Extended cognitive behavior therapy for cigarette smoking cessation. A randomized controlled trial of a smoking cessation intervention among people with a psychotic disorder. A randomised controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of a nurse-provided intervention for hospitalised smokers. One year effectiveness of an individualised smoking cessation intervention at the workplace: a randomised 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. Maintaining abstinence from cigarette smoking: effectiveness of group counselling and factors predicting outcome. Relapse prevention versus broad spectrum treatment for smoking cessation: a comparison of efficacy. A randomized controlled trial to assess the effects of reimbursing the costs of smoking cessation therapy on sustained abstinence. Extended treatment of older cigarette smokers. Impact of a brief motivational smoking cessation intervention the Get PHIT randomized controlled trial. A randomized trial assessing the Five-Day Plan for smoking cessation. A digital smoking cessation program delivered through internet and cell phone without nicotine replacement (happy ending): randomized controlled trial. [Clinical trial of 2 tobacco use cessation interventions in primary care]. A randomised control study of a fully automated internet based smoking cessation programme.
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. 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. 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. To assess the effectiveness of a smoking cessation intervention at the workplace. The intervention was adapted to smokers' tobacco dependence, and included minimal structured counselling at the first visit (5-8 minutes), nicotine patches for three months, and three sessions of counselling for reinforcement of abstinence (2-3 minutes) over a three month period.
                Open randomised trial with two groups: the intervention group, and the control group which was subjected to standard clinical practice, consisting of short (30 seconds to one minute) sporadic sessions of unstructured medical antismoking advice. The trial was carried out among 217 smokers of both sexes, aged 20-63 years, motivated to quit smoking and without contraindications for nicotine patches, who were employees at a public transport company and at two worksites of an electric company. The main outcome measure was self reported tobacco abstinence confirmed by carbon monoxide in expired air </=10 ppm. Analysis was performed according to intention-to-treat.
                The rate of continuous abstinence at 12 months was 20.2% for the intervention versus 8.7% for the control group (OR: 2.58; 95% CI: 1.13 to 5.90; p = 0.025). In subgroup analyses, effectiveness of the intervention did not vary substantially with age, tobacco dependence, number of cigarettes smoked per day, number of years of tobacco consumption, degree of desire to quit smoking, time spent with smokers, subjective health, and presence of tobacco related symptoms. Weight gain at 12 months was similar for both groups (1.69 kg in the intervention v 2.01 kg in the control group; p = 0.21).
                A simple and easily generalisable intervention at the workplace is effective to achieve long term smoking cessation. In a setting similar to ours, nine subjects would have to be treated for three months for one to achieve continuous abstinence for 12 months. 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. The aim of the study was to assess the effectiveness of worksite group counselling interventions designed to prevent smoking relapse after abstinence has been achieved following 3 months therapy using group support and/or transdermal nicotine replacement therapy. After 3 months, abstinent subjects were randomly allocated either to a counselling group led by professional psychologists (PG), to a counselling group led by former smokers (SG) or to no intervention group (NG). The 3 and 12 months abstinence were defined, respectively, as a sustained smoking cessation during the last month, and the last 9 months. Complete abstinence was confirmed by expired carbon monoxide and by urine cotinine concentrations. The abstinence rate at 3 months was 35.1%. After 12 months abstinence rates were not statistically different in the PG, the SG and the NG (respectively 57.8, 53.4 and 49.6% of those randomised). In multivariate analyzes, baseline variables associated with 12 months abstinence were non-smoking family, gender (male), lower daily intake of nicotine and better psychological adjustment. Mean weight gain at 3 months in abstinent versus relapsed subjects, was respectively, 4.1 and 2.4 kg. Baseline variables associated with weight gain at 3 months were higher Fagerström score, gender (male) and professional status (blue collar worker). Group support after abstinence has been achieved did not significantly improve the abstinence. This study shows the difficulty of preventing smoking relapse with monthly group counselling. The results indicate the need to investigate further specific programmes focusing on factors such as gender, family, nicotine dependence, psychological and weight concerns/issues which may precipitate relapse. The efficacy of a smoking cessation relapse prevention (RP) program, emphasizing cognitive-behavioral coping skills, was compared to that of a broad spectrum (BS) program, which emphasized behavioral skills. It was hypothesized that the RP program would be more effective in producing long-term abstinence, compared to the BS package. Abstinence rates validated by saliva thiocyanate and carbon monoxide, as well as self-report of smoking reduction, were measured at posttreatment, 3 and 6 months. No differences in posttreatment quit rates were found between the two groups, although both programs produced significantly higher quit rates than the wait-list control group. Contrary to prediction, the BS group produced marginally significantly greater abstinence at 3 months. No differences in abstinence were found at 6 months. Reduction in cigarette consumption was marginally significantly greater for the BS group at 3 and 6 months. Various mediators of treatment outcome were not found to influence success in quitting. There was a significant weight gain in those who quit. We studied whether reimbursement for smoking cessation treatment (SCT) can increase prolonged abstinence from smoking up to 2 years. SETTING, PARTICIPANTS AND DESIGN: From the general population, we recruited smokers and assigned them randomly to a control group (n = 634) or an intervention group (n = 632). For 6 months, participants in the intervention group could apply for reimbursement and received information regarding the reimbursed SCT. Participants in the control group received no reimbursement or information.
