Dataset Information

Effects of motivation phase intervention components on quit attempts in smokers unwilling to quit: A factorial experiment.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Smoking reduction treatment is a promising approach to increase abstinence amongst smokers initially unwilling to quit. However, little is known about which reduction treatment elements increase quit attempts and the uptake of cessation treatment amongst such smokers. METHODS:This study is a secondary analysis of a 4-factor randomized factorial experiment conducted amongst primary care patients (N = 517) presenting for regular healthcare visits in Southern Wisconsin who were unwilling to quit smoking but willing to cut down. We evaluated the main and interactive effects of Motivation-phase intervention components on whether participants: 1) made a quit attempt (intentional abstinence ≥24 h) by 6- and 26-weeks post-study enrollment and, 2) used cessation treatment. We also evaluated the relations of quit attempts with abstinence. The four intervention components evaluated were: 1) Nicotine Patch vs. None; 2) Nicotine Gum vs. None; 3) Motivational Interviewing (MI) vs. None; and 4) Behavioral Reduction Counseling (BR) vs. None. Intervention components were administered over 6 weeks, with an option to repeat treatment; participants could request cessation treatment at any point. RESULTS:Nicotine gum significantly increased the likelihood of making a quit attempt by 6 weeks (23% vs. 15% without gum; p < .05). Conversely, nicotine patch reduced quit attempts when used with BR. Patch also discouraged use of cessation treatment (15.8% vs. 23% without patch; p < .05). Aided vs. unaided quit attempts produced abstinence in 42% vs. 10% of participants, respectively. CONCLUSION:Nicotine gum is a promising Motivation-phase intervention that may spur quit attempts amongst smokers initially unwilling to quit.

SUBMITTER: Engle JL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6573018 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effects of motivation phase intervention components on quit attempts in smokers unwilling to quit: A factorial experiment.

Engle Jessica L JL Mermelstein Robin R Baker Timothy B TB Smith Stevens S SS Schlam Tanya R TR Piper Megan E ME Jorenby Douglas E DE Collins Linda M LM Cook Jessica W JW

Drug and alcohol dependence 20190216

<h4>Background</h4>Smoking reduction treatment is a promising approach to increase abstinence amongst smokers initially unwilling to quit. However, little is known about which reduction treatment elements increase quit attempts and the uptake of cessation treatment amongst such smokers.<h4>Methods</h4>This study is a secondary analysis of a 4-factor randomized factorial experiment conducted amongst primary care patients (N = 517) presenting for regular healthcare visits in Southern Wisconsin who ...[more]

PMID: 30825795

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionMost people who smoke cigarettes are not willing (ie, not ready) to make a quit attempt (QA) at any given time. Unfortunately, interventions intended to increase QAs and the success of QAs are only modestly effective. Identifying processes leading to QAs and quitting success could guide intervention development.Aims and methodsThis is a secondary analysis of a randomized factorial trial of 6 weeks of motivation-phase interventions among primary care patients (N = 517) who were initially unwilling to quit but were willing to reduce their smoking. Using logistic regression, we controlled for treatment condition and tested whether baseline or change in smoking-related constructs after 6 weeks of treatment predicted (1) making an at least 24 h QA between weeks 6 and 26 and (2) quitting success at week 26 (7-day point-prevalence abstinence among those who made a QA). Predictors included cigarettes/day, time to first cigarette, motivation to quit, quitting self-efficacy, anticipated urges to smoke if quit, positive affect, negative affect, and time spent around others who smoke.ResultsIn multivariable models that included all smoking-related constructs, changes in the following variables predicted initiating a QA above and beyond other variables: greater baseline time to first cigarette (odds ratio [OR] = 1.60), increases in time to first cigarette (OR = 1.27), and increases in quitting self-efficacy (OR = 1.14). Increased motivation to quit predicted conversion of a QA into quitting success at 26 weeks (OR = 1.36).ConclusionPredictors of making a QA differed from predictors of quitting success. Predictors of QAs and success could each serve as important treatment targets of motivation-phase interventions.ImplicationsMotivation-phase interventions for people initially unwilling to quit smoking cigarettes may be improved by striving to increase their (1) time to first cigarette and quitting self-efficacy to promote QAs and (2) motivation to quit to promote quit success. Future experimental tests of such interventions are needed to identify causal determinants of QAs and quitting success.

Project description:AimsLittle is known about the extent to which quit attempts are planned ahead or initiated immediately following a sudden decision to quit. This is important because if most smokers quit abruptly, rather than plan ahead, this could impact heavily upon recommendations to health care professionals on the kind of smoking cessation advice they deliver to patients. This paper aims to address this gap in knowledge by examining detailed smoking histories taken from smoking and ex-smoking patients.DesignFace-to-face in depth semi-structured interviews.Participants146 smoking and ex-smoking patients within a family medicine practice were recruited by means of screening 700 consecutive patients (14 years of age and older) and inviting eligible patients to participate. To be eligible, patients had to have smoked a minimum of five cigarettes per day for at least six months in their lives and made at least one serious quit attempt that lasted at least 24 hours. There were no refusals. Ex-smokers (n = 67) were defined as those who had not smoked for six months. The remainder were classified as smokers (n = 79).MeasurementsParticipants were asked to describe, in their own words, their most recent quit attempt and whether they had planned the quit attempt in advance, what were the triggers, and how long they abstained. A quit attempt was defined as planned if smokers set a quit date at some future time point. An unplanned quit attempt was defined as a sudden decision not to smoke any more cigarettes including those that might be remaining in the current pack. Information was also collected on methods used to quit and reasons for quitting.ResultsA majority (51.6%) of quit attempts were reported as being unplanned. The figure was higher for ex-smokers than for smokers (67.1% v 36.7%, p < 0.001). Most quit attempts were unaided (64%) and made for reasons of health (64%).ConclusionsThe finding that so many quit attempts are unprepared suggests that models of smoking cessation should place greater emphasis on the dynamic nature of motivation to quit. This is an area that requires further investigation.

Project description:IntroductionThis study used data from a randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of motivational interviewing (MI) relative to health education (HE) and brief advice (BA) to encourage quit attempts and cessation in order to determine their relative cost-effectiveness.Aims and methodsUrban community residents (n = 255) with low desire to quit smoking were randomized to MI, HE, or BA which differed in communication style and/or number of treatment sessions. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were used to compare the intensive interventions (MI and HE) to BA for facilitating quit attempts and smoking cessation. Costs were calculated from the perspective of an agency that might engage in program delivery. Sensitivity analysis examined different assumptions for MI training and pharmacotherapy costs.ResultsTotal intervention delivery time costs per participant for MI, HE, and BA were $46.63, $42.87, and $2.4, respectively. Cost-effectiveness ratios per quit attempt at 24 weeks were $380 for MI, $272 for HE, and $209 for BA. The cost per additional quit attempt for MI and HE relative to BA was $508 and $301, respectively. The cost per additional quit for MI and HE relative to BA was $2030 and $752, respectively. Four separate sensitivity analyses conducted in our study did not change the conclusion the HE had a lower Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio for both quit attempts and cessation.ConclusionsHE was the most cost-effective of the three types of smoking cessation induction therapies and therefore may be preferable for smokers who are less motivated to quit. Providing valuable cost information in choosing different clinical methods for motivating smokers to quit.ImplicationsAll direct costs and activity-based time costs associated with delivering the intervention were analyzed from the perspective of an agency that may wish to replicate these strategies. A randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of MI relative to HE and BA to encourage quit attempts and cessation determined their relative cost-effectiveness. HE was the most cost-effective of the three types of smoking cessation induction therapies and therefore may be preferable. Despite guideline recommendations, MI may not be the best approach to encourage quit attempts in diverse populations. Rather, a structured, intensive HE intervention might be the most cost-effective alternative.

Dataset Information

Effects of motivation phase intervention components on quit attempts in smokers unwilling to quit: A factorial experiment.

Publications

Effects of motivation phase intervention components on quit attempts in smokers unwilling to quit: A factorial experiment.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets