Sumner Walton, Walker Mark S, Highstein Gabrielle R, Fischer Irene, Yan Yan, McQueen Amy, Fisher Edwin B
Washington University School of Medicine, 660 S. Euclid Ave, Campus Box 8005, St. Louis, Missouri, 63110, USA.
Vector Oncology, Memphis, Tennessee, USA.
BMC Public Health. 2016 Jul 11;16:550. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3202-y.
Telephone quitlines can help employees quit smoking. Quitlines typically use directive coaching, but nondirective, flexible coaching is an alternative. Call-2-Quit used a worksite-sponsored quitline to compare directive and nondirective coaching modes, and evaluated employee race and income as potential moderators.
An unblinded randomized controlled trial compared directive and nondirective telephone coaching by trained laypersons. Participants were smoking employees and spouses recruited through workplace smoking cessation campaigns in a hospital system and affiliated medical school. Coaches were four non-medical women trained to use both coaching modes. Participants were randomized by family to coaching mode. Participants received up to 7 calls from coaches who used computer assisted telephone interview software to track topics and time. Outcomes were reported smoking abstinence for 7 days at last contact, 6 or 12 months after coaching began. Both worksites implemented new tobacco control policies during the study.
Most participants responded to an insurance incentive introduced at the hospital. Call-2-Quit coached 518 participants: 22 % were African-American; 45 % had incomes below $30,000. Income, race, and intervention did not affect coaching completion rates. Cessation rates were comparable with directive and nondirective coaching (26 % versus 30 % quit, NS). A full factorial logistic regression model identified above median income (odds ratio = 1.8, p = 0.02), especially among African Americans (p = 0.04), and recent quit attempts (OR = 1.6, p = 0.03) as predictors of cessation. Nondirective coaching was associated with high cessation rates among subgroups of smokers reporting income above the median, recent quit attempts, or use of alternative therapies. Waiting up to 4 weeks to start coaching did not affect cessation. Of 41 highly addicted or depressed smokers who had never quit more than 30 days, none quit.
Nondirective coaching improved cessation rates for selected smoking employees, but less expensive directive coaching helped most smokers equally well, regardless of enrollment incentives and delays in receiving coaching. Some subgroups had very low cessation rates with either mode of quitline support.
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02730260 , Registered March 31, 2016.
电话戒烟热线可帮助员工戒烟。戒烟热线通常采用指导性辅导,但非指导性的灵活辅导是一种替代方式。“Call-2-Quit”利用一个由工作场所赞助的戒烟热线来比较指导性和非指导性辅导模式,并将员工的种族和收入作为潜在的调节因素进行评估。
一项非盲随机对照试验比较了由经过培训的非专业人员进行的指导性和非指导性电话辅导。参与者是通过医院系统和附属医学院的职场戒烟活动招募的吸烟员工及其配偶。辅导人员是四名接受过两种辅导模式培训的非医学女性。参与者按家庭随机分配到辅导模式。参与者最多可接到辅导人员的7个电话,辅导人员使用计算机辅助电话访谈软件来跟踪话题和时间。结局指标是在最后一次联系时、辅导开始后6个月或12个月时报告的连续7天戒烟情况。两个工作场所在研究期间都实施了新的烟草控制政策。
大多数参与者对医院推出的保险激励措施做出了回应。“Call-2-Quit”辅导了518名参与者:22%为非裔美国人;45%的收入低于3万美元。收入、种族和干预措施均未影响辅导完成率。指导性和非指导性辅导的戒烟率相当(分别为26%和30%戒烟,无统计学差异)。一个全因子逻辑回归模型确定收入高于中位数(优势比=1.8,p=0.02),尤其是在非裔美国人中(p=0.04),以及最近的戒烟尝试(优势比=1.6,p=0.03)是戒烟的预测因素。非指导性辅导与报告收入高于中位数、最近有戒烟尝试或使用替代疗法的吸烟者亚组中的高戒烟率相关。等待长达4周开始辅导并不影响戒烟。在41名从未戒烟超过30天的高度成瘾或抑郁的吸烟者中,无人戒烟。
非指导性辅导提高了部分吸烟员工的戒烟率,但成本较低的指导性辅导对大多数吸烟者同样有效,无论是否有注册激励措施以及接受辅导的延迟情况。在任何一种戒烟热线支持模式下,一些亚组的戒烟率都非常低。
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02730260,2016年3月31日注册。