A randomized controlled trial of a smoking cessation intervention among people with a psychotic disorder. Impact of a brief motivational smoking cessation intervention the Get PHIT randomized controlled trial. Extended cognitive behavior therapy for cigarette smoking cessation. A randomised controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of a nurse-provided intervention for hospitalised smokers. Effectiveness of pharmacotherapy and behavioral interventions for smoking cessation in actual clinical practice. Nurse case-managed tobacco cessation interventions for general hospital patients: results of a randomized clinical trial. Proactive interventions for smoking cessation in general medical practice: a quasi-randomized controlled trial to examine the efficacy of computer-tailored letters and physician-delivered brief advice. Randomized trial of nurse-assisted strategies for smoking cessation in primary care. Randomized controlled trial of a computer-based, tailored intervention to increase smoking cessation counseling by primary care physicians.
Despite extremely high rates of smoking among individuals with psychotic disorders and the associated financial and health costs, few studies have investigated the efficacy of smoking cessation interventions among this group. The purpose of this study was to compare an integrated psychological and nicotine replacement therapy intervention for people with a psychotic disorder with routine care alone.
                The authors recruited 298 regular smokers with a psychotic disorder residing in the community and randomly assigned them to a routine care comparison condition (N=151) or an eight-session, individually administered smoking cessation intervention (N=147), which consisted of nicotine replacement therapy, motivational interviewing, and cognitive behavior therapy. Outcome variables included continuous and point-prevalence abstinence rates, smoking reduction status, and changes in symptoms and functioning.
                While there were no overall differences between the treatment group and comparison group in abstinence rates, a significantly higher proportion of smokers who completed all treatment sessions stopped smoking at each of the follow-up occasions (point-prevalence rates: 3 months, 30.0% versus 6.0%; 6 months, 18.6% versus 4.0%; and 12 months, 18.6% versus 6.6%). Smokers who completed all treatment sessions were also more likely to have achieved continuous abstinence at 3 months (21.4% versus 4.0%). There was a strong dose-response relationship between treatment session attendance and smoking reduction status, with one-half of those who completed the intervention program achieving a 50% or greater reduction in daily cigarette consumption across the follow-ups, relative to less than one-fifth of the comparison subjects. There was no evidence of any associated deterioration in symptoms or functioning.
                These findings demonstrate the utility of a nicotine replacement therapy plus motivational interviewing/cognitive behavior therapy smoking cessation intervention among individuals with a psychotic disorder. Further development of more efficacious interventions is required for those who do not respond to existing interventions. Few studies have rigorously evaluated whether providing biologically based health-risk feedback is more effective than standard interventions in increasing smokers' motivation to quit and their long-term abstinence.
                An RCT was conducted from 2005 to 2008. Data were analyzed in 2008.
                Smokers (N=536) were recruited from the community, regardless of their interest in quitting smoking.
                Smokers either received brief ( approximately 20 minutes), personally tailored counseling sessions based on their lung functioning, carbon monoxide (CO) exposure, and smoking-related health conditions, or they received generic smoking-risk information and personalized counseling about their diet, BMI, and physical activity. All were advised to quit smoking and were offered access to a free phone-counseling program.
                Treatment utilization and abstinence at 6 and 12 months post-intervention.
                Participants who received the experimental treatment demonstrated no greater motivation to quit, use of treatment services, or abstinence compared to controls at either follow-up assessment. In fact, controls reported greater motivation to quit at 12 months (M 3.42 vs 3.20, p=0.03), greater use of pharmacotherapy at 6 months (37.8% vs 28.0%, p=0.02), and greater 30-day point prevalent abstinence at 6 months, after controlling for relevant covariates (10.8% vs 6.4%, adjusted p=0.04).
                The present study found no support for adding a personalized health-risk assessment emphasizing lung health and CO exposure to generic cessation advice and counseling for community-based smokers not otherwise seeking treatment.
                NCT00169260. PRIMARY AIM: Examine the effectiveness of extended cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) in promoting longer-term smoking abstinence.
                Open-label treatment phase followed by extended treatment phase. Randomization conducted prior to entry into open-label treatment phase; analysis based on intention-to-treat to avoid threat of selection bias.
                Community smoking cessation clinic.
                A total of 304 adult smokers (> or = 18 years of age; > or = 10 cigarettes/day).
                Open-label (8 weeks): all participants received bupropion SR, nicotine patch, CBT. Extended treatment (12 weeks): participants received either CBT + voicemail monitoring and telephone counseling or telephone-based general support.
                Seven-day point prevalence abstinence, expired-air carbon monoxide.
