Linking smokers to a quitline

Randomized controlled effectiveness trial of a support person intervention that targets non-smokers

Christi Ann Patten, Raymond Boyle, David Tinkelman, Tabetha A. Brockman, Amy Lukowski, Paul A. Decker, Joanne D'Silva, Edward Lichtenstein, Shu Hong Zhu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Evidence-based treatments (e.g. quitlines) are greatly underutilized by smokers limiting their public health impact. A three-session phone intervention for nonsmoking family members and friends (i.e. support persons) was successful for increasing smoker quitline enrollment. To enhance the intervention's potential translatability, in this study, we delivered treatment for the nonsmokerwithin ongoing quitline services and compared the efficacy of the three-call intervention to a streamlined version (one call). A total of 704 adult non-smokers (85% female, 95% White) wanting to help a smoker quit and recruited statewide in Minnesota participated in this randomized controlled trial with parallel groups. Non-smokers received mailed written materials and were randomly assigned to a control condition (no additional treatment, n=235), or to a one-(n=233) or three-call (n=236) intervention delivered by quitline coaches. The main outcome was smoker quitline enrollment through 7-month follow-up. Smoker quitline enrollment was similar for those linked to non-smokers in the oneand three-call interventions (14.6% [34/233] and 14.8% [35/236]), and higher than for smokers linked to control participants (6.4% [15/235]), P = 0.006. Just one quitline coaching call delivered to non-smokers increased treatment enrollment among smokers. The reach of quitlines could be enhanced by targeting the social support network of smokers.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)318-331
Number of pages14
JournalHealth Education Research
Volume32
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2017

Fingerprint

Randomized Controlled Trials
human being
Social Support
Therapeutics
coaching
coach
Public Health
family member
social support
public health
evidence
Group
Mentoring

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Linking smokers to a quitline : Randomized controlled effectiveness trial of a support person intervention that targets non-smokers. / Patten, Christi Ann; Boyle, Raymond; Tinkelman, David; Brockman, Tabetha A.; Lukowski, Amy; Decker, Paul A.; D'Silva, Joanne; Lichtenstein, Edward; Zhu, Shu Hong.

In: Health Education Research, Vol. 32, No. 4, 01.08.2017, p. 318-331.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Patten, CA, Boyle, R, Tinkelman, D, Brockman, TA, Lukowski, A, Decker, PA, D'Silva, J, Lichtenstein, E & Zhu, SH 2017, 'Linking smokers to a quitline: Randomized controlled effectiveness trial of a support person intervention that targets non-smokers', Health Education Research, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 318-331. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyx050
Patten, Christi Ann ; Boyle, Raymond ; Tinkelman, David ; Brockman, Tabetha A. ; Lukowski, Amy ; Decker, Paul A. ; D'Silva, Joanne ; Lichtenstein, Edward ; Zhu, Shu Hong. / Linking smokers to a quitline : Randomized controlled effectiveness trial of a support person intervention that targets non-smokers. In: Health Education Research. 2017 ; Vol. 32, No. 4. pp. 318-331.
@article{8150d14ac85e43b6bfac01c4d4ce79a2,
title = "Linking smokers to a quitline: Randomized controlled effectiveness trial of a support person intervention that targets non-smokers",
abstract = "Evidence-based treatments (e.g. quitlines) are greatly underutilized by smokers limiting their public health impact. A three-session phone intervention for nonsmoking family members and friends (i.e. support persons) was successful for increasing smoker quitline enrollment. To enhance the intervention's potential translatability, in this study, we delivered treatment for the nonsmokerwithin ongoing quitline services and compared the efficacy of the three-call intervention to a streamlined version (one call). A total of 704 adult non-smokers (85{\%} female, 95{\%} White) wanting to help a smoker quit and recruited statewide in Minnesota participated in this randomized controlled trial with parallel groups. Non-smokers received mailed written materials and were randomly assigned to a control condition (no additional treatment, n=235), or to a one-(n=233) or three-call (n=236) intervention delivered by quitline coaches. The main outcome was smoker quitline enrollment through 7-month follow-up. Smoker quitline enrollment was similar for those linked to non-smokers in the oneand three-call interventions (14.6{\%} [34/233] and 14.8{\%} [35/236]), and higher than for smokers linked to control participants (6.4{\%} [15/235]), P = 0.006. Just one quitline coaching call delivered to non-smokers increased treatment enrollment among smokers. The reach of quitlines could be enhanced by targeting the social support network of smokers.",
author = "Patten, {Christi Ann} and Raymond Boyle and David Tinkelman and Brockman, {Tabetha A.} and Amy Lukowski and Decker, {Paul A.} and Joanne D'Silva and Edward Lichtenstein and Zhu, {Shu Hong}",
year = "2017",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/her/cyx050",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "318--331",
journal = "Health Education Research",
issn = "0268-1153",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Linking smokers to a quitline

