Cahill Kate, Lancaster Tim, Green Natasha
Department of Primary Health Care, University of Oxford, Rosemary Rue Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, UK, OX3 7LF.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Nov 10(11):CD004492. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004492.pub4.
The transtheoretical model is the most widely known of several stage-based theories of behaviour. It proposes that smokers move through a discrete series of motivational stages before they quit successfully. These are precontemplation (no thoughts of quitting), contemplation (thinking about quitting), preparation (planning to quit in the next 30 days), action (quitting successfully for up to six months), and maintenance (no smoking for more than six months). According to this influential model, interventions which help people to stop smoking should be tailored to their stage of readiness to quit, and are designed to move them forward through subsequent stages to eventual success. People in the preparation and action stages of quitting would require different types of support from those in precontemplation or contemplation.
Our primary objective was to test the effectiveness of stage-based interventions in helping smokers to quit.
We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's specialised register for trials, using the terms ('stage* of change', 'transtheoretical model*', 'trans-theoretical model*, 'precaution adoption model*', 'health action model', 'processes of change questionnaire*', 'readiness to change', 'tailor*') and 'smoking' in the title or abstract, or as keywords. The latest search was in August 2010.
We included randomized controlled trials, which compared stage-based interventions with non-stage-based controls, with 'usual care' or with assessment only. We excluded trials which did not report a minimum follow-up period of six months from start of treatment, and those which measured stage of change but did not modify their intervention in the light of it.
We extracted data in duplicate on the participants, the dose and duration of intervention, the outcome measures, the randomization procedure, concealment of allocation, and completeness of follow up.The main outcome was abstinence from smoking for at least six months. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence, and preferred biochemically validated rates where reported. Where appropriate we performed meta-analysis to estimate a pooled risk ratio, using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.
We found 41 trials (>33,000 participants) which met our inclusion criteria. Four trials, which directly compared the same intervention in stage-based and standard versions, found no clear advantage for the staging component. Stage-based versus standard self-help materials (two trials) gave a relative risk (RR) of 0.93 (95% CI 0.62 to 1.39). Stage-based versus standard counselling (two trials) gave a relative risk of 1.00 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.22). Six trials of stage-based self-help systems versus any standard self-help support demonstrated a benefit for the staged groups, with an RR of 1.27 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.59). Twelve trials comparing stage-based self help with 'usual care' or assessment-only gave an RR of 1.32 (95% CI 1.17 to 1.48). Thirteen trials of stage-based individual counselling versus any control condition gave an RR of 1.24 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.42). These findings are consistent with the proven effectiveness of these interventions in their non-stage-based versions. The evidence was unclear for telephone counselling, interactive computer programmes or training of doctors or lay supporters. This uncertainty may be due in part to smaller numbers of trials.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on four trials using direct comparisons, stage-based self-help interventions (expert systems and/or tailored materials) and individual counselling were neither more nor less effective than their non-stage-based equivalents. Thirty-one trials of stage-based self help or counselling interventions versus any control condition demonstrated levels of effectiveness which were comparable with their non-stage-based counterparts. Providing these forms of practical support to those trying to quit appears to be more productive than not intervening. However, the additional value of adapting the intervention to the smoker's stage of change is uncertain. The evidence is not clear for other types of staged intervention, including telephone counselling, interactive computer programmes and training of physicians or lay supporters. The evidence does not support the restriction of quitting advice and encouragement only to those smokers perceived to be in the preparation and action stages.
跨理论模型是几种基于阶段的行为理论中最为人所知的一种。该模型提出,吸烟者在成功戒烟之前会经历一系列不同的动机阶段。这些阶段依次为:前意向阶段(没有戒烟想法)、意向阶段(考虑戒烟)、准备阶段(计划在未来30天内戒烟)、行动阶段(成功戒烟达6个月)和维持阶段(戒烟超过6个月)。根据这一有影响力的模型,帮助人们戒烟的干预措施应根据他们的戒烟准备阶段进行调整,旨在推动他们通过后续阶段最终实现成功戒烟。处于戒烟准备和行动阶段的人需要的支持类型与处于前意向或意向阶段的人不同。
我们的主要目的是测试基于阶段的干预措施在帮助吸烟者戒烟方面的有效性。
我们在Cochrane烟草成瘾小组的专业试验注册库中进行检索,使用的检索词为(“改变阶段”、“跨理论模型”、“跨理论模型”、“预防采用模型”、“健康行动模型”、“改变过程问卷”、“改变意愿”、“调整”)以及标题或摘要中或作为关键词的“吸烟”。最近一次检索时间为2010年8月。
我们纳入了随机对照试验,这些试验将基于阶段的干预措施与非基于阶段的对照措施、“常规护理”或仅进行评估的措施进行比较。我们排除了未报告从治疗开始起至少6个月随访期的试验,以及那些测量了改变阶段但未据此调整干预措施的试验。
我们对参与者、干预措施的剂量和持续时间、结局指标、随机化程序、分配隐藏和随访完整性进行了双人数据提取。主要结局是至少6个月的戒烟。我们采用了最严格的戒烟定义,如有报告则优先选择经生化验证的戒烟率。在适当情况下,我们使用Mantel-Haenszel固定效应模型进行荟萃分析以估计合并风险比。
我们发现41项试验(超过33000名参与者)符合我们的纳入标准。四项直接比较基于阶段和标准版本相同干预措施的试验未发现阶段划分部分有明显优势。基于阶段的自助材料与标准自助材料(两项试验)的相对风险(RR)为0.93(95%CI 0.62至1.39)。基于阶段的咨询与标准咨询(两项试验)的相对风险为1.00(95%CI 0.82至1.22)。六项基于阶段的自助系统与任何标准自助支持措施的试验显示出阶段分组的益处,RR为1.27(95%CI 1.01至1.59)。十二项将基于阶段的自助与“常规护理”或仅进行评估的措施进行比较的试验的RR为1.32(95%CI 1.17至1.48)。十三项基于阶段的个体咨询与任何对照条件的试验的RR为1.24(95%CI 1.08至1.42)。这些结果与这些干预措施在非基于阶段版本中的已证实有效性一致。电话咨询、交互式计算机程序或医生或非专业支持者培训的证据不明确。这种不确定性可能部分归因于试验数量较少。
基于四项直接比较的试验,基于阶段的自助干预措施(专家系统和/或量身定制的材料)和个体咨询与非基于阶段的等效措施相比,效果相当。31项基于阶段的自助或咨询干预措施与任何对照条件的试验显示出与非基于阶段的对应措施相当的有效性水平。为试图戒烟的人提供这些形式的实际支持似乎比不进行干预更有成效。然而,根据吸烟者的改变阶段调整干预措施的额外价值尚不确定。其他类型的阶段性干预措施,包括电话咨询