[Effectiveness of a group therapy intervention to quit smoking. Randomized clinical trial]. A comparison of alternative theoretical approaches to smoking cessation and relapse. Training support persons to help smokers quit: a pilot study. Evaluation of the amount of therapist contact in a smoking cessation program. [Effectiveness of a programme of intensive tobacco counselling by nursing professionals]. Effectiveness of a cognitive behaviour therapy self-help programme for smokers in London, UK. A randomized controlled trial of a smoking cessation intervention among people with a psychotic disorder. Effectiveness of pharmacotherapy and behavioral interventions for smoking cessation in actual clinical practice. Preventing smoking relapse, using an individually tailored skills-training technique.
Group therapy is a widely used technique for the treatment of tobacco, alcohol and other toxic addictions. Nevertheless, its effectiveness for smoking cessation remains to be established. Our objective was to evaluate the relative effectiveness of a group intervention versus an individual intervention for smoking cessation.
                Randomized clinical trial of 106 smokers wishing to quit their addiction, who were assigned to two types of intervention: Short Individual Intervention (SII) and Group Intervention (GI). Nicotine patches were administered as supplemental therapy when needed in both instances. Results were assessed by intention to treat analysis.
                Although smoking cessation rates decreased in parallel with longer follow-up periods in each intervention group (from 39.6 to 26.4% and from 22.6 to 15.1% for GI and SII groups, respectively, at 3 and 6-months), the relative effectiveness was similar during both periods and there was no better response to any intervention at 3-months (relative risk [RR] = 1.75; CI95%, 0.96-3.18) and at 6-months (RR = 1.75; CI95%, 0.80-3.82). Compliance with GI was low and less than 60% of smokers attended to 5 out of 7 GI sessions.
                Group intervention (GI) is not more effective than short individual intervention to quit smoking. However, this fact could be due to the low compliance observed with regard to smokers' attendance to GI sessions. Two theoretical approaches to smoking cessation were compared. Participants were randomly assigned either to (a) a traditional treatment program that used contingency contracting and that emphasized the necessity for absolute abstinence (AA) or to (b) a relapse-prevention (RP) treatment that focused on gradual acquisition of nonsmoking skills. It was hypothesized that participants in the RP treatment would be less successful initially but would have better maintenance skills and thus would relapse less during a 1-year follow-up period. Each program was evaluated in two formats: group-based treatment and self-help materials. Results indicated comparable 1-year abstinence rates for all treatments, although more participants dropped out of the self-help formats. Participants in the RP intervention were more likely to lapse sooner after quitting and were more likely to quit again during the 1-year maintenance period. Exploratory analyses of successful participants suggested that women were more successful in the RP program and that men had greater success with the AA approach. Evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and potential efficacy of a skills-training intervention for adults interested in helping someone to stop smoking (i.e., support persons).
                Sixty adult support persons (77% female) were directly recruited from the community and randomly assigned to this intervention (manual plus five weekly group-based sessions) or a control condition (one-page leaflet). All intervention and outcome assessments occurred through the support persons. Assessments occurred at weeks 0 (baseline), 6 (end of treatment), 12, and 24. The study was conducted from 1998 to 2001; data collection occurred from 1999 to 2000. Outcomes were ratings of treatment acceptability, recruitment and retention rates, supportive behaviors provided to the smoker, and smoking behavior change in the smoker as reported by the support person.
                Support persons were recruited in a timely manner and study retention rates were high. Support persons in skills training showed significant increases in their supportive behavior scores compared with control subjects at weeks 6 and 12. Although not statistically significant, the skills-training intervention was associated with more quit attempts, greater improvement in stage of change, and higher 7-day point prevalence abstinence rates in the smokers than the control condition.
