Training physicians about smoking cessation

Study objective:To test the hypotheses that physicians in private practice who receive a continuing education program (entitled “Quit for Life”) about how to counsel smokers to quit would counsel smokers more effectively and have higher rates of long-term smoking cessation among their patients. Design:Randomized trial with blinded assessment of principal outcomes. Setting:Private practices of internal medicine and family practice. Subjects:Forty-four physicians randomly assigned to receive training (24) or serve as controls (20) and consecutive samples of smokers visiting each physician (19.6 patients per experimental and 22.3 per control physician). Interventions:Physicians received three hours of training about how to help smokers quit. Physicians and their office staffs were also given self-help booklets to distribute to smokers and were urged to use a system of stickers on charts as reminders to counsel smokers about quitting. Measurements and main results:Based on telephone interviews with patients, physicians in the experimental group were more likely to discuss smoking with patients who smoked (64% vs. 44%), spent more time counseling smokers about quitting (7.5 vs. 5.2 minutes), helped more smokers set dates to quit smoking (29% vs. 5% of smokers), gave out more self-help booklets (37% vs. 9%), and were more likely to make a follow-up appointment about quitting smoking (19% vs. 11% of those counseled) than physicians in the control group. One year later, the rates of biochemically confirmed, long-term (≥9 months) abstinence from smoking were similar among patients in the experimental (3.2%) and control (2.5%) groups (95% confidence interval for the 0.7% difference: −1.7 to +3.1%). Conclusions:The authors conclude that this continuing education program substantially changed the way physicians counseled smokers, but had little or no impact on rates of long-term smoking cessation among their patients. There is a need for more effective strategies to help physicians help their patients to quit smoking. Supported by Grant # CA38337 from the National Cancer Institute and by the Henry J. Kaiser Foundation Faculty Fellowship in General Internal Medicine (SRC).     

A randomized trial of naltrexone for smoking cessation

Aims. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of orally administered naltrexone, alone or in combination with nicotine patches, as a treatment for cigarette smoking. Design. Randomized, partially-blinded, 2 2 factorial trial using naltrexone (active vs. placebo) and nicotine patches (active vs. none). Participants. One hundred cigarette smokers. Intervention. Twelve weeks of either placebo-only, naltrexone-only, placebo with nicotine patches or naltrexone with nicotine patches. The naltrexone dose was 50 mg taken once daily, and the nicotine patch dose was 21 mg/24-hour for the first 8 weeks and 14 mg/24-hour for the remaining 4 weeks. Brief behavioral intervention was provided at each visit. Measurements. One-week pointprevalence smoking abstinence rates confirmed by an expired air carbon monoxide level of 8 parts per million (ppm) or less, daily cigarette smoking and cigarette craving. Findings. At the end of treatment, there was no effect of naltrexone on smoking abstinence. The smoking abstinence rates were 19% and 22% for the placebo only and naltrexone only treatment groups, respectively, and 48% and 46% for the placebo with nicotine patch and naltrexone with nicotine patch groups, respectively. However, the effect of the nicotine patch at this time was significant (p=0.006), but not at the 6-month follow-up. No significant effect of naltrexone was observed on daily cigarette smoking or cigarette craving during the study. Conclusions. The opioid antagonist naltrexone was not found to be effective for smoking cessation and had no significant effect on daily cigarette consumption or craving. The results of the present study provide no support for the use of naltrexone, alone or in combination with nicotine patches, as a therapeutic treatment for smoking cessation.     

Effectiveness of a computer-tailored smoking cessation program: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: From a public health perspective, prevention of cancer and cardiovascular diseases requires effective smoking cessation programs that can be used on a large scale. OBJECTIVE: To test the effectiveness of a new computer-tailored smoking cessation program vs no intervention. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial, in the French-speaking part of Switzerland, September 20, 1998, to December 31, 1999. Potential participants were randomly selected from a general population register and recruited by mail. Daily cigarette smokers who wished to participate (N = 2934) were randomized to either the program or no intervention. A mean of 1.5 times per 6 months, participants in the active arm received by mail a computer-tailored counseling letter based on their answers to a questionnaire and stage-matched booklets. The counseling letters were tailored to the participants' stage of change (categorized as precontemplation [no intention of quitting smoking in the next 6 months], contemplation [seriously considers quitting in the next 6 months], or preparation [has decided to quit in the next 30 days]), level of tobacco dependence, self-efficacy, and personal characteristics. The outcome measure was self-reported abstinence (no puff of tobacco smoke in the past 4 weeks) 7 months after entry into the program. RESULTS: Abstinence was 2.6 times greater in the intervention group than in the control group (5.8% vs 2.2%, P<.001). The program was effective in "precontemplators" who were not motivated to quit smoking at baseline (intervention vs control, 3.8% vs 0.8%; P =.001) and was effective regardless of perceived difficulty in quitting smoking at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: The program was effective in increasing smoking cessation rates. Because it can reach a large number of smokers, this program can substantially contribute to disease prevention at a population level.     

A randomized, controlled trial of smoking cessation counseling provided during child hospitalization for respiratory illness

The impact of parental smoking on children is enormous. Injury and illness related to parental smoking result in 6,200 excess pediatric deaths per year, which places smoking as the leading preventable cause of death in US children. Parental smoking doubles the risk of child hospitalization for respiratory illness therefore pediatricians have frequent contact with smoking parents. A single study has previously investigated the effect of child hospitalization on parental smoking cessation. Smoking caregivers of children hospitalized for respiratory illness at the University of New Mexico were offered a smoking cessation intervention during the child's hospitalization. Participants were randomized to receive either a brief anti-smoking message or more extensive counseling based on current clinical practice guidelines. Forty-two parents enrolled in the study. Fourteen percent of participants in the counseling group and 5% in the brief message group were self-reported quitters at 6 months. A significant percentage of smoking parents of children hospitalized for respiratory illness are willing to receive smoking cessation counseling while their child is in the hospital. Abstinence rates appear similar to other pediatric office-based interventions. Child hospitalization should be considered an important opportunity to provide parents with smoking cessation services, particularly since many smoking parents will not have access to these services elsewhere.     

A randomized trial assessing the Five-Day Plan for smoking cessation

AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of the Five-Day Plan (FDP) in helping smokers to stop smoking. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial comparing intervention and control groups. The primary outcome measure was 12 months continuous abstinence verified by expired air carbon monoxide concentration. Secondary outcome measures were self-reported abstinence at end of treatment, at 3 and 6 months. SETTING: Six towns in France. PARTICIPANTS: 228 smokers, recruited by newspaper and radio advertisement, aged 18 years or over and willing to make an attempt to quit smoking. INTERVENTION: The Intervention group (119 participants) received the FDP, which is a behavioural group-based treatment programme that has been in operation in France since 1965. It involves five consecutive evening behavioural therapy sessions. The Control group (109 participants) received a single session discussing the health effects of smoking. FINDINGS: In the Intervention group, 67 participants (56%) quit smoking at the end of the FDP. After three months this number had been reduced to 30 (25%) and to 19 (16%) by the end of one year. In the Control group these numbers were 14 (13%) and 12 (11%), respectively, after three and 12 months. When considering the rate of cessation without lapse after one year a significant difference was observed with a 13% rate in the Intervention group and 3% in the Control group (P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: The FDP may be considered as an aid for smokers who want to quit.     

Bupropion for smoking cessation: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND: Bupropion hydrochloride is recommended for smoking cessation; however, there have been relatively few clinical trials examining its efficacy. METHODS: A total of 244 current smokers were enrolled in an outpatient randomized blinded smoking cessation trial conducted at the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, Calif. Of the 244 participants, 121 received a 7-week course of bupropion and 123 received placebo. All participants received 2 months of transdermal nicotine replacement therapy and 3 months of cognitive-behavioral counseling. We determined on-medication treatment, end-of-medication treatment, 3-month, 6-month, and 1-year quit rates. RESULTS: During treatment with bupropion vs placebo, there was a trend toward increased quit rates among participants randomized to bupropion; the self-reported end-of-medication treatment quit rates were 64% for the bupropion group vs 57% for the placebo group (P =.23). The trend favoring bupropion persisted at 3 months of follow-up (P =.12) but was not apparent at 6 months and 1 year of follow-up (both P>.78). The 12-month quit rates, validated by either saliva cotinine or spousal proxy, were 22% in the bupropion group and 28% in the placebo group (P =.31). Based on biochemical validation, 19% of the bupropion group vs 24% of the placebo group had quit smoking by 1 year (P =.36). CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized blinded trial of mostly veteran participants, the addition of a brief 7-week bupropion trial to treatment with nicotine replacement therapy and counseling did not significantly increase smoking cessation rates.     

A randomized controlled trial of stage-matched intervention for smoking cessation in cardiac out-patients

Aim To examine the effectiveness of a stage‐matched smoking cessation counselling intervention for smokers who had cardiac diseases. Methods A total of 1860 Chinese cardiac patients who smoked at least one cigarette in the past 7 days and aged 18 years or above recruited from cardiac out‐patient clinics in Hong Kong hospitals were allocated randomly to an intervention group or control group. The intervention group (n = 938) received counselling matched with their stage of readiness to quit by trained counsellors at baseline, 1 week and 1 month. The control group (n = 922) received brief counselling on healthy diet at baseline. The primary outcomes were self‐reported 7‐day and 30‐day point prevalence (PP) of tobacco abstinence at 12 months after baseline. The secondary outcome measures included biochemically validated abstinence at 12‐month follow‐up, self‐reported 7‐day and 30‐day PP abstinence and reduction of cigarette consumption by 50% at 3 and 6 months. Results By intention‐to‐treat analysis, the intervention and control groups showed no significant difference in self‐reported 7‐day PP abstinence (intervention: 26.5% versus control: 25.5%; P = 0.60) and 30‐day PP (intervention: 25.4% versus control: 24.2%; P = 0.55), biochemically validated abstinence (intervention: 6.6% versus control: 4.9%; P = 0.14) and overall quit attempts of least 24 hours (intervention: 40.3% versus control: 34.3%; P = 0.007) at the 12‐month follow‐up, adjusted for the baseline stage of readiness to quit smoking. Conclusions An intervention, based on the Stages of Change model, to promote smoking cessation in cardiac patients in China failed to find any long‐term benefit.     

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

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.     

A randomized trial of nortriptyline combined with transdermal nicotine for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND: Smoking cessation rates with current therapy are suboptimal. Tricyclic antidepressants improve cessation rates. We hypothesized that addition of nortriptyline hydrochloride to transdermal nicotine would enhance cessation rates. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at a Department of Veterans Affairs medical center. Subjects were aged 18 to 65 years, smoked 10 or more cigarettes per day, and did not have current major depression. Nortriptyline hydrochloride or matched placebo was started at 25 mg 14 days before quit day, titrated to 75 mg/d as tolerated, and continued for 12 weeks after quit day. Transdermal nicotine (21 mg/d) was started on quit day and continued for 8 weeks. The behavioral intervention consisted of 12 brief, individual visits. Withdrawal symptoms were measured by means of a daily diary, and smoking cessation was defined as self-reported abstinence, expired carbon monoxide level of 9 ppm or less, and a 6-month urine cotinine level less than 50 ng/mL (284 nmol/L). RESULTS: A total of 158 patients were randomized (79 to nortriptyline and 79 to placebo). There was no significant reduction in withdrawal symptoms. The cessation rates at 6 months were 23% (18/79) and 10% (8/79), respectively (absolute difference, 13%; 95% confidence interval, 1.3%-24.5%; P = .052). Nortriptyline caused frequent side effects, including dry mouth (38%) and sedation (20%). CONCLUSIONS: Nortriptyline combined with transdermal nicotine resulted in an increased cessation rate with little effect on withdrawal symptoms. This combination may represent an option for smokers in whom standard therapy has failed.     

Intensive smoking cessation counseling versus minimal counseling among hospitalized smokers treated with transdermal nicotine replacement: a randomized trial

PURPOSE: To determine whether an intensive cognitive-behavioral intervention begun during hospitalization when combined with transdermal nicotine replacement therapy is more effective than a minimal counseling intervention combined with transdermal nicotine replacement therapy in helping inpatients to quit smoking. METHODS: A total of 223 patients who smoked were enrolled in a hospital-based randomized smoking cessation trial at the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center. One hundred and seven participants (48%) received intensive counseling and outpatient telephone follow-up; 116 participants (52%) received minimal counseling. All study participants received 2 months of transdermal nicotine replacement therapy. We determined 6-month quit rates by self-report and measured saliva cotinine levels or obtained proxy reports to confirm self-reported smoking cessation at 12 months. Analyses adjusted for baseline differences in the distribution of coronary disease. RESULTS: At 6 months, 35% (36/103) of the intensive intervention group reported quitting, compared with 21% (23/109) of the comparison group (relative risk [RR] = 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1 to 2.7). At 12 months, the self-reported quit rate was 33% (33/99) in the intensive intervention group versus 20% (21/103) in the comparison group (RR = 1.7; 95% CI: 1.1 to 2.7). Based on biochemical or proxy confirmation, 29% (30/102) in the intensive intervention group versus 20% (21/107) in the comparison group quit smoking at 12 months (RR = 1.6; 95% CI: 0.96 to 2.5). CONCLUSION: Hospital-initiated smoking cessation interventions that include transdermal nicotine replacement therapy can improve long-term quit rates.     

