Brunette Mary F, Ferron Joelle C, McGurk Susan R, Williams Jill M, Harrington Amy, Devitt Timothy, Xie Haiyi
Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Dartmouth-Hitchcock, Concord, NH, United States.
Dartmouth-Hitchcock, Concord, NH, United States.
JMIR Ment Health. 2020 Feb 8;7(2):e16524. doi: 10.2196/16524.
In-person motivational interventions increase engagement with evidence-based cessation treatments among smokers with schizophrenia, but access to such interventions can be limited because of workforce shortages and competing demands in mental health clinics. The use of digital technology to deliver interventions can increase access, but cognitive impairments in schizophrenia may impede the use of standard digital interventions. We developed an interactive, multimedia, digital motivational decision support system for smokers with schizophrenia (Let's Talk About Smoking). We also digitalized a standard educational pamphlet from the National Cancer Institute (NCI Education). Both were tailored to reduce cognitive load during use.
We conducted a randomized trial of Let's Talk About Smoking versus NCI Education to test whether the interactive motivational intervention was more effective and more appealing than the static educational intervention for increasing use of smoking cessation treatment, quit attempts, and abstinence among smokers with schizophrenia, accounting for the level of cognitive functioning.
Adult smokers with schizophrenia (n=162) were enrolled in the study from 2014 to 2015, randomly assigned to intervention condition, and assessed in person at 3- and 6-month follow-ups. Interventions were delivered on a laptop computer in a single session. All participants had access to standard, community-delivered cessation treatments during follow-up. Multivariate models were used to evaluate outcomes.
Treatment initiation outcomes were not different between intervention conditions (27/84 [32%] for Let's Talk About Smoking vs 36/78 [46%] for NCI Education; odds ratio [OR] 0.71 [95% CI 0.37-1.33]); 38.9% (63/162) of participants initiated treatment. Older age (OR 1.03 [95% CI 1.00-1.07]; P=.05), higher education (OR 1.21 [95% CI 1.04-1.41]; P=.03), and fewer positive symptoms (OR 0.87 [95% CI 0.80-0.96]; P=.01) predicted cessation treatment initiation, whereas level of cognition did not. The mean satisfaction and usability index score was higher for Let's Talk About Smoking versus NCI Education (8.9 [SD 1.3] vs 8.3 [SD 2.1]; t=2.0; P=.045). Quit attempts (25/84, 30% vs 36/78, 46%; estimate [Est]=-0.093, SE 0.48; P=.85) and abstinence (1/84, 1% vs 6/78, 7%; χ21=3.4; P=.07) were not significantly different between intervention conditions. Cognitive functioning at baseline (Est=1.47, SE 0.47; P=.002) and use of any behavioral or medication cessation treatment (Est=1.43, SE 0.47; P=.003) predicted quit attempts with self-reported abstinence over the 6-month follow-up.
The interactive, multimedia intervention was not more effective than the static, text-based intervention among smokers with schizophrenia. Both tailored digital interventions resulted in levels of treatment engagement and quit attempts that were similar to findings from previous studies of in-person interventions, confirming the potential role of digital interventions to educate and motivate smokers with schizophrenia to use cessation treatment and to quit smoking. These findings indicate that additional cessation treatment is needed after brief education or motivational interventions, and that cessation treatment should be adjusted for people with cognitive impairment.
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02086162; https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02086162.
面对面的动机干预可提高精神分裂症吸烟者对循证戒烟治疗的参与度,但由于劳动力短缺和心理健康诊所的其他需求,此类干预的可及性可能有限。利用数字技术提供干预可增加可及性,但精神分裂症患者的认知障碍可能会妨碍标准数字干预的使用。我们为精神分裂症吸烟者开发了一个交互式、多媒体数字动机决策支持系统(“让我们谈谈吸烟”)。我们还将美国国立癌症研究所的一份标准教育手册进行了数字化处理(NCI教育)。两者都经过了调整,以减少使用过程中的认知负担。
我们对“让我们谈谈吸烟”与NCI教育进行了一项随机试验,以测试这种交互式动机干预在提高精神分裂症吸烟者戒烟治疗的使用率、戒烟尝试和戒烟成功率方面是否比静态教育干预更有效、更有吸引力,同时考虑到认知功能水平。
2014年至2015年,162名成年精神分裂症吸烟者纳入本研究,随机分配至干预组,并在3个月和6个月随访时进行当面评估。干预在一次会议中通过笔记本电脑进行。所有参与者在随访期间都可获得标准的社区戒烟治疗。使用多变量模型评估结果。
干预组之间的治疗启动结果无差异(“让我们谈谈吸烟”组为27/84 [32%],NCI教育组为36/78 [46%];优势比[OR] 0.71 [95%置信区间0.37 - 1.33]);38.9%(63/162)的参与者开始治疗。年龄较大(OR 1.03 [95%置信区间1.00 - 1.07];P = 0.05)、受教育程度较高(OR 1.21 [95%置信区间1.04 - 1.41];P = 0.03)和阳性症状较少(OR 0.87 [95%置信区间0.80 - 0.96];P = 0.01)可预测戒烟治疗的启动,而认知水平则不然。“让我们谈谈吸烟”组的平均满意度和可用性指数得分高于NCI教育组(8.9 [标准差1.3] 对8.3 [标准差2.1];t = 2.0;P = 0.045)。干预组之间的戒烟尝试(25/84,30% 对36/78,46%;估计值[Est] = -0.093,标准误0.48;P = 0.85)和戒烟成功率(1/84,1% 对6/78,7%;χ²1 = 3.4;P = 0.07)无显著差异。基线时的认知功能(Est = 1.47,标准误0.47;P = 0.002)和使用任何行为或药物戒烟治疗(Est = 1.43,标准误0.47;P = 0.003)可预测在6个月随访期间自我报告戒烟成功的戒烟尝试。
在精神分裂症吸烟者中,交互式多媒体干预并不比基于文本的静态干预更有效。两种经过调整的数字干预所带来的治疗参与度和戒烟尝试水平与以往面对面干预研究的结果相似,证实了数字干预在教育和激励精神分裂症吸烟者使用戒烟治疗及戒烟方面的潜在作用。这些发现表明,在简短的教育或动机干预后还需要额外的戒烟治疗,并且应针对认知障碍者调整戒烟治疗。
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02086162;https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02086162