRACT: AIMS:To determine, in the context of a trial in which counseling did not improve smoking cessation outcomes, whether this was due to a failure of the conceptual theory identifying treatment targets or the action theory specifying interventions. DESIGN:Data from a randomized clinical trial of smoking cessation counseling and bupropion SR were submitted to multi-level modeling to test whether counseling influenced real-time reports of cognitions, emotions and behaviors, and whether these targets predicted abstinence. SETTING:Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, Madison, WI. PARTICIPANTS:A total of 403 adult, daily smokers without contraindications to bupropion SR use. Participants were assigned randomly to receive individual counseling or no counseling and a 9-week course of bupropion SR or placebo pill. Cessation counseling was delivered in eight 10-minute sessions focused on bolstering social support, motivation, problem-solving and coping skills. MEASUREMENTS:Pre- and post-quit ecological momentary assessments of smoking behavior, smoking triggers, active prevention and coping strategies, motivation to quit, difficulty quitting and reactions to initial lapses. FINDINGS:Counseling prompted avoidance of access to cigarettes, improved quitting self-efficacy, reduced perceived difficulty of quitting over time and protected against guilt and demoralization following lapses. Results also supported the importance of limiting cigarette access, receiving social support, strong motivation and confidence and easing withdrawal distress during cessation efforts. Quitting self-efficacy and perceived difficulty quitting may partially mediate counseling effects on abstinence. CONCLUSIONS:Smoking cessation counseling may work by supporting confidence about quitting and reducing perceived difficulty quitting. Counseling did not affect other targets that protect against relapse.

SUBMITTER: McCarthy DE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2975757 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A multi-level analysis of non-significant counseling effects in a randomized smoking cessation trial.

McCarthy Danielle E DE Piasecki Thomas M TM Jorenby Douglas E DE Lawrence Daniel L DL Shiffman Saul S Baker Timothy B TB

Addiction (Abingdon, England) 20100915 12

<h4>Aims</h4>To determine, in the context of a trial in which counseling did not improve smoking cessation outcomes, whether this was due to a failure of the conceptual theory identifying treatment targets or the action theory specifying interventions.<h4>Design</h4>Data from a randomized clinical trial of smoking cessation counseling and bupropion SR were submitted to multi-level modeling to test whether counseling influenced real-time reports of cognitions, emotions and behaviors, and whether ...[more]

PMID: 20840173

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceElectronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) for smoking cessation remain controversial.ObjectiveTo evaluate e-cigarettes with individual counseling for smoking cessation.Design, setting, and participantsA randomized clinical trial enrolled adults motivated to quit smoking from November 2016 to September 2019 at 17 Canadian sites (801 individuals screened; 274 ineligible and 151 declined). Manufacturing delays resulted in early termination (376/486 participants, 77% of target). Outcomes through 24 weeks (March 2020) are reported.InterventionsRandomization to nicotine e-cigarettes (n = 128), nonnicotine e-cigarettes (n = 127), or no e-cigarettes (n = 121) for 12 weeks. All groups received individual counseling.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was point prevalence abstinence (7-day recall, biochemically validated using expired carbon monoxide) at 12 weeks, changed from 52 weeks following early termination. Participants missing data were assumed to be smoking. The 7 secondary end points, examined at multiple follow-ups, were point prevalence abstinence at other follow-ups, continuous abstinence, daily cigarette consumption change, serious adverse events, adverse events, dropouts due to adverse effects, and treatment adherence.ResultsAmong 376 randomized participants (mean age, 52 years; 178 women [47%]), 299 (80%) and 278 (74%) self-reported smoking status at 12 and 24 weeks, respectively. Point prevalence abstinence was significantly greater for nicotine e-cigarettes plus counseling vs counseling alone at 12 weeks (21.9% vs 9.1%; risk difference [RD], 12.8 [95% CI, 4.0 to 21.6]) but not 24 weeks (17.2% vs 9.9%; RD, 7.3 [95% CI, -1.2 to 15.7]). Point prevalence abstinence for nonnicotine e-cigarettes plus counseling was not significantly different from counseling alone at 12 weeks (17.3% vs 9.1%; RD, 8.2 [95% CI, -0.1 to 16.6]), but was significantly greater at 24 weeks (20.5% vs 9.9%; RD, 10.6 [95% CI, 1.8 to 19.4]). Adverse events were common (nicotine e-cigarette with counseling: 120 [94%]; nonnicotine e-cigarette with counseling: 118 [93%]; counseling only: 88 [73%]), with the most common being cough (64%) and dry mouth (53%).Conclusions and relevanceAmong adults motivated to quit smoking, nicotine e-cigarettes plus counseling vs counseling alone significantly increased point prevalence abstinence at 12 weeks. However, the difference was no longer significant at 24 weeks, and trial interpretation is limited by early termination and inconsistent findings for nicotine and nonnicotine e-cigarettes, suggesting further research is needed.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02417467.

Project description:The focus on acute care, time pressure, and lack of resources hamper the delivery of smoking cessation interventions in the emergency department (ED). The aim of this study was to 1) determine the effect of an emergency nurse-initiated intervention on delivery of smoking cessation counseling based on the 5As framework (ask-advise-assess-assist-arrange) and 2) assess ED nurses' and physicians' perceptions of smoking cessation counseling.The authors conducted a pre-post trial in 789 adult smokers (five or more cigarettes/day) who presented to two EDs. The intervention focused on improving delivery of the 5As by ED nurses and physicians and included face-to-face training and an online tutorial, use of a charting/reminder tool, fax referral of motivated smokers to the state tobacco quitline for proactive telephone counseling, and group feedback to ED staff. To assess ED performance of cessation counseling, a telephone interview of subjects was conducted shortly after the ED visit. Nurses' and physicians' self-efficacy, role satisfaction, and attitudes toward smoking cessation counseling were assessed by survey. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the effect of the intervention on performance of the 5As, while adjusting for key covariates.Of 650 smokers who completed the post-ED interview, a greater proportion had been asked about smoking by an ED nurse (68% vs. 53%, adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 2.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.3 to 2.9), assessed for willingness to quit (31% vs. 9%, adjusted OR= 4.9, 95% CI = 2.9 to 7.9), and assisted in quitting (23% vs. 6%, adjusted OR = 5.1, 95% CI = 2.7 to 9.5) and had arrangements for follow-up cessation counseling (7% vs. 1%, adjusted OR = 7.1, 95% CI = 2.3 to 21) during the intervention compared to the baseline period. A similar increase was observed for emergency physicians (EPs). ED nurses' self-efficacy and role satisfaction in cessation counseling significantly improved following the intervention; however, there was no change in "pros" and "cons" attitudes toward smoking cessation in either ED nurses or physicians.Emergency department nurses and physicians can effectively deliver smoking cessation counseling to smokers in a time-efficient manner. This trial also provides empirical support for expert recommendations that call for nursing staff to play a larger role in delivering public health interventions in the ED.

Project description:Abstinence reinforcement is efficacious for improving smoking treatment outcomes, but practical constraints related to the need for multiple in-person carbon monoxide (CO) breath tests daily to verify smoking abstinence have limited its use. This study tested an mHealth procedure to remotely monitor and reinforce smoking abstinence in individuals' natural environment.Eligible treatment-seeking smokers (N = 90) were randomized to (1) usual care and ecological monitoring with abstinence reinforcement (mHealth reinforcement) or (2) without reinforcement (mHealth monitoring). Usual care was 8 weeks of transdermal nicotine and twice-weekly telephone counseling. Following training, an interactive voice response system prompted participants to conduct CO tests 1-3 daily at pseudorandom times (7 am to 10 pm) for 4 weeks. When prompted, participants used a study cell phone and CO monitor to complete a CO self-test, video record the process, and submit videos using multimedia messaging. mHealth reinforcement participants could earn prizes for smoking-negative on-time CO tests. The interactive voice response generated preliminary earnings immediately. Earnings were finalized by comparing video records against participants' self-reports.mHealth reinforcement was associated with a greater proportion of smoking-negative CO tests, longest duration of prolonged abstinence, and point-prevalence abstinence during the monitoring/reinforcement phase compared to mHealth monitoring (p < .01, d = 0.8-1.3). Follow-up (weeks 4-24) analyses indicated main effects of reinforcement on point-prevalence abstinence and proportion of days smoked (p ? .05); values were comparable by week 24.mHealth reinforcement has short-term efficacy. Research on methods to enhance and sustain benefits is needed.This study suggests that mHealth abstinence reinforcement is efficacious and may present temporal and spatial opportunities to research, engage, and support smokers trying to quit that do not exist with conventional (not technology-based) reinforcement interventions.

Project description:ImportancePersistent smoking may cause adverse outcomes among patients with cancer. Many cancer centers have not fully implemented evidence-based tobacco treatment into routine care.ObjectiveTo determine the effectiveness of sustained telephone counseling and medication (intensive treatment) compared with shorter-term telephone counseling and medication advice (standard treatment) to assist patients recently diagnosed with cancer to quit smoking.Design, setting, and participantsThis unblinded randomized clinical trial was conducted at Massachusetts General Hospital/Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Adults who had smoked 1 cigarette or more within 30 days, spoke English or Spanish, and had recently diagnosed breast, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, gynecological, head and neck, lung, lymphoma, or melanoma cancers were eligible. Enrollment occurred between November 2013 and July 2017; assessments were completed by the end of February 2018.InterventionsParticipants randomized to the intensive treatment (n = 153) and the standard treatment (n = 150) received 4 weekly telephone counseling sessions and medication advice. The intensive treatment group also received 4 biweekly and 3 monthly telephone counseling sessions and choice of Food and Drug Administration-approved cessation medication (nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, or varenicline).Main outcome and measuresThe primary outcome was biochemically confirmed 7-day point prevalence tobacco abstinence at 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were treatment utilization rates.ResultsAmong 303 patients who were randomized (mean age, 58.3 years; 170 women [56.1%]), 221 (78.1%) completed the trial. Six-month biochemically confirmed quit rates were 34.5% (n = 51 in the intensive treatment group) vs 21.5% (n = 29 in the standard treatment group) (difference, 13.0% [95% CI, 3.0%-23.3%]; odds ratio, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.13-3.27]; P < .02). The median number of counseling sessions completed was 8 (interquartile range, 4-11) in the intensive treatment group. A total of 97 intensive treatment participants (77.0%) vs 68 standard treatment participants (59.1%) reported cessation medication use (difference, 17.9% [95% CI, 6.3%-29.5%]; odds ratio, 2.31 [95% CI, 1.32-4.04]; P = .003). The most common adverse events in the intensive treatment and standard treatment groups, respectively, were nausea (n = 13 and n = 6), rash (n = 4 and n = 1), hiccups (n = 4 and n = 1), mouth irritation (n = 4 and n = 0), difficulty sleeping (n = 3 and n = 2), and vivid dreams (n = 3 and n = 2).Conclusions and relevanceAmong smokers recently diagnosed with cancer in 2 National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers, sustained counseling and provision of free cessation medication compared with 4-week counseling and medication advice resulted in higher 6-month biochemically confirmed quit rates. However, the generalizability of the study findings is uncertain and requires further research.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01871506.

Dataset Information

A multi-level analysis of non-significant counseling effects in a randomized smoking cessation trial.

Publications

A multi-level analysis of non-significant counseling effects in a randomized smoking cessation trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets