Dataset Information

Trial protocol and preliminary results for a cluster randomised trial of behavioural support versus brief advice for smoking cessation in adolescents.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Many young people report they want to stop smoking and have tried to do so, but most of their quit attempts fail. For adult smokers, there is strong evidence that group behavioural support enhances quit rates. However, it is uncertain whether group behavioural support enhances abstinence in young smokers trying to quit. FINDINGS: A cluster randomised trial for young people trying to stop smoking to compare the efficacy of a school-based 9 week intensive group behavioural support course versus a school-based 7 week brief advice only course. Participants were assessed for evidence of tobacco addiction and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) was used if it was deemed appropriate by the therapist. Both types of course aimed to recruit approximately one hundred participants from approximately ten schools.The primary outcome was successful quitting at 4 weeks after quit day judged according to the Russell standard. Had the trial been completed, abstinence at 6 months after quit day and the relationships between successful quit attempts and 1) psychological assessments of dependence prior to quitting 2) salivary cotinine concentration prior to quitting and 3) sociodemographic characteristics would also have been assessed. The proportion of participants who stopped smoking in each arm of the trial were compared using Chi square tests.The trial was stopped shortly after it had started because funding to support the therapists running the stop smoking group behavioural support programme was withdrawn. Only three stop smoking courses were completed (two group support courses and one brief advice pharmacotherapy course). Seventeen participants in total entered the trial. At the end of the courses, one participant (10%) attending the group support programme had stopped smoking and no participant attending the brief advice programme had stopped smoking. DISCUSSION: The trial was stopped so we were unable to determine whether group support helped more young people to stop smoking than brief advice. Engagement and recruitment of participants proved much more difficult than had been anticipated. Fifteen of the seventeen participants reported that quitting smoking was either pretty important or very important to them. Thus, the stop smoking success rate could, nevertheless, be considered disappointing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN25181936.

SUBMITTER: Markham WA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3022813 | biostudies-literature | 2010

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Trial protocol and preliminary results for a cluster randomised trial of behavioural support versus brief advice for smoking cessation in adolescents.

Markham Wolfgang A WA Bridle Christopher C Grimshaw Gillian G Stanton Alan A Aveyard Paul P

BMC research notes 20101214

<h4>Background</h4>Many young people report they want to stop smoking and have tried to do so, but most of their quit attempts fail. For adult smokers, there is strong evidence that group behavioural support enhances quit rates. However, it is uncertain whether group behavioural support enhances abstinence in young smokers trying to quit.<h4>Findings</h4>A cluster randomised trial for young people trying to stop smoking to compare the efficacy of a school-based 9 week intensive group behavioural ...[more]

PMID: 21156068

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIt is a priority to achieve smoking cessation in diabetic smokers, given that this is a group of patients with elevated cardiovascular risk. Furthermore, tobacco has a multiplying effect on micro and macro vascular complications. Smoking abstinence rates increase as the intensity of the intervention, length of the intervention and number and diversity of contacts with the healthcare professional during the intervention increases. However, there are few published studies about smoking cessation in diabetics in primary care, a level of healthcare that plays an essential role in these patients. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to evaluate the effectiveness of an intensive smoking cessation intervention in diabetic patients in primary care.Methods/designCluster randomized trial, controlled and multicentric. Randomization unit: Primary Care Team.Study population546 diabetic smokers older than 14 years of age whose disease is controlled by one of the primary care teams in the study.Outcome measuresContinuous tobacco abstinence (a person who has not smoked for at least six months and with a CO level of less than 6 ppm measured by a cooximeter) , evolution in the Prochaska and DiClemente's Transtheoretical Model of Change, number of cigarettes/day, length of the visit. Point of assessment: one- year post- inclusion in the study.InterventionBrief motivational interview for diabetic smokers at the pre-contemplation and contemplation stage, intensive motivational interview with pharmacotherapy for diabetic smokers in the preparation-action stage and reinforcing intevention in the maintenance stage.Statistical analysisA descriptive analysis of all variables will be done, as well as a multilevel logistic regression and a Poisson regression. All analyses will be done with an intention to treatment basis and will be fitted for potential confounding factors and variables of clinical importance. Statistical packages: SPSS15, STATA10 y HLM6.DiscussionThe present study will try to describe the profile of a diabetic smoker who receives the most benefit from an intensive intervention in primary care. The results will be useful for primary care professionals in their usual clinical practice.Trial registrationClinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT00954967.

Project description:Importance:Most smoking cessation (SC) clinics are costly, passive, and underused. Objective:To compare the SC effect of a combined intervention involving brief, model-guided SC advice plus active referral to SC services (active referral group) with those of brief, model-guided SC advice only (brief advice group) and general SC advice only (control group). Design, Setting, and Participants:A single-blind, 3-arm, pragmatic cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted including 1226 adult daily smokers in the general Hong Kong community proactively recruited to participate in the Quit-to-Win Contest held in 2015. The study was conducted from June 20 to September 24, 2015. Participants were randomly allocated to the active referral (n = 402), brief advice (n = 416), and control (n = 408) groups. Intention-to-treat analysis was used. Interventions:Brief telephone counseling was offered to the active referral and brief advice groups at 1 and 2 months. Interventions were delivered by SC ambassadors who had undergone a short training period. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was the self-reported past 7-day point prevalence of abstinence (PPA) at 6 months. The secondary outcomes were carbon monoxide level-validated abstinence, smoking reduction, and SC service use. Results:Participants included 991 (80.8%) men; mean (SD) age was 42.0 (14.8) years. The response rate was 68.2% at 3 and 72.3% at 6 months. The corresponding PPAs were 18.9% and 17.2% in the active referral group-higher than in the brief advice (8.9% and 9.4%; both P ≤ .001) or control (14.0% and 11.5%; P = .03 at 6 months) groups. Compared with the other 2 groups, the active referral group had significantly higher validated abstinence rates (10.2% at 3 months and 9.0% at 6 months, all P < .05) with odds ratios of 2.84 (95% CI, 1.57-5.15) and 2.61 (95% CI, 1.46-4.68) at 3 months, and 1.85 (95% CI, 1.06-3.23) and 1.81 (95% CI, 1.04-3.16) at 6 months in the brief advice and control groups, respectively. The SC service use rate was significantly higher in the active referral group (25.1%) than in either brief advice (2.4%) or control (3.4%) groups at 6 months (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance:An intervention involving brief advice and active referral delivered to smokers in the community by volunteers can increase quitting in places where SC services are available but underused. Trial Registration:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02539875.

Project description:BackgroundEffectiveness of evidence-based behaviour change interventions is likely to be undermined by failure to deliver interventions as planned. Behavioural support for smoking cessation can be a highly cost-effective, life-saving intervention. However, in practice, outcomes are highly variable. Part of this may be due to variability in fidelity of intervention implementation. To date, there have been no published studies on this. The present study aimed to: evaluate a method for assessing fidelity of behavioural support; assess fidelity of delivery in two English Stop-Smoking Services; and compare the extent of fidelity according to session types, duration, individual practitioners, and component behaviour change techniques (BCTs).MethodsTreatment manuals and transcripts of 34 audio-recorded behavioural support sessions were obtained from two Stop-Smoking Services and coded into component BCTs using a taxonomy of 43 BCTs. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using percentage agreement. Fidelity was assessed by examining the proportion of BCTs specified in the manuals that were delivered in individual sessions. This was assessed by session type (i.e., pre-quit, quit, post-quit), duration, individual practitioner, and BCT.ResultsInter-coder reliability was high (87.1%). On average, 66% of manual-specified BCTs were delivered per session (SD 15.3, range: 35% to 90%). In Service 1, average fidelity was highest for post-quit sessions (69%) and lowest for pre-quit (58%). In Service 2, fidelity was highest for quit-day (81%) and lowest for post-quit sessions (56%). Session duration was not significantly correlated with fidelity. Individual practitioner fidelity ranged from 55% to 78%. Individual manual-specified BCTs were delivered on average 63% of the time (SD 28.5, range: 0 to 100%).ConclusionsThe extent to which smoking cessation behavioural support is delivered as specified in treatment manuals can be reliably assessed using transcripts of audiotaped sessions. This allows the investigation of the implementation of evidence-based practice in relation to smoking cessation, a first step in designing interventions to improve it. There are grounds for believing that fidelity in the English Stop-Smoking Services may be low and that routine monitoring is warranted.

Project description:BACKGROUND AND AIMS:Behavioural support increases smoking cessation in clinical settings, but effect sizes differ among providers, due possibly to variations in delivery. This study evaluates a measure ('fidelity index') intended to capture fidelity to delivery of content- and interaction-based items of a behavioural support (BS) for smoking cessation and the association of fidelity with quit rates. METHODS:A fidelity index for scoring the adherence and quality domains of a specific BS intervention, '5As for quit', was developed by classifying the intervention components using the taxonomy of behaviour change techniques. The index was applied to code 154 BS sessions audiotaped among 18 chest clinics in Pakistan to assess their fidelity and explore reliability of coding. The association between intervention fidelity and successful quit achieved by the same providers in a previous study was explored using regression analysis. RESULTS:The index represented two domains: adherence to delivery of content-based activities of 5As (37 items) and quality of interaction-based activities (eight items). The intercoder reliability was good for content-based (average Krippendorff's ? = 0.80) and moderate for interaction-based (average Krippendorff's ? = 0.66) items. Approximately 70% (intraclass correlation coefficient: adherence scores = 0.72, quality scores = 0.71) of variation in BS delivery was contributed by providers, which increased to 97% (g-coefficient: adherence scores = 0.973, quality scores = 0.974) after accounting for other sources of variation. Higher quit rates were positively associated with average quality scores [risk ratio = 2.15; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.43-3.24], but negatively associated with average adherence scores (risk ratio = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.40-0.77) within services. CONCLUSIONS:The fidelity index is a reliable measure for quantifying intervention fidelity of delivering smoking cessation behavioural support. Recommended revisions of the fidelity index include incorporation of additional interaction-based items, such as the relational techniques used in motivational interviewing.

Project description:IntroductionArgentina and Uruguay have a high prevalence of smoking during pregnancy. However, and despite national recommendations, pregnant women are not routinely receiving cessation counseling during antenatal care (ANC). We evaluated a multifaceted strategy designed to increase the frequency of pregnant women who received a brief smoking cessation counseling based on the 5As (Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, and Arrange).MethodsWe randomly assigned (1:1) 20 ANC clusters in Buenos Aires, Argentina and Montevideo, Uruguay to receive a multifaceted intervention to implement brief smoking cessation counseling into routine ANC, or to receive no intervention. The primary outcome was the frequency of women who recalled receiving the 5As during ANC at more than one visit. Frequency of women who smoked until the end of pregnancy, and attitudes and readiness of ANC providers towards providing counseling were secondary outcomes. Women's outcomes were measured at baseline and at the end of the 14- to 18-month intervention, by administering questionnaires at the postpartum hospital stay. Self-reported cessation was verified with saliva cotinine. The trial took place between October 03, 2011 and November 29, 2013.ResultsThe rate of women who recalled receiving the 5As increased from 14.0% to 33.6% in the intervention group (median rate change, 22.1%), and from 10.8% to 17.0% in the control group (median rate change, 4.6%; P = .001 for the difference in change between groups). The effect of the intervention was larger in Argentina than in Uruguay. The proportion of women who continued smoking during pregnancy was unchanged at follow-up in both groups and the relative difference between groups was not statistically significant (ratio of odds ratios 1.16, 95% CI: 0.98-1.37; P = .086). No significant changes were observed in knowledge, attitudes, and self-confidence of ANC providers.ConclusionsThe intervention showed a moderate effect in increasing the proportion of women who recalled receiving the 5As, with a third of women receiving counseling in more than one visit. However, the frequency of women who smoked until the end of the pregnancy was not significantly reduced by the intervention.ImplicationsNo implementation trials of smoking cessation interventions for pregnant women have been carried out in Latin American or in middle-income countries where health care systems or capacities may differ. We evaluated a multifaceted strategy designed to increase the frequency of pregnant women who receive brief smoking cessation counseling based on the 5As in Argentina and Uruguay. We found that the intervention showed a moderate effect in increasing the proportion of women receiving the 5As, with a third of women receiving counseling in more than one visit. However, the frequency of women who smoked until the end of the pregnancy was not significantly reduced by the intervention.

