Dataset Information

Tobacco quitline performance: Comparing the impacts of early cessation and proactive re-engagement on callers' smoking status at follow-up at 12 months.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

While tobacco Quitlines are effective in the promotion of smoking cessation, the majority of callers who wish to quit still fail to do so. The aim of this study was to determine if 12-month tobacco Quitline smoking cessation rates could be improved with re-engagement of callers whose first Quitline treatment failed to establish abstinence.

Methods

In an adaptive trial, 614 adult smokers, who were active duty, retired, and family of military personnel with TRICARE insurance who called a tobacco Quitline, received a previously evaluated and efficacious four-session tobacco cessation intervention with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). At the scheduled follow-up at 3 months, callers who had not yet achieved abstinence were offered the opportunity to re-engage. This resulted in three caller groups: 1) those who were abstinent, 2) those who were still smoking but willing to re-engage with an additional Quitline treatment; and 3) individuals who were still smoking but declined re-engagement. A propensity score-adjusted logistic regression model was generated to compare past-7-day point prevalence abstinence at 12 months post Quitline consultation.

Results

Using a propensity score adjusted logistic regression model, comparison of the three groups resulted in higher odds of past-7-day point prevalence abstinence at follow-up at 12 months for those who were abstinent at 3 months compared to those who re-engaged (OR=9.6; 95% CI: 5.2-17.8; Bonferroni adjusted p<0.0001), and relative to those who declined re-engagement (OR=13.4; 95% CI: 6.8-26.3; Bonferroni adjusted p<0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference in smoking abstinence between smokers at 3 months who re-engaged and those who declined re-engagement (OR=1.39; 95% CI: 0.68-2.85).

Conclusions

Tobacco Quitlines seeking to select a single initiative by which to maximize abstinence at follow-up at 12 months may benefit from diverting additional resources from the re-engagement of callers whose initial quit attempt failed, toward changes which increase callers' probability of success within the first 3 months of treatment.

Trial registration

This study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02201810).

SUBMITTER: Cassidy DG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9923459 | biostudies-literature | 2023

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Tobacco quitline performance: Comparing the impacts of early cessation and proactive re-engagement on callers' smoking status at follow-up at 12 months.

Cassidy Daniel G DG Wang Xin-Qun XQ Mallawaarachchi Indika I Wiseman Kara P KP Ebbert Jon O JO Blue Star John A JA Aycock Chase A CA Estevez Burns Rosemary R Jones John R JR Krunnfusz Andrea E AE Halbert Jennifer P JP Roy Natalie M NM Ellis Jordan M JM Williams Juinell B JB Klesges Robert C RC Talcott Gerald W GW

Tobacco induced diseases 20230215

<h4>Introduction</h4>While tobacco Quitlines are effective in the promotion of smoking cessation, the majority of callers who wish to quit still fail to do so. The aim of this study was to determine if 12-month tobacco Quitline smoking cessation rates could be improved with re-engagement of callers whose first Quitline treatment failed to establish abstinence.<h4>Methods</h4>In an adaptive trial, 614 adult smokers, who were active duty, retired, and family of military personnel with TRICARE insu ...[more]

