The modification of smoking behavior: Progress and problems (original) (raw)
Related papers
The modification of smoking behavior: A search for effective variables
Behaviour Research and Therapy, 1970
A smoking withdrawal clinic procedure employing social pressure was compared to an attention placebo condition and other control conditions designed to subtract "non-active" variance due to such factors as mere contact with an experimenter and individual etfort, with and without the expectation of future help. Both Social Pressure and Placebo Ss responded to treatment with significant reduction in smoking, but did not differ. Subjects asked to quit smoking on their own, displayed significant gains only if future aid was not expected, and the behavior of subjects who were unaware of their participation in an experiment remained essentially unchanged. Data on suggestibility, internal vs. external control of reinforcement, extroversion and emotionality were collected in Experiment 3, but failed to correlate significantly (nithin treatment conditions) with success in quitting smoking.
Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
Objective: Addictions can be beaten if started off with a true motivation to quit it. Enhancing motivation is an important part of overall treatment for smoking cessation as it increases a smoker's courage and enthusiasm to quit smoke. This study aimed to assess effectiveness of various interventional methods to motivate unmotivated smokers with a focus on changing behavioural stage of smokers to quit. Methodology: A single blinded trial was conducted at the outpatient department of ITS dental college and hospital among precontemplation stage smokers allocated into 4 groups and given interventional therapies like general counselling only(group 1), counselling and intra oral camera assessment (Group 2), counselling as well as carbon monoxide monitoring(Group 3)whereas fourth group(Group 4) given a combination therapy of all of them. A baseline evaluation of nicotine dependence and behavioural stage of the smoker was assessed. The patients were then evaluated on presence on their scheduled follow up visits done at interval of 2 weeks and 4 weeks. Descriptive statistics were addressed and the association was evaluated using Pearson chi square test. Any p value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Majority of smokers were males(88%) and about 48.8% of them were highly dependent smokers. The change in precontemplation behavioural stage was assessed on basis of follow up visits after interventional therapy which was significantly higher in group 4 receiving combination therapy, followed by carbon monoxide therapy ,counselling and intra oral camera assessment and the least visits in behaviour counselling group (p<0.05). Conclusion: A combination of counselling and other motivational aids therapy is best way possible to help smokers focusing a change on the behavioural stage of the patient from precontemplation to preparation stage.
Addiction, 2006
Aims Most smokers attempt to stop smoking without using help. We evaluated the efficacy of a decision aid to motivate quitters to use efficacious treatment. Setting and participants A total of 1014 were recruited from a convenience sample of 3391 smokers who intended to quit smoking within 6 months. Design and intervention Smokers were assigned randomly to either receive the decision aid or no intervention. The decision aid was expected to motivate quitters to use efficacious cessation methods and contained neutral information on treatment methods, distinguishing between efficacious and non-efficacious treatments. Measurements Baseline questionnaire and follow-ups were used 2 weeks and 6 months after the start of the intervention. Findings The decision aid increased knowledge of cessation methods and induced a more positive attitude towards these methods. Furthermore, 45% reported increased confidence about being able to quit and 43% said it helped them to choose between treatments. However, no clear effect on usage of treatment aids was found, but the intervention group had more quit attempts (OR = 1.52, 95% CI 1.14-2.02) and higher point prevalence abstinence at 6-month follow-up (20.2% versus 13.6%; OR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.07-2.11). Conclusions An aid to help smokers decide to use efficacious treatment when attempting to quit smoking had a positive effect on smoking cessation, while failing to increase the usage of efficacious treatment. This finding lends support to the notion that the mere promotion of efficacious treatments for tobacco addiction might increase the number of quit attempts, irrespective of the actual usage of treatment.
Interest in treatments to stop smoking
Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 2009
We surveyed 884 Vermont (VT) tobacco smokers by random digit dialing to determine past and future use of treatment. Among those who had recently attempted to quit, 61% had ever used a treatment, 21% had ever used a psychosocial treatment, and 57% had used a medication. Among those who planned to quit in the next month, 68% stated they would use a treatment, 35% would use a psychosocial treatment, and 62% would use a medication. The major predictors of past or future use of treatment were greater cigarettes per day, older age, being a woman, and seeing a health professional. Although this survey suggests many smokers have used or plan to use a smoking cessation treatment, program data indicate less than 10% of VT smokers who try to quit use the state quitline, counseling, or free medication provision. Why smokers do not use these treatments needs to be determined.
2008
This study was based on a ten-year follow-up of smokers who had participated in a randomized controlled trial of a behavioral self-help program for smoking cessation. The original sample was made up of 200 smokers assigned at random to two treatment groups. Ten years later 93.5% (n = 187) of the sample were successfully located (of the 13 not located, 6 had died), from whom information was obtained about their current state and the evolution of their smoking over the 10-year period. Reported abstinence at this follow-up was confirmed by carbon monoxide in expired air. Significant differences were found in the abstinence rates of the two groups at the follow-ups 1 year (14% vs. 28%) and 2 years (13% vs. 24%) after the end of the treatment. After 10 years 26% (n = 52) of the total sample were abstinent. Over the ten-year period, 62.0% tried to give up smoking at some point, the mean figure for attempts being 1.3. According to the results of the 10-year follow-up, low nicotine dependence at pretreatment is a major factor predicting long-term cessation in smokers.
Smoking reduction intervention in a large population-based study. The Inter99 study
Preventive Medicine, 2005
Background. Several large and well-conducted community interventions have failed to detect an effect on prevalence of smoking. Methods. Two thousand four hundred eight daily smokers in all motivational stages were actively recruited and included in a randomised population-based intervention study in Copenhagen, Denmark. All smokers completed a questionnaire and underwent a health examination and a lifestyle consultation. Daily smokers in the high intensity intervention group were offered assistance to quit in smoking cessation groups.
SMOKING CESSATION INTERVENTIONS
Cigarette smoking is the leading cause of premature death and disability (Goren, Annunziata, Schnoll, & Suaya, 2014). Cigarette smoking is responsible for over 443 thousand premature deaths, 97 billion dollars in loss of productivity and over 96 billion dollars in medical costs annually in the United States (Goren, Annunziata, Schnoll, & Suaya, 2014). The prevalence of cigarette smoking is highest among young adult males, minorities, people with low educational and socio-economic status than the general population. The is a need for robust policy intervention. Current smoking cessation interventions include smoke free environment, increase cigarette tax and increase minimum age to access cigarette. A comprehensive approach to smoking cessation intervention that includes socio-economic, regulatory, clinical, and educational strategies are best alternative to eliminate the socio-economic and health impact of cigarette smoking.
Behavioural interventions for smoking cessation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
European Heart Journal, 2008
Widely varying estimates of treatment effects have been reported in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy of behavioural interventions for smoking cessation. Previous meta-analyses investigating behavioural interventions have important limitations and do not include recently published RCTs. We undertook a meta-analysis of RCTs to synthesize the treatment effects of four behavioural interventions, including minimal clinical intervention (brief advice from a healthcare worker), and intensive interventions, including individual, group, and telephone counselling.