T2 - Randomized controlled effectiveness trial of a support person intervention that targets non-smokers

AU - Patten, Christi Ann

AU - Boyle, Raymond

AU - Tinkelman, David

AU - Brockman, Tabetha A.

AU - Lukowski, Amy

AU - Decker, Paul A.

AU - D'Silva, Joanne

AU - Lichtenstein, Edward

AU - Zhu, Shu Hong

PY - 2017/8/1

Y1 - 2017/8/1

N2 - Evidence-based treatments (e.g. quitlines) are greatly underutilized by smokers limiting their public health impact. A three-session phone intervention for nonsmoking family members and friends (i.e. support persons) was successful for increasing smoker quitline enrollment. To enhance the intervention's potential translatability, in this study, we delivered treatment for the nonsmokerwithin ongoing quitline services and compared the efficacy of the three-call intervention to a streamlined version (one call). A total of 704 adult non-smokers (85% female, 95% White) wanting to help a smoker quit and recruited statewide in Minnesota participated in this randomized controlled trial with parallel groups. Non-smokers received mailed written materials and were randomly assigned to a control condition (no additional treatment, n=235), or to a one-(n=233) or three-call (n=236) intervention delivered by quitline coaches. The main outcome was smoker quitline enrollment through 7-month follow-up. Smoker quitline enrollment was similar for those linked to non-smokers in the oneand three-call interventions (14.6% [34/233] and 14.8% [35/236]), and higher than for smokers linked to control participants (6.4% [15/235]), P = 0.006. Just one quitline coaching call delivered to non-smokers increased treatment enrollment among smokers. The reach of quitlines could be enhanced by targeting the social support network of smokers.

AB - Evidence-based treatments (e.g. quitlines) are greatly underutilized by smokers limiting their public health impact. A three-session phone intervention for nonsmoking family members and friends (i.e. support persons) was successful for increasing smoker quitline enrollment. To enhance the intervention's potential translatability, in this study, we delivered treatment for the nonsmokerwithin ongoing quitline services and compared the efficacy of the three-call intervention to a streamlined version (one call). A total of 704 adult non-smokers (85% female, 95% White) wanting to help a smoker quit and recruited statewide in Minnesota participated in this randomized controlled trial with parallel groups. Non-smokers received mailed written materials and were randomly assigned to a control condition (no additional treatment, n=235), or to a one-(n=233) or three-call (n=236) intervention delivered by quitline coaches. The main outcome was smoker quitline enrollment through 7-month follow-up. Smoker quitline enrollment was similar for those linked to non-smokers in the oneand three-call interventions (14.6% [34/233] and 14.8% [35/236]), and higher than for smokers linked to control participants (6.4% [15/235]), P = 0.006. Just one quitline coaching call delivered to non-smokers increased treatment enrollment among smokers. The reach of quitlines could be enhanced by targeting the social support network of smokers.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85029224853&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85029224853&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/her/cyx050

DO - 10.1093/her/cyx050

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 318

EP - 331

JO - Health Education Research

JF - Health Education Research

SN - 0268-1153

IS - 4

ER -