Department of Internal Medicine, University of California-Davis, Sacramento, California.
Department of Psychology, DePaul University, Chicago, Illinois.
Cancer. 2018 Apr 1;124 Suppl 7:1590-1598. doi: 10.1002/cncr.31115.
Chinese American men smoke at a high rate, which puts household nonsmokers at risk. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a brief-intensity versus moderate-intensity smoke-free-living educational intervention for household pairs.
The authors conducted a randomized controlled trial of Cantonese-speaking Chinese American smoker and household nonsmoker pairs in San Francisco, California. Pairs were randomized to moderate-intensity or brief-intensity group sessions with their household partner. The moderate-intensity group received 2 group sessions, a laboratory report of their baseline smoke exposure, as measured by 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL), and 3 follow-up calls over 6 months. The brief-intensity group received 1 group session on tobacco-cessation resources. Primary outcomes were biochemically validated, past-month smoking abstinence and elimination of nonsmoker household exposure at 12 months.
Participant pairs (n = 203) were male smokers, one-half of whom did not intend to quit within 6 months, with mostly female spouses as household nonsmokers. Approximately three-quarters of nonsmokers in both groups already had smoke-free home rules. At 12 months, smokers in both groups had similar biochemically validated 30-day abstinence rates (moderate-intensity group, 0%-20.7%; brief-intensity group, 0%-20.0%; P = .002 over time). More smokers in the moderate-intensity group used subsequent cessation group classes (moderate-intensity group, 50%; brief-intensity group, 24%; P = .004). Household nonsmokers in both groups had similar biochemically validated rates of no home exposure (moderate-intensity group, 24.5%-42.2%; brief-intensity group, 24.8%-33.3%; P = .0001 over time).
A moderate-intensity smoke-free-living educational intervention for Chinese-speaking household pairs was not more effective than a brief-intensity intervention for smoking abstinence and elimination of household nonsmoker exposure. Abstinence rates were similar to those achieved with standard group counseling. Cancer 2018;124:1590-8. © 2018 American Cancer Society.
美籍华裔男性吸烟率较高，这使家庭中的不吸烟者处于危险之中。本研究的目的是评估针对家庭对的简短强度与中度强度无烟生活教育干预的有效性。
作者在加利福尼亚州旧金山对讲广东话的美籍华裔吸烟者及其家庭中的不吸烟者进行了一项随机对照试验。将对随机分配到中度强度或简短强度的小组会议中，并与他们的家庭伴侣一起参加。中度强度组接受了 2 次小组会议，他们的基线吸烟暴露量的实验室报告，由 4-（甲基亚硝氨基）-1-（3-吡啶基）-1-丁醇（NNAL）测量，并在 6 个月内进行了 3 次后续电话随访。简短强度组接受了 1 次有关戒烟资源的小组会议。主要结局是在 12 个月时通过生物化学验证的过去一个月的吸烟禁欲和消除非吸烟者家庭暴露。
参与者对（n = 203）是男性吸烟者，其中一半的人在 6 个月内没有戒烟的打算，主要是女性配偶作为家庭中的不吸烟者。两组中大约有四分之三的不吸烟者已经有了无烟家庭规则。在 12 个月时，两组吸烟者的生物化学验证的 30 天禁欲率相似（中度强度组，0％-20.7％；简短强度组，0％-20.0％；随时间推移 P =.002）。中度强度组中有更多的吸烟者使用了随后的戒烟小组课程（中度强度组，50％；简短强度组，24％；P =.004）。两组中的家庭非吸烟者的生物化学验证的无家庭暴露率相似（中度强度组，24.5％-42.2％；简短强度组，24.8％-33.3％；随时间推移 P =.0001）。
针对讲中文的家庭对的中度强度无烟生活教育干预对吸烟禁欲和消除家庭非吸烟者暴露的效果并不优于简短强度干预。禁欲率与标准小组咨询所达到的相似。癌症 2018;124:1590-8。© 2018 美国癌症协会。