                At week 20 follow-up, CBT produced a higher 7-day point prevalence abstinence rate: 45% versus 29%, P = 0.006; at 52 weeks the difference in abstinence rates (31% versus 27%) was not significant. History of depression was a moderator of treatment. Those with a positive history had a better treatment response at 20 weeks when assigned to the less intensive telephone support therapy (P < 0.05).
                The superiority of CBT to 20 weeks suggests that continued emphasis on the development of cognitive and behavioral strategies for maintaining non-smoking during an extended treatment phase may help smokers to maintain abstinence in the longer term. At present, the minimum duration of therapy is unknown. Does the provision of a nurse-based intervention lead to smoking cessation in hospital patients?
                At tertiary teaching hospital in Newcastle, Australia, 4,779 eligible (aged 18-80, admitted for at least 24 hours, and able to provide informed consent) and consenting (73.4%) in-patients were recruited into a larger cross-sectional survey. 1,422 (29.7%) smokers (in the last 12 months) were randomly assigned to control (n = 711) or intervention group (n = 711). The brief nurse-delivered intervention incorporated: tailored information, assessment of withdrawal, offer of nicotine replacement therapy, booklets, and a discharge letter. Self-reported cessation at 12 months was validated with CO and salivary cotinine.
                There were no significant differences between groups in self-reported abstinence at three or 12 months post intervention, based on an intention to treat analysis. At three months, self-reported abstinence was 27.3% (I) and 27.5% (C); at 12 months was 18.5% (I) and 20.6% (C). There were no differences in validation of self-report between intervention and control groups at 12 months.
                This brief nurse-provided in-patient intervention did not significantly increase the smoking cessation rates compared with the control group at either three or 12-month follow-up.
                A systematic total quality improvement model of accountable outcome-focused treatment, incorporating assertive physician-led pharmacotherapy, routine assessment and recording of nicotine dependence (ICD 10 coding), in- and outpatient services and engagement from multidisciplinary teams of health professionals may be required to improve treatment modalities for this chronic addictive disorder. This study evaluated the effectiveness of behavioral interventions (brief counseling, nonspecific psychological support in groups - NSGS and cognitive behavioral group therapy - CBGT) in combination with bupropion SR for smoking cessation in the field, through a smoking cessation clinic.
                Two-hundred-and-five smokers were enrolled in a 19-week course during 2007/ 2008, and were randomly assigned to: bupropion SR combined with brief counseling (group A), bupropion SR combined with NSGS (group B), bupropion SR combined with CBGT (group C), or CBGT as the only approach (group D).
                Continuous abstinence rates at the end of therapy were 53.2% for group A, 62.9% for group B, 50.0% for group C, and 22.2% (p < 0.05) for group D. Sustained abstinence rates in 12 months were 29.6%, 28.1%, 34.3% and 19.4% (p > 0.05), respectively.
                Bupropion SR is an effective aid for smoking cessation in clinical practice. NSGT increased the chances for success at the end of therapy when combined with bupropion SR, while CBGT as monotherapy was less effective compared with the approaches including pharmacotherapy. It is suggested that smoking cessation interventions in real-life healthcare settings should be implemented through comprehensive programs using pharmacotherapy where applicable, combined with NSGT, and integrated by specialized healthcare professionals. This randomized clinical trial was designed to test the efficacy of intensive versus brief smoking cessation interventions for hospital patients. The interventions included advice and pamphlets for Brief and bedside counselling, take-home materials, and 7 post-discharge telephone counselling calls over 2 months for Intensive. Confirmed 1-year abstinence was 28% for Intensive (85/301) and 24% for Brief (76/315). Abstinence was significantly higher for patients who did not use pharmacotherapy (36%) versus those who did (16%) and for patients with CVD (40%) versus other diagnoses (20%). Because this was a replication trial, benchmarks for planning can be suggested: 12% to 15% recruitment of identified smokers, 90% plus completion for Intensive, 15% drop-out, and 75% abstinence corroboration. The results consolidate findings for general inpatients, including expected absolute abstinence and treatment outcomes, the effect of CVD patients on outcomes, the reproducibility of high abstinence in a universal health-care system, and the need for more research to inform practice. To test the efficacy of (i) computer-generated tailored letters and (ii) practitioner-delivered brief advice for smoking cessation against an assessment-only condition; and to compare both interventions directly.
                Quasi-randomized controlled trial.
                A total of 34 randomly selected general practices from a German region (participation rate 87%).
                A total of 1499 consecutive patients aged 18-70 years with daily cigarette smoking (participation rate 80%).
