Comparing two web-based smoking cessation programs: randomized controlled 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. Participation in a population-based physical activity programme as an aid for smoking cessation: a randomised trial. Resistance training as an aid to standard smoking cessation treatment: a pilot study. The efficacy of moderate-intensity exercise as an aid for smoking cessation in women: a randomized controlled trial. A randomised controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of a nurse-provided intervention for hospitalised smokers. Exercise as an adjunct to nicotine gum in treating tobacco dependence among women. Exercise enhances the maintenance of smoking cessation in women. The efficacy of exercise as an aid for smoking cessation in women: a randomized controlled trial. Integrated tobacco cessation counseling in a diabetes self-management training program: a randomized trial of diabetes and reduction of tobacco. Randomized controlled trial of a computer-based, tailored intervention to increase smoking cessation counseling by primary care physicians. Effectiveness of implementing the agency for healthcare research and quality smoking cessation clinical practice guideline: a randomized, controlled trial. Impact of a brief motivational smoking cessation intervention the Get PHIT randomized controlled trial. Evaluation of a minimal-contact smoking cessation intervention in an outpatient setting.
Smoking cessation remains a significant public health problem. Innovative interventions that use the Internet have begun to emerge that offer great promise in reaching large numbers of participants and encouraging widespread behavior change. To date, the relatively few controlled trials of Web-based smoking cessation programs have been limited by short follow-up intervals.
                We describe the 6-month follow-up results of a randomized controlled trial in which participants recruited online were randomly assigned to either a Web-based smoking cessation program (Quit Smoking Network; QSN) or a Web-based exercise enhancement program (Active Lives) adapted somewhat to encourage smoking cessation.
                The study was a two-arm randomized controlled trial that compared two Web-based smoking cessation programs: (1) the QSN intervention condition presented cognitive-behavioral strategies, and (2) the Active Lives control condition provided participants with guidance in developing a physical activity program to assist them with quitting. The QSN condition provided smoking cessation information and behavior change strategies while the Active Lives condition provided participants with physical activity recommendations and goal setting. The QSN condition was designed to be more engaging (eg, it included multimedia components) and to present much greater content than is typically found in smoking cessation programs.
                Contrary to our hypotheses, no between-condition differences in smoking abstinence were found at 3- and 6-month follow-up assessments. While participants in the QSN intervention condition spent more time than controls visiting the online program, the median number of 1.0 visit in each condition and the substantial attrition (60.8% at the 6-month follow-up) indicate that participants were not as engaged as we had expected.
                Contrary to our hypothesis, our test of two Web-based smoking cessation conditions, an intervention and an attention placebo control, failed to show differences at 3- and 6-month assessments. We explored possible reasons for this finding, including limited engagement of participants and simplifying program content and architecture. Future research needs to address methods to improve participant engagement in online smoking cessation programs. Possible approaches in this regard can include new informed consent procedures that better explain the roles and responsibilities of being a research participant, new program designs that add more vitality (changing content from visit to visit), and new types of reminders pushed out to participants to encourage return visits. Simplifying program content through a combination of enhanced tailoring and information architecture also merits further research attention. 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. Exercise combined with nicotine therapy may help smoking cessation and minimise weight gain after quitting. Low participation in vigorous-intensity physical activity programmes precludes their population-wide applicability. In a randomised controlled trial, we tested whether a population-based moderate-intensity physical activity programme increases quit rates among sedentary smokers receiving nicotine therapy.
                Participants (n=481; 57% male; mean age, 42.2 years (SD 10.1); mean cigarette consumption, 27 (SD 10.2) per day) were offered a nine-week smoking cessation programme consisting of a weekly 15-minute counselling session and the prescription of nicotine replacement therapy. In addition, participants in the physical activity group (n=229) also took part in a programme of moderate-intensity physical activity implemented at the national level, and offering nine weekly 60-minute sessions of physical activity. To ensure equal contact conditions, participants in the control group (n=252) attended weekly 60-minute health behaviour education sessions unrelated to physical activity. The primary outcome was continuous CO-verified smoking abstinence rates at 1-year follow-up.