Effect of smoking cessation counseling on recovery from alcoholism: findings from a randomized community intervention trial

Aims. To assess the effects of a smoking cessation program for recovering alcoholics on use of alcohol, tobacco and illicit drugs after discharge from residential treatment. Design and Setting. A randomized community intervention trial design was employed in which 12 residential drug treatment centers in Iowa, Kansas and Nebraska were matched and then randomly assigned to the intervention or control condition. Participants. Approximately 50 adult residents (inpatients) from each site were followed for 12 months after treatment discharge. Intervention. Participating residents in the six intervention centers received a 4-part, individually tailored, smoking cessation program while those in the six control sites received usual care. Findings. Both moderate and heavy drinking rates were reduced in the intervention group. Intervention site participants were significantly more likely than controls to report alcohol abstinence at both the 6-month (OR = 1.59, 95%CI: 1.09-2.35) and 12-month assessment (OR = 1.84, 95%CI:1.28-2.92). Illicit drug use rates were comparable. Effect of the intervention on tobacco quit rates was not statistically significant. Conclusions. Counseling alcoholics in treatment to quit smoking does not jeopardize the alcohol recovery process. However, low-intensity tobacco interventions are unlikely to yield high tobacco quit rates.     

A randomized controlled trial of a smoking cessation intervention based in community pharmacies

Aims. To evaluate whether a structured community pharmacy-based smoking cessation programme (the PAS model) would give rise to a higher smoking cessation rate compared with ad hoc advice from pharmacists. Design. A randomized controlled trial comparing a structured intervention with usual care. Setting. One hundred pharmacists working in community pharmacies in N. Ireland and 24 in London took part in the study and were each asked to enroll 12 smokers; 44% of pharmacists who were trained managed to recruit one or more smokers during the recruitment period of approximately 1 year. Participants. A total of 484 smokers were enrolled by the pharmacists and individually randomized into the PAS intervention group ( N = 265) or the control group ( N = 219). Intervention. The PAS intervention involved a structured counselling programme, an information leaflet and a follow-up weekly for the first 4 weeks then monthly as needed. Measurements. The primary outcome measure of this study was self-reported smoking cessation for 12 months with cotinine validation at the 12-month follow-up. Findings. Of smokers in the PAS group, 14.3% (38) were abstinent up to 12 months compared with 2.7% (6) in the control group ( p < 0.001 for the difference). Conclusion. The community pharmacy-based PAS smoking cessation service can be an effective method of helping people stop smoking when delivered by pharmacists willing to adopt this approach.     

A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of bupropion for smoking cessation in primary care

BACKGROUND: Studies undertaken in academic settings have shown that bupropion hydrochloride can double the odds of smoking cessation compared with placebo. To assess whether these results are applicable in primary care, we launched a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial to be conducted by general practitioners. METHODS: We assigned 593 healthy smokers to receive bupropion hydrochloride, 150 mg twice a day, or placebo daily for 7 weeks (hereinafter, bupropion group [n = 400] and placebo group [n = 193], respectively). After the baseline visit, 4 clinical visits and 3 telephone calls were scheduled over the 1-year period. The primary end points were biochemically confirmed continuous abstinence at week 7 and at week 52. RESULTS: Seventy-one Italian general practitioners enrolled participants from April 2004 to May 2005. Of the bupropion group, 41.0% were continuously abstinent from week 4 to week 7 compared with 22.3% of the placebo group (multivariate odds ratio, 2.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.60-3.53). The continuous abstinence rates from week 4 to week 52 were 25% in the bupropion group and 14% in the placebo group (odds ratio, 2.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.32-3.39). The mean weight gain was similar in both groups and among long-term abstainers was 3 kg in women and 4 kg in men. More participants in the bupropion group experienced an adverse event than those in the placebo group, but the percentage who discontinued use of the study medication was similar. CONCLUSIONS: Bupropion more than doubled the odds of continuous abstinence from smoking. The adherence of general practitioners and participants to the protocol was excellent, making our findings robust and easy to generalize to the context of primary care.