                The tailored letters intervention group received up to three individualized personal letters. Brief advice was delivered during routine consultation by the practitioner after an onsite training session. Both interventions were based on the Transtheoretical Model of behaviour change.
                Self-reported point prevalence and prolonged abstinence at 6-, 12-, 18- and 24-month follow-ups.
                Among participants completing the last follow-up, 6-month prolonged abstinence was 18.3% in the tailored letters intervention group, 14.8% in the brief advice intervention group and 10.5% in the assessment-only control group. Assuming those lost to follow-up to be smokers, the rates were 10.2%, 9.7% and 6.7%, respectively. Analyses including all follow-ups confirmed statistically significant effects of both interventions compared to assessment only. Using complete case analysis, the tailored letters intervention was significantly more effective than brief advice for 24-hour [odds ratio (OR) = 1.4; P = 0.047] but not for 7-day point prevalence abstinence (OR = 1.4; P = 0.068) for prolonged abstinence, or for alternative assumptions about participants lost to follow-up.
                The study demonstrated long-term efficacy of low-cost interventions for smoking cessation in general practice. The interventions are suitable to reach entire populations of general practices and smoking patients. Computer-generated letters are a promising option to overcome barriers to provide smoking cessation counselling routinely. Brief advice to stop smoking from general practitioners (GPs) has been repeatedly shown to increase smoking cessation by a small, but measurable amount. Some studies have suggested that adding more intensive interventions to brief advice may increase its effectiveness, but it is unclear whether this is true in general practice.
                To determine whether brief advice from a doctor together with counselling and follow-up from a trained practice nurse is more effective than brief advice alone in helping people to stop smoking.
                The design was a randomized controlled trial. Four hundred and ninety-seven general practice patients aged older than 18 years and smoking at least one cigarette per day in six general practices in Oxfordshire, Berkshire, and Buckinghamshire were randomized to one of two interventions: brief verbal or written advice from a GP plus extended counselling and follow-up from a trained practice nurse; brief advice from a GP alone. The primary outcome was sustained abstinence from smoking at three and 12 months. A secondary outcome was forward movement in the stages of change cycle.
                The proportion showing sustained abstinence was 3.6% in the extended counselling group, and 4.4% in the brief advice group (difference = -0.8%; 95% confidence interval = -4.3% to 2.6%). Seventy-four (30%) of those randomized to extended counselling actually took up this offer. No significant progression in stages of change was detected between the two groups.
                In unselected general practice patients who smoke, brief advice from a GP combined with intensive intervention and follow-up by a practice nurse is no more effective than brief advice alone. The primary care visit represents an important venue for intervening with a large population of smokers. However, physician adherence to the Smoking Cessation Clinical Guideline (5As) remains low. We evaluated the effectiveness of a computer-tailored intervention designed to increase smoking cessation counseling by primary care physicians.
                Physicians and their patients were randomized to either intervention or control conditions. In addition to brief smoking cessation training, intervention physicians and patients received a one-page report that characterized the patients' smoking habit and history and offered tailored recommendations. Physician performance of the 5As was assessed via patient exit interviews. Quit rates and smoking behaviors were assessed 6 months postintervention via patient phone interviews. Intervention effects were tested in a sample of 70 physicians and 518 of their patients. Results were analyzed via generalized and mixed linear modeling controlling for clustering.
                Intervention physicians exceeded controls on "Assess" (OR 5.06; 95% CI 3.22, 7.95), "Advise" (OR 2.79; 95% CI 1.70, 4.59), "Assist-set goals" (OR 4.31; 95% CI 2.59, 7.16), "Assist-provide written materials" (OR 5.14; 95% CI 2.60, 10.14), "Assist-provide referral" (OR 6.48; 95% CI 3.11, 13.49), "Assist-discuss medication" (OR 4.72;95% CI 2.90, 7.68), and "Arrange" (OR 8.14; 95% CI 3.98, 16.68), all p values being < 0.0001. Intervention patients were 1.77 (CI 0.94, 3.34,p = 0.078) times more likely than controls to be abstinent (12 versus 8%), a difference that approached, but did not reach statistical significance, and surpassed controls on number of days quit (18.4 versus 12.2, p < .05) but not on number of quit attempts.
                The use of a brief computer-tailored report improved physicians' implementation of the 5As and had a modest effect on patients' smoking behaviors 6 months postintervention.
Interventions that combine pharmacotherapy and behavioural support increase smoking cessation success compared to a minimal intervention or usual care. Further trials would be unlikely to change this conclusion. We did not find strong evidence from indirect comparisons that offering more intensive behavioural support was associated with larger treatment effects but this could be because intensive interventions are less likely to be delivered in full.