PMID: 36798676

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionCannabis use is increasing among cigarette smokers in the United States. Prior studies suggest that cannabis use may be a barrier to smoking cessation. Yet, the extent to which this is the case among adults seeking to quit tobacco use remains unclear. Tobacco quitlines are the most common provider of no-cost treatment for adults who use smoke in the United States. This study investigated the association between cannabis use and smoking cessation outcomes among quitline callers.Aims and methodsParticipants included callers to the New York State Smokers' Quitline, who were seeking to quit smoking cigarettes and were contacted for outcome assessment 7 months after intake. Thirty-day point prevalence abstinence rates were calculated and compared among cannabis use groups, based on frequency of past-30-day cannabis use at baseline (none: 0 days, occasional: 1-9 days, regular: 10-19 days, and daily: 20-30 days).ResultsApproximately 8.3% (n = 283) of participants (n = 3396) reported past-30-day cannabis use at baseline. Callers with daily cannabis use (20-30 days per month) had significantly lower odds of 30-day abstinence, relative to those who did not use cannabis (odds ratio = 0.5; 95% confidence interval [0.3, 0.9]).ConclusionsDaily cannabis use appears to be associated with poorer smoking cessation treatment outcomes among adults seeking to quit smoking cigarettes via a quitline. Because quitlines are among the most accessible, affordable, and frequently utilized community-based treatments available in the United States, and the prevalence of cannabis use is increasing among cigarette smokers, detailed inquiry into cannabis use might enhance cigarette smoking cessation outcomes.ImplicationsQuitlines are free of cost and accessible to millions of smokers in the United States. The current study found an inverse relationship between daily cannabis use at baseline and 30-day abstinence from cigarette smoking at 7-month follow-up among New York State Smokers' Quitline callers. Findings suggest that daily cannabis use may be a barrier to smoking cessation and sustained abstinence among those seeking help to stop smoking cigarettes.

Project description:ObjectivesApproximately 10% (40 000) of US quitline enrollees who smoke cigarettes report current use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS); however, little is known about callers' ENDS use. Our aim was to describe why and how quitline callers use ENDS, their beliefs about ENDS and the impact of ENDS use on callers' quit processes and use of FDA-approved cessation medications.DesignQualitative interviews conducted 1-month postregistration. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, double-coded and analysed to identify themes.SettingOklahoma Tobacco Helpline.Participants40 callers aged ≥18 who were seeking help to quit smoking were using ENDS at registration and completed ≥1 programme calls.ResultsAt 1-month postregistration interview, 80% of callers had smoked cigarettes in the last 7 days, almost two-thirds were using ENDS, and half were using cessation medications. Nearly all believed ENDS helped them quit or cut down on smoking; however, participants were split on whether they would recommend cessation medications, ENDS or both together for quitting. Confusion and misinformation about potential harms of ENDS and cessation medications were reported. Participants reported using ENDS in potentially adaptive ways (eg, using ENDS to cut down and nicotine replacement therapy to quit, and stepping down nicotine in ENDS to wean off ENDS after quitting) and maladaptive ways (eg, frequent automatic ENDS use, using ENDS in situations they did not previously smoke, cutting down on smoking using ENDS without a schedule or plan to quit), which could impact the likelihood of quitting smoking or continuing ENDS use.ConclusionsThese qualitative findings suggest quitline callers who use ENDS experience confusion and misinformation about ENDS and FDA-approved cessation medications. Callers also use ENDS in ways that may not facilitate quitting smoking. Opportunities exist for quitlines to educate ENDS users and help them create a coordinated plan most likely to result in completely quitting combustible tobacco.