                A skills training intervention for support persons is feasible and acceptable. Further studies are needed to test the efficacy of this approach for smoking cessation. This research tested a multicomponent self-help manual that contained nicotine fading and some behavioral techniques. It also evaluated the incremental effects of using higher amounts of therapist contact on quitting rates. 114 smokers were randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups: (1) A 10-session multicomponent program (n = 25); (2) a 5-session multicomponent program (n = 31); (3) a 5-session multicomponent plus a self-help manual program (n = 25); and (4) a self-help-manual-only program (n = 33). A control group (n = 48) did not receive any treatment. The distinctive characteristic of the treatments was the different amount of therapist contact. Common components of the programs were a refundable deposit, self-monitoring, information on smoking, stimulus control, CO feedback, nicotine fading, and strategies to avoid withdrawal symptoms. End-of-treatment quit rates ranged from 36% (self-help manual) to 68% (10-session multicomponent program). At 12-month follow-up there were significant differences between groups, and the most effective group was the 5-session plus manual group, with an abstinence rate of 48%. To determine the effectiveness of a systematic intensive tobacco counselling programme conducted by nursing professionals.
                Randomised clinical trial with control.
                Primary care nursing and medical consultations.
                Smokers requesting help in our centre's medical clinics during the recruitment period, up to the sample size required (125). Inclusion criteria were: aged between 18 and 70, people who smoked during the preceding month any number of cigarettes a day, and a score over 7 on the Richmond test.
                The patients recruited were randomised, according to the clinic from which they came, to the group that received brief counselling from the doctor (control group) or to the group that received brief counselling plus nursing follow-up (intervention group). Follow-up visits were programmed in this latter group for up to 3 months after giving up smoking.
                Abstinence at 12 and 24 months.
                The effectiveness of the intervention considered as the rate of abstinence at 12 months was 13.8% (95% CI, 6.5-24.7) in the control group and 6.7% (95% CI, 1.8-16.2) in the intervention group, with no significant differences between the two.
                In smokers seen in primary care, the effectiveness of a programme of intensive tobacco counselling by nursing staff is no more effective than the doctor's brief, one-off counselling. Brief counselling has a better cost-effectiveness relationship than intensive counselling. One of the key goals of health promotion strategies in the UK and other developed countries is to reduce the prevalence of cigarette consumption. While overall smoking rates in the UK have fallen over the last few decades, they have barely fallen for the least advantaged adults (Department of Health, 1998a). There is a need for interventions that are suitable for lower socio-economic status (SES) smokers that have undergone rigorous evaluation. This study describes a randomized controlled trial of cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) with smokers from a deprived area of London. At 6 months follow-up, 21 (17.2%) of 122 participants receiving therapy were abstinent and 14 (11.5%) had reduced cigarette consumption by at least 25% of pre-treatment level. Six (5.6%) of 107 participants in the control group were abstinent and none had reduced consumption. These results suggest that this self-help CBT intervention has the potential to reduce the prevalence of smoking among lower SES smokers. 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. 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. The effectiveness of a relapse prevention program was studied in a population of 744 smokers. Subjects first attended an intensive 4-day series of 2-hr meetings in which they were trained to use more than 40 behavioral and cognitive smoking cessation techniques. At the 1-week follow-up session, those abstinent from smoking (79%, carbon monoxide verified) were randomly assigned to one of three follow-up conditions: (a) a three-session skills-training program in which subjects developed and actively rehearsed individually tailored coping strategies for likely relapse situations, (b) a three-session discussion control condition in which subjects discussed maintenance but did not develop or rehearse coping strategies, or (c) a no-treatment control condition. Survival analysis indicated higher abstinence rates for the skills-training group than for the control groups throughout the following year. After 12 months, the biochemically confirmed continuous abstinence rate was higher in the skills-training group (41.3%) than in the discussion and no-treatment groups (34.1% and 33.3%, respectively).
Group therapy is better for helping people stop smoking than self help, and other less intensive interventions. There is not enough evidence to evaluate whether groups are more effective, or cost-effective, than intensive individual counselling. There is not enough evidence to support the use of particular psychological components in a programme beyond the support and skills training normally included.