Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a minimal intervention to prevent smoking relapse: dismantling the effects of amount of content versus contact.

Department of Psychology, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL 33617, USA. .
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (Impact Factor: 4.85). 11/2004; 72(5):797-808. DOI: 10.1037/0022-006X.72.5.797
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Relapse prevention remains a major challenge to smoking cessation efforts. T. H. Brandon, B. N. Collins, L. M. Juliano, and A. B. Lazev (2000) found that a series of 8 empirically based relapse-prevention booklets mailed to ex-smokers over 1 year significantly reduced relapse. This study dismantled 2 components of that intervention: the amount of content (number of booklets) and the frequency of contact. Content and contact were crossed in a 2 X 2 factorial design. The criteria of at least 1 week of abstinence at baseline was met by 431 participants, 75%-85% of whom returned 12-, 18-, and 24-month follow-up questionnaires. Eight booklets produced consistently higher point-prevalence abstinence rates than did a single booklet, but frequency of contact did not affect outcome. Moreover, the high-content interventions were highly cost-effective.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: We examined socioeconomic disparities in tobacco dependence treatment outcomes from a free, proactive telephone counseling quitline. METHODS: We delivered cognitive-behavioral treatment and nicotine patches to 6626 smokers and examined socioeconomic differences in demographic, clinical, environmental, and treatment use factors. We used logistic regressions and generalized estimating equations (GEE) to model abstinence and account for socioeconomic differences in the models. RESULTS: The odds of achieving long-term abstinence differed by socioeconomic status (SES). In the GEE model, the odds of abstinence for the highest SES participants were 1.75 times those of the lowest SES participants. Logistic regression models revealed no treatment outcome disparity at the end of treatment, but significant disparities 3 and 6 months after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Although quitlines often increase access to treatment for some lower SES smokers, significant socioeconomic disparities in treatment outcomes raise questions about whether current approaches are contributing to tobacco-related socioeconomic health disparities. Strategies to improve treatment outcomes for lower SES smokers might include novel methods to address multiple factors associated with socioeconomic disparities.
    American Journal of Public Health 08/2014; 104(8):e76-84. DOI:10.2105/AJPH.2014.301951 · 3.93 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: A number of treatments can help smokers make a successful quit attempt, but many initially successful quitters relapse over time. Several interventions have been proposed to help prevent relapse. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether specific interventions for relapse prevention reduce the proportion of recent quitters who return to smoking. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register in May 2013 for studies mentioning relapse prevention or maintenance in title, abstracts or keywords. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials of relapse prevention interventions with a minimum follow-up of six months. We included smokers who quit on their own, were undergoing enforced abstinence, or were participating in treatment programmes. We included trials that compared relapse prevention interventions with a no intervention control, or that compared a cessation programme with additional relapse prevention components with a cessation programme alone. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Studies were screened and data extracted by one review author, and checked by a second. Disagreements were resolved by discussion or by referral to a third review author. MAIN RESULTS: Sixty-three studies met inclusion criteria but were heterogeneous in terms of populations and interventions. We considered 41 studies that randomly assigned abstainers separately from studies that randomly assigned participants before their quit date.Upon looking at studies of behavioural interventions that randomly assigned abstainers, we detected no benefit of brief and 'skills-based' relapse prevention methods for women who had quit smoking because of pregnancy, or for smokers undergoing a period of enforced abstinence during hospitalisation or military training. We also failed to detect significant effects of behavioural interventions in trials in unselected groups of smokers who had quit on their own or through a formal programme. Amongst trials randomly assigning smokers before their quit date and evaluating the effects of additional relapse prevention components, we found no evidence of benefit of behavioural interventions or combined behavioural and pharmacotherapeutic interventions in any subgroup. Overall, providing training in skills thought to be needed for relapse avoidance did not reduce relapse, but most studies did not use experimental designs best suited to the task and had limited power to detect expected small differences between interventions. For pharmacological interventions, extended treatment with varenicline significantly reduced relapse in one trial (risk ratio (RR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.36). Pooling of six studies of extended treatment with bupropion failed to detect a significant effect (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.35). Two small trials of oral nicotine replacement treatment (NRT) failed to detect an effect, but treatment compliance was low, and in two other trials of oral NRT in which short-term abstainers were randomly assigned, a significant effect of intervention was noted. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: At the moment, there is insufficient evidence to support the use of any specific behavioural intervention to help smokers who have successfully quit for a short time to avoid relapse. The verdict is strongest for interventions focused on identifying and resolving tempting situations, as most studies were concerned with these. Little research is available regarding other behavioural approaches.Extended treatment with varenicline may prevent relapse. Extended treatment with bupropion is unlikely to have a clinically important effect. Studies of extended treatment with nicotine replacement are needed.
    Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 01/2014; DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD003999.pub4 · 5.94 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A significant proportion of women who self-quit smoking during pregnancy subsequently relapse to smoking post-partum. This study examined free-text responses describing attributions of smoking relapse or maintained abstinence at 1, 8, and 12 months post-partum. This study reports secondary analyses from a randomized clinical trial (N = 504) for preventing post-partum smoking relapse. At each follow-up, one survey item asked the participant to describe why she resumed smoking or what helped her maintain abstinence. A thematic content analysis was conducted on responses from the 472 participants (94.0 % of the original sample) who returned at least 1 survey. Content analyses revealed several themes for participants' reasons for relapse and abstinence. Stress was the most frequently cited reason for smoking relapse across all follow-ups. Health concerns for children and family was the most common reason provided for remaining abstinent. Chi square analyses revealed differences in written responses related to income, age, and depressive symptoms. Overall, these findings suggest that during the post-partum period, stress and familial health concerns are perceived contributors to smoking relapse and abstinence, respectively. These results confirmed key risk and protective factors that have been identified through other assessment modalities (e.g., quantitative surveys and focus groups). They also provide support for targeting these variables in the development, content, and delivery of future post-partum smoking relapse-prevention interventions. The high response rate to these open-ended attribution questions suggests that future studies would benefit from including these and similar items to allow for additional insight into participant perspectives.
    Maternal and Child Health Journal 07/2014; DOI:10.1007/s10995-014-1556-2 · 2.24 Impact Factor


Available from