Okuyemi Kolawole S, Thomas Janet L, Hall Sandra, Nollen Nicole L, Richter Kimber P, Jeffries Shawn K, Caldwell Amelia R, Ahluwalia Jasjit S
Program in Health Disparities Research, Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA.
Nicotine Tob Res. 2006 Oct;8(5):689-99. doi: 10.1080/14622200600789841.
This study, which tested two motivational interviewing treatment approaches, assessed the feasibility of conducting a community-based smoking cessation intervention among homeless smokers. Participants (N = 46) were recruited from multiple facilities in the Kansas City area and were randomized to two counseling conditions in which they received five individual motivational interviewing sessions, six group meetings, and their choice of 8 weeks of 21-mg nicotine patch or 4-mg nicotine lozenge. The two counseling conditions consisted of motivational interviewing targeted either to smoking behaviors exclusively (smoking only) or to smoking and other addictions or life events that could affect ability to quit (smoking plus). Group meetings were designed to provide educational information and social support. Measures of feasibility assessed included the proportion of participants who returned for randomization among those eligible, adherence to prescribed nicotine replacement therapies, retention rates at the week 26 final study visit, and biochemically verified 7-day abstinence at week 26. Most participants (69.6%) chose nicotine patches, and 32% of those participants reported using at least four patches per week. Carbon monoxide verified 7-day abstinence rates in the smoking-only and smoking-plus groups were 13.04% and 17.39% (ns), respectively, at week 8 and 8.70% and 17.39% (ns), respectively, at week 26. Participants who used at least four patches per week were more likely to have quit at 8 weeks than were those who used fewer patches (33.3% vs. 10.5%, p = .30). Results support the feasibility of conducting a smoking cessation intervention among homeless smokers. Findings also show promising effects for nicotine replacement therapy and counseling in this population. Developing programs to improve smoking cessation outcomes in underserved populations is an essential step toward achieving national health objectives and for ultimately reducing tobacco-related health disparities.
本研究测试了两种动机性访谈治疗方法,评估了在无家可归吸烟者中开展基于社区的戒烟干预措施的可行性。参与者(N = 46)从堪萨斯城地区的多个机构招募,并随机分配到两种咨询条件下,他们接受了五次个体动机性访谈、六次小组会议,并可选择使用为期8周的21毫克尼古丁贴片或4毫克尼古丁含片。两种咨询条件包括仅针对吸烟行为的动机性访谈(仅吸烟组)或针对吸烟以及可能影响戒烟能力的其他成瘾行为或生活事件的动机性访谈(吸烟加其他组)。小组会议旨在提供教育信息和社会支持。评估的可行性指标包括符合条件的参与者中返回进行随机分组的比例、对规定的尼古丁替代疗法的依从性、在第26周最终研究访视时的留存率,以及在第26周经生化验证的7天戒烟率。大多数参与者(69.6%)选择了尼古丁贴片,其中32%的参与者报告每周至少使用四片贴片。在第8周时,仅吸烟组和吸烟加其他组经一氧化碳验证的7天戒烟率分别为13.04%和17.39%(无显著差异),在第26周时分别为8.70%和17.39%(无显著差异)。每周至少使用四片贴片的参与者在8周时戒烟的可能性高于使用贴片较少的参与者(33.3%对10.5%,p = 0.30)。结果支持在无家可归吸烟者中开展戒烟干预措施的可行性。研究结果还表明尼古丁替代疗法和咨询对该人群有显著效果。制定改善服务不足人群戒烟效果的项目是实现国家健康目标以及最终减少烟草相关健康差距的重要一步。