                In this follow-up study, prolonged abstinence from smoking was defined as reported being abstinent from at least 7 days before the end of reimbursement until the follow-up assessment 6 months or 2 years later.
                At 6 months after the end of reimbursement, 18 participants in the control group (2.8%) and 35 participants (5.5%) in the intervention group reported sustained abstinence for at least 6 months [odds ratio (OR) = 2.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-3.6]. Two years after the reimbursement period, 10 participants in the control group (1.6%) and 27 participants in the intervention group (4.3%) still reported sustained abstinence (OR = 4.1, 95% CI 1.7-10.2). The overall effectiveness of SCT increased with reimbursement and was 22% in the intervention group and 8% in the control group after 2 years.
                Reimbursement may be an effective strategy to increase the prolonged abstinence rate even after 2 years. Tobacco dependence treatments achieve abstinence rates of 25-30% at 1 year. Low rates may reflect failure to conceptualize tobacco dependence as a chronic disorder. The aims of the present study were to determine the efficacy of extended cognitive behavioral and pharmacological interventions in smokers > or = 50 years of age, and to determine if gender differences in efficacy existed.
                Open randomized clinical trial.
                A free-standing, smoking treatment research clinic.
                A total of 402 smokers of > or = 10 cigarettes per day, all 50 years of age or older.
                Participants completed a 12-week treatment that included group counseling, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and bupropion. Participants, independent of smoking status, were then assigned randomly to follow-up conditions: (i) standard treatment (ST; no further treatment); (ii) extended NRT (E-NRT; 40 weeks of nicotine gum availability); (iii) extended cognitive behavioral therapy (E-CBT; 11 cognitive behavioral sessions over a 40-week period); or (iv) E-CBT plus E-NRT (E-combined; 11 cognitive behavioral sessions plus 40 weeks nicotine gum availability).
                Primary outcome variable was 7-day point prevalence cigarette abstinence verified biochemically at weeks 24, 52, 64 and 104.
                The most clinically important findings were significant main effects for treatment condition, time and the treatment x time interaction. The E-CBT condition produced high cigarette abstinence rates that were maintained throughout the 2-year study period [(week 24 (58%), 52 (55%), 64 (55%) and 104 (55%)], and was significantly more effective than E-NRT and ST across that period. No other treatment condition was significantly different to ST. No effects for gender were found.
                Extended cognitive behavioral treatments can produce high and stable cigarette abstinence rates for both men and women. NRT does not add to the efficacy of extended CBT, and may hamper its efficacy. Research is needed to determine if these results can be replicated in a sample with a greater range of ages, and improved upon with the addition of medications other than NRT. 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. To evaluate the effectiveness of the Five-Day Plan (FDP) in helping smokers to stop smoking.
                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.
                Six towns in France.
                228 smokers, recruited by newspaper and radio advertisement, aged 18 years or over and willing to make an attempt to quit smoking.
                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.
                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).
                The FDP may be considered as an aid for smokers who want to quit. Happy Ending (HE) is an intense 1-year smoking cessation program delivered via the Internet and cell phone. HE consists of more than 400 contacts by email, Web pages, interactive voice response, and short message service technology. HE includes a craving helpline and a relapse prevention system, providing just-in-time therapy. All the components of the program are fully automated.
                The objectives were to describe the rationale for the design of HE, to assess the 12-month efficacy of HE in a sample of smokers willing to attempt to quit without the use of nicotine replacement therapy, and to explore the potential effect of HE on coping planning and self-efficacy (prior to quitting) and whether coping planning and self-efficacy mediate treatment effect.
                A two-arm randomized controlled trial was used. Subjects were recruited via Internet advertisements and randomly assigned to condition. Inclusion criteria were willingness to quit on a prescribed day without using nicotine replacement and being aged 18 years or older. The intervention group received HE, and the control group received a 44-page self-help booklet. Abstinence was defined as "not even a puff of smoke, for the last seven days" and was assessed by means of Internet surveys or telephone interviews 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postcessation. The main outcome was repeated point abstinence (ie, abstinence at all four time points). Coping planning and self-efficacy were measured at baseline and at the end of the preparation phase (ie, after 2 weeks of treatment, but prior to cessation day).
                A total of 290 participants received either the HE intervention (n=144) or the control booklet (n=146). Using intent-to-treat analysis, participants in the intervention group reported clinically and statistically significantly higher repeated point abstinence rates than control participants (20% versus 7%, odds ratio [OR] = 3.43, 95% CI = 1.60-7.34, P = .002). Although no differences were observed at baseline, by the end of the preparation phase, significantly higher levels of coping planning (t(261) = 3.07, P = .002) and precessation self-efficacy (t(261) = 2.63, P = .01) were observed in the intervention group compared with the control group. However, neither coping planning nor self-efficacy mediated long-term treatment effect. For point abstinence 1 month after quitting, however, coping planning and self-efficacy showed a partial mediation of the treatment effect.
                This 12-month trial documents a long-term treatment effect of a fully automated smoking cessation intervention without the use of nicotine replacement therapy. The study adds to the promise of using digital media in supporting behavior change. To study the efficacy of two types of intervention to stop tobacco dependency.
                Randomised clinical trial.
                Primary care centre.
                Smokers recruited from among the health centre users through the preventive activities and health promotion programme.
                Independent variable: type of intervention. General variables: age, sex, marital status, educational level, work situation, cohabitation with children, smokers at home, number of years smoking, type of tobacco. There were two types of intervention: a) Minimal Intervention (MI). b) Advanced Intervention (AI). 54 patients were included, with 6 losses. 21 were assigned at random to the MI group and 27 to the AI group. Progress was measured at 15 days, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and a year.
                In the MI, 23.8% were abstinent at 15 days; the same percentage at one month and 3 months; 19% at 6 months; and 14.3% remained abstinent after a year. In the AI, 51.9% were abstinent at 15 days; 48.1% at both one and 3 months; 25.9% at 6 months; and 22.2% were still not smoking after a year. No significant differences between the two interventions were found in any of the observations.
                These data do not show that one intervention is better than the other. With the passage of time the effect of the intervention decreased in both groups. The objective of this project was to test the short term (90 days) efficacy of an automated behavioural intervention for smoking cessation, the "1-2-3 Smokefree" programme, delivered via an internet website.
                Randomised control trial. Subjects surveyed at baseline, immediately post-intervention, and 90 days later.
                The study and the intervention occurred entirely via the internet site. Subjects were recruited primarily via worksites, which referred potential subjects to the website.
                The 351 qualifying subjects were notified of the study via their worksite and required to have internet access. Additionally, subjects were required to be over 18 years of age, smoke cigarettes, and be interested in quitting smoking in the next 30 days. Eligible subjects were randomly assigned individually to treatment or control condition by computer algorithm.
                The intervention consisted of a video based internet site that presented current strategies for smoking cessation and motivational materials tailored to the user's race/ethnicity, sex, and age. Control subjects received nothing for 90 days and were then allowed access to the programme.
                The primary outcome measure was abstinence from smoking at 90 day follow up.
                At follow up, the cessation rate at 90 days was 24.1% (n = 21) for the treatment group and 8.2% (n = 9) for the control group (p = 0.002). Using an intent-to-treat model, 12.3% (n = 21) of the treatment group were abstinent, compared to 5.0% (n = 9) in the control group (p = 0.015).
                These evaluation results suggest that a smoking cessation programme, with at least short term efficacy, can be successfully delivered via the internet.
Psychosocial smoking cessation interventions are effective in promoting abstinence at 1 year, provided they are of sufficient duration. Further studies, with longer follow-up, should compare different psychosocial intervention strategies, or the addition of a psychosocial intervention strategy to pharmacological therapy (e.g. nicotine replacement therapy) compared with pharmacological treatment alone.