Project description:ImportanceSmoking quitline programs effectively promote smoking cessation in outpatient primary care settings.ObjectiveTo examine the factors associated with smoking quitline engagement and smoking cessation among patients undergoing thoracic surgery who consented to a quitline electronic referral.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2018, among 111 active smoking patients referred to the quitline from a thoracic surgery outpatient clinic visit. Patients were divided into operative and nonoperative cohorts.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcomes were engagement rates in the quitline program and successful smoking cessation. Secondary outcomes were self-reported point prevalence abstinence at 1 month and 6 months after the smoking quit date.ResultsOf 111 patients (62 men; mean [SD] age, 61.8 [11.2] years) who had a quitline referral, 58 (52%) underwent surgery, and 32 of these 58 patients (55%) participated in the program. Of the 53 nonoperative patients (48%), 24 (45%) participated in the program. In the operative cohort, there was no difference in the smoking cessation rate between quitline participants and nonparticipants (21 of 32 [66%] vs 16 of 6 [62%]; P = .79) or in point prevalence abstinence at 1 month (23 of 32 [72%] vs 14 of 25 [56%]; P = .27) or 6 months (14 of 28 [50%] vs 6 of 18 [33%]; P = .36). Similarly, in the nonoperative cohort, there was no difference in the smoking cessation rate between quitline participants and nonparticipants (8 of 24 [33%] vs 11 of 29 [38%]; P = .78) or in point prevalence abstinence at 1 month (7 of 24 [29%] vs 8 of 27 [30%]; P = .99) or 6 months (6 of 23 [26%] vs 6 of 25 [24%]; P = .99). Regardless of quitline participation, operative patients had a 1.8-fold higher proportion of successful smoking cessation compared with nonoperative patients (37 of 58 [64%] vs 19 of 53 [36%]; P = .004) as well as a 2.2-fold higher proportion of 1-month point prevalence abstinence (37 of 57 [65%] vs 15 of 51 [29%]; P < .001) and a 1.8-fold higher proportion of 6-month point prevalence abstinence (20 of 45 [44%] vs 12 of 48 [25%]; P = .05). Having surgery doubled the odds of smoking cessation (odds ratio, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.06-5.64; P = .04) and quitline engagement tripled the odds of remaining smoke free at 6 months (odds ratio, 3.57; 95% CI, 1.03-12.38; P = .04).Conclusions and relevancePatients undergoing thoracic surgery were nearly twice as likely to quit smoking as those who did not have an operation, and smoking quitline participation further augmented point prevalence abstinence. Improved smoking cessation rates, even among nonoperative patients, were associated with appropriate outpatient counseling and intervention.

Project description:BackgroundUse of smokeless tobacco (moist snuff and chewing tobacco) is a significant public health problem but smokeless tobacco users have few resources to help them quit. Web programs and telephone-based programs (Quitlines) have been shown to be effective for smoking cessation. We evaluate the effectiveness of a Web program, a Quitline, and the combination of the two for smokeless users recruited via the Web.ObjectivesTo test whether offering both a Web and Quitline intervention for smokeless tobacco users results in significantly better long-term tobacco abstinence outcomes than offering either intervention alone; to test whether the offer of Web or Quitline results in better outcome than a self-help manual only Control condition; and to report the usage and satisfaction of the interventions when offered alone or combined.MethodsSmokeless tobacco users (N= 1,683) wanting to quit were recruited online and randomly offered one of four treatment conditions in a 2×2 design: Web Only, Quitline Only, Web + Quitline, and Control (printed self-help guide). Point-prevalence all tobacco abstinence was assessed at 3- and 6-months post enrollment.Results69% of participants completed both the 3- and 6-month assessments. There was no significant additive or synergistic effect of combining the two interventions for Complete Case or the more rigorous Intent To Treat (ITT) analyses. Significant simple effects were detected, individually the interventions were more efficacious than the control in achieving repeated 7-day point prevalence all tobacco abstinence: Web (ITT, OR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.03, 1.94, p = .033) and Quitline (ITT: OR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.13, 2.11, p = .007). Participants were more likely to complete a Quitline call when offered only the Quitline intervention (OR = 0.71, 95% CI = .054, .093, p = .013), the number of website visits and duration did not differ when offered alone or in combination with Quitline. Rates of program helpfulness (p <.05) and satisfaction (p <.05) were higher for those offered both interventions versus offered only quitline.ConclusionCombining Web and Quitline interventions did not result in additive or synergistic effects, as have been found for smoking. Both interventions were more effective than a self-help control condition in helping motivated smokeless tobacco users quit tobacco. Intervention usage and satisfaction were related to the amount intervention content offered. Usage of the Quitline intervention decreased when offered in combination, though rates of helpfulness and recommendations were higher when offered in combination.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT00820495; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00820495.

Dataset Information

Tobacco quitline performance: Comparing the impacts of early cessation and proactive re-engagement on callers' smoking status at follow-up at 12 months.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Publications

Tobacco quitline performance: Comparing the impacts of early cessation and proactive re-engagement on callers' smoking status at follow-up at 12 months.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets