TY - JOUR
T1 - Tobacco quitline performance
T2 - Comparing the impacts of early cessation and proactive re-engagement on callers' smoking status at follow-up at 12 months
AU - Cassidy, Daniel G.
AU - Wang, Xin Qun
AU - Mallawaarachchi, Indika
AU - Wiseman, Kara P.
AU - Ebbert, Jon O.
AU - Blue Star, John A.
AU - Aycock, Chase A.
AU - Burns, Rosemary Estevez
AU - Jones, John R.
AU - Krunnfusz, Andrea E.
AU - Halbert, Jennifer P.
AU - Roy, Natalie M.
AU - Ellis, Jordan M.
AU - Williams, Juinell B.
AU - Klesges, Robert C.
AU - Talcott, Gerald W.
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI; HL123978). This study was a collaborative endeavor among the US Air Force, the University of Tennessee Health Science Center and the Rectors and Visitors of the University of Virginia via Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (17-250-59MDW-C17006). The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and neither reflect the official views or policy of the Department of Defense and its components, nor represent an endorsement by the United States Government.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 Cassidy D.G. et al.
PY - 2023/2
Y1 - 2023/2
N2 - INTRODUCTION While tobacco Quitlines are effective in the promotion of smoking cessation, the majority of callers who wish to quit still fail to do so. The aim of this study was to determine if 12-month tobacco Quitline smoking cessation rates could be improved with re-engagement of callers whose first Quitline treatment failed to establish abstinence. METHODS In an adaptive trial, 614 adult smokers, who were active duty, retired, and family of military personnel with TRICARE insurance who called a tobacco Quitline, received a previously evaluated and efficacious four-session tobacco cessation intervention with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). At the scheduled follow-up at 3 months, callers who had not yet achieved abstinence were offered the opportunity to re-engage. This resulted in three caller groups: 1) those who were abstinent, 2) those who were still smoking but willing to re-engage with an additional Quitline treatment; and 3) individuals who were still smoking but declined re-engagement. A propensity score-adjusted logistic regression model was generated to compare past-7-day point prevalence abstinence at 12 months post Quitline consultation. RESULTS Using a propensity score adjusted logistic regression