                Continuous smoking abstinence rates were high and similar in the physical activity group and the control group at the end of the intervention (47% versus 46%, p=0.81) and at 1-year follow-up (27% versus 29%, p=0.71). The mean weight gain after one year was 4.4 kg and 6.2 kg among sustained quitters of the physical activity and control groups, respectively (p=0.06).
                Participation in a population-based moderate-intensity physical activity programme for 9 weeks in addition to a comprehensive smoking cessation programme did not significantly increase smoking cessation rates. A non-significant reduction in weight gain was observed among participants who quit smoking in the physical activity group.
                ClinicalTrials.gov; US National Institutes for Health (available online at http://clinicaltrials.gov/; Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT00521391). Research indicates that exercise may be helpful for smoking cessation; however, the majority of studies have focused only on women and only on aerobic exercise. This pilot study explored the use of resistance training (RT) (i.e., weight lifting) as an adjunctive strategy for quitting smoking for both men and women.
                A sample of 25 smokers received a brief smoking cessation counseling session and the nicotine patch prior to being randomized into a 12-week RT or contact control (CC) group. Assessments were conducted at baseline, 3-month, and at a 6-month follow-up.
                Participants (52% female) averaged 36.5 years (SD = 12.0) of age and 19.1 years (SD = 12.0) of smoking. At the 3-month assessment, objectively verified 7-day point prevalence abstinence (PPA) rates were 46% for the RT group and 17% for CC; prolonged abstinence rates were 16% and 8%, respectively. At the 6-month assessment, objectively verified 7-day PPA rates were 38% for the RT group and 17% for CC; prolonged abstinence rates were 15% and 8%, respectively. Mean body weight decreased 0.6 kg (SD = 1.7) in the RT group and increased 0.6 kg (SD = 2.8) in the CC group. Mean body fat decreased 0.5% (SD = 1.8) in the RT group and increased 0.6% (SD = 0.7) in the CC.
                This is the first study reporting on the use of a RT program as an aid to smoking cessation treatment. The findings suggest that such a program is feasible as an adjunctive treatment for smoking cessation. An adequately powered trial is warranted. Evidence suggests that vigorous-intensity exercise interventions may be effective for smoking cessation among women; however, few studies have examined the efficacy of a moderate-intensity exercise program. The present study examined the efficacy of moderate-intensity exercise for smoking cessation among female smokers. Healthy, sedentary female smokers (N = 217) were randomly assigned to an 8-week cognitive-behavioral smoking cessation program plus moderate-intensity exercise (CBT+EX) or to the same cessation program plus equal contact (CBT). A subsample received nicotine replacement therapy. Results indicated that the CBT+EX and CBT groups were equally likely to attain smoking cessation at the end of treatment, as measured by cotinine-verified 7-day point-prevalence abstinence (20.2% for CBT+EX vs. 18.5% for CBT). The CBT+EX group was more likely to report smoking cessation, as measured by 7-day point prevalence at the 3-month follow-up (11.9% vs. 4.6%, p<.05), compared with the CBT group. No group differences were found at 12 months by either 7-day point prevalence (7.3% for CBT+EX vs. 8.3% for CBT) or continuous abstinence (0.9% for CBT+EX vs. 0.9% for CBT). Additionally, among participants in the CBT+EX group, those with higher adherence to the exercise prescription were significantly more likely to achieve smoking cessation at the end of treatment than were participants reporting lower adherence to exercise. Our findings indicate that the empirical support for moderate-intensity exercise as an adjunctive treatment to CBT for smoking cessation may be limited. Perhaps future studies could compare moderate- vs. vigorous-intensity physical activity to test their relative efficacy. 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 was the first randomized, controlled smoking cessation trial assessing the efficacy of an exercise intervention as an adjunct to nicotine gum therapy in comparison with both equal contact control and standard care control conditions. Sedentary female smokers aged 18-55 years were provided with nicotine gum treatment along with brief behavioral counseling and were randomized into one of these three behavioral adjunct conditions. In the "intent-to-treat" sample (N = 182), at end of treatment and at 1-year follow-up, there were clear, but nonsignificant, trends in univariate analyses in which the exercise and equal contact control conditions both had higher rates of abstinence than the standard care control. However, when adjusting for other predictors of relapse in a multiple logistic regression, both exercise and equal contact control showed an advantage over standard care control in avoiding early relapse (i.e., after 1 week). In a multivariate survival model adjusting for other predictors, the equal contact condition had a significantly lower likelihood of relapse compared with the standard care condition and there was a near significant trend in which exercise offered an advantage over standard care as well. While these findings suggest a slightly improved likelihood of abstinence with exercise compared with standard care, exercise did not differ from equal contact control in its efficacy. Potential explanations for these equivalent levels of efficacy and implications for the findings are discussed. We examined the effects of physical exercise on smoking relapse. Twenty previously sedentary female smokers were randomly assigned to smoking cessation plus exercise or smoking cessation with frequency contact control. The smoking cessation program included 12 professionally led sessions over 12 weeks. Exercise treatment included three supervised exercise sessions per week for 15 weeks. Contact control included three women's health/wellness lectures per week for 15 weeks. Smoking abstinence was validated by carbon monoxide and saliva cotinine. Mean exercise attendance for exercise subjects was 88% with an increase in estimated VO2 of 25%. The percentage of subjects who quit for 24 hours was 80% for the exercise and 90% for the contact group. One subject in the contact group remained abstinent at the end of the 12-week treatment and at 1-, 3-, and 12-month follow-ups, whereas three subjects in the exercise group were abstinent at these time points. These results suggest that exercise training improves short-term quit rates and may prove a useful strategy for long-term maintenance of smoking cessation. Smoking prevalence rates among women are declining at a slower rate than among men.
                To determine if exercise, a healthful alternative to smoking, enhances the achievement and maintenance of smoking cessation.
                Two hundred eighty-one healthy, sedentary female smokers were randomly assigned to either a cognitive-behavioral smoking cessation program with vigorous exercise (exercise) or to the same program with equal staff contact time (control). Subjects participated in a 12-session, group-based smoking cessation program. Additionally, exercise subjects were required to attend 3 supervised exercise sessions per week and control subjects were required to participate in 3 supervised health education lectures per week. Abstinence from smoking was based on self-report, was verified by saliva cotinine level, and was measured at 1 week after quit day (week 5), end of treatment (week 12), and 3 and 12 months later (20 and 60 weeks after quit day, respectively).
                Compared with control subjects (n = 147), exercise subjects (n = 134) achieved significantly higher levels of continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (19.4% vs 10.2%, P = .03) and 3 months (16.4% vs 8.2%, P=.03) and 12 months (11.9% vs 5.4%, P=.05) following treatment. Exercise subjects had significantly increased functional capacity (estimated VO2 peak, 25+/-6 to 28+/-6, P<.01) and had gained less weight by the end of treatment (3.05 vs 5.40 kg, P = .03).
                Vigorous exercise facilitates short- and longer-term smoking cessation in women when combined with a cognitive-behavioral smoking cessation program. Vigorous exercise improves exercise capacity and delays weight gain following smoking cessation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a tobacco cessation intervention using motivational interviewing on smoking cessation rates during diabetes self-management training (DSMT).
                A randomized controlled trial was conducted with subjects recruited from an ongoing type 2 diabetes adult education program at a large diabetes center. A total of 114 subjects were randomized to intervention (n = 57; face-to-face motivational interviewing plus telephone counseling and offering of medication) or standard care (n = 57). Outcome measures included tobacco cessation rates, mean number of cigarettes smoked, A1C, weight, blood pressure, and lipids.
                Intensive intervention using motivational interviewing integrated into a standard DSMT program resulted in a trend toward greater abstinence at 3 months of follow-up in those receiving the intervention. However, this same trend was not observed at 6 months. The addition of this structured smoking cessation intervention did not negatively affect either diabetes education or other measures of diabetes management, including A1C values.
                Structured tobacco cessation efforts can be readily integrated into established diabetes education programs without a negative impact on diabetes care or delivery of diabetes education. However, an intervention of moderate intensity for smoking cessation was no more effective than usual care in assisting patients with tobacco cessation after 6-month follow-up. Whether a more intensive intervention, targeting patients expressing a readiness to discontinue tobacco use, and/or a longer duration or a more cumulative effect of treatment will be more effective must be evaluated. 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. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Smoking Cessation Clinical Practice Guideline recommends that all clinicians strongly advise their patients who use tobacco to quit.
                We conducted a randomized, controlled trial of the effectiveness of Guideline implementation at eight community-based primary care clinics in southern Wisconsin (four test sites, four control sites) among 2163 consecutively enrolled adult patients who smoked at least one cigarette per day and presented for nonemergency care during the baseline period (June 16, 1999, to June 20, 2000) or the intervention period (from June 21, 2000, to May 3, 2001). After collecting baseline data, staff at test sites implemented the intervention over a 2-month period. The intervention included a tutorial for intake clinicians, group and individual performance feedback for intake clinicians, use of a modified vital signs stamp, an offer of free nicotine replacement therapy, and proactive telephone counseling. Staff at control sites received only general information about the AHRQ Guideline. Self-reported abstinence from smoking was determined by telephone interviews at 2- and 6-month follow-up assessments. Hierarchical logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) for treatment assignment after adjustment for patient characteristics. All statistical tests were two-sided.
                There were no statistically significant differences in smoking cessation rates between participants at test and control sites during the baseline period. Among participants treated during the intervention period, those at test sites were more likely than those at control sites to report being abstinent at the 2-month (16.4% versus 5.8%; adjusted OR = 3.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.9 to 5.6; P<.001) and 6-month (15.4% versus 9.8%; adjusted OR = 1.7, 95% CI = 1.2 to 2.6; P =.009) follow-up assessments and to report continuous abstinence, that is, abstinence at both 2 and 6 months (10.9% versus 3.8%; adjusted OR = 3.4, 95% CI = 1.8 to 6.3; P<.001).
                Implementation of a guideline-based smoking cessation intervention by intake clinicians in primary care is associated with higher abstinence among smokers. 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. We examined the ability of a provider-initiated, minimal-contact intervention to modify the smoking behavior of ambulatory clinic patients. Smokers at two outpatient sites were assigned to one of three groups: provider intervention only (PI); provider intervention plus self-help manual (PI/M); and usual care (control) group (C). The physician message emphasized the patient's personal susceptibility, the physician's concern, and the patient's ability to quit (self-efficacy). The nurse consultation concentrated on benefits and barriers associated with stopping, and on strategies for cessation. Telephone interviews were conducted with the 250 participants within a few days of their clinic visit and again at one and six months. Both PI and PI/M proved to be superior to usual care in motivating attempts to quit at both one-month and six-month follow-ups, and logistic regression analyses indicated that participants receiving the self-help manual in addition to the health provider message were between two and three times more likely to quit smoking during the study period than were participants in either of the other study groups.
Only one of the 15 trials offered evidence for exercise aiding smoking cessation at a 12-month follow up. All the other trials were too small to reliably exclude an effect of intervention, or included an exercise intervention which was insufficiently intense to achieve the desired level of exercise. Trials are needed with larger sample sizes, sufficiently intense interventions, equal contact control conditions, and measures of exercise adherence and change in physical activity in both exercise and comparison groups.