Project description:Background and aimsA combination of behavioural and pharmacological support is judged to be the optimal approach for assisting smoking cessation. Allen Carr's Easyway (ACE) is a single-session pharmacotherapy-free programme that has been in operation internationally for 38 years. We compared the effectiveness of ACE with specialist behavioural and pharmacological support delivered to the national standard in England.DesignA two-arm, parallel-group, single-blind, randomized controlled trial.SettingLondon, UK, between February 2017 and May 2018.ParticipantsA total of 620 participants (310 in ACE and 310 in the combined behavioural and pharmacological support condition) were included in the analysis. Adult (≥ 18 years) smokers wanting to quit were randomized in a 1 : 1 ratio. Mean age for the total sample was 40.8 years, with 53.4% being male. Participant baseline characteristics (ethnicity, educational level, number of previous quit attempts, nicotine dependence) were evenly balanced between treatment groups.Intervention and comparatorThe intervention was the ACE method of stopping smoking. This centres on a 4.5-6-hour session of group-based support, alongside subsequent text messages and top-up sessions if needed. It aims to make it easy to stop smoking by convincing smokers that smoking provides no benefits for them. The comparator was a specialist stop smoking service (SSS) providing behavioural and pharmacological support in accordance with national standards.MeasurementsThe primary outcome was self-reported continuous abstinence for 26 weeks from the quit/quit re-set date verified by exhaled breath carbon monoxide measurement < 10 parts per million (p.p.m.). Primary analysis was by intention to treat. Secondary outcomes were: use of pharmacotherapy, adverse events and continuous abstinence up to 4 and 12 weeks.FindingsA total of 468 participants attended treatment (255 ACE versus 213 SSS, P < 0.05). Of those who did attend treatment, 100 completed 6-month measures (23.7% ACE versus 20.7% SSS). Continuous abstinence to 26 weeks was 19.4% (60 of 310) in the ACE intervention and 14.8% (46 of 310) in the SSS intervention [risk difference for ACE versus SSS 4.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) = -1.4 to 10.4%, odds ratio (OR) = 1.38)]. The Bayes factor for superiority of the ACE condition was 1.24.ConclusionThere was no clear evidence of a difference in the efficacies of the Allen Carr's Easyway (ACE) and specialist smoking cessation support involving behavioural support and pharmacotherapy.

Project description:BackgroundPeople with a serious mental illness are more likely to smoke more and to be more dependent smokers than the general population. This may be due to a wide range of factors that could include a common aetiology to both smoking and the illness, self medication, smoking to alleviate adverse effects of medications, boredom in the existing environment, or a combination of these factors. It is important to undertake this review to facilitate improvements in both the health and safety of people with serious mental illness who smoke, and to reduce the overall burden of costs (both financial and health) to the smoker and, eventually, to the taxpayer.ObjectivesTo review the effects of smoking cessation advice for people with serious mental illness.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Specialized Trials Register up to 2 April 2015, which is based on regular searches of CENTRAL, BIOSIS, PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and trial registries. We also undertook unsystematic searches of a sample of the component databases (BNI, CINHAL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO), up to 2 April 2015, and searched references of all identified studiesSelection criteriaWe planned to include all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that focussed on smoking cessation advice versus standard care or comparing smoking cessation advice with other more focussed methods of delivering care or information.Data collection and analysisThe review authors (PK, AC, and DB) independently screened search results but did not identify any trials that fulfilled the inclusion criteria of this review.Main resultsWe did not identify any RCTs that evaluated advice regarding smoking cessation for people with serious mental illness. The excluded studies illustrate that randomisation of packages of care relevant to smokers with serious mental illness is possible.Authors' conclusionsPeople with serious mental illness are more likely to smoke than the general population. Yet we could not find any high quality evidence to guide the smoking cessation advice healthcare professionals pass onto service users. This is an area where trials are possible and needed.

Dataset Information

Trial protocol and preliminary results for a cluster randomised trial of behavioural support versus brief advice for smoking cessation in adolescents.

Publications

Trial protocol and preliminary results for a cluster randomised trial of behavioural support versus brief advice for smoking cessation in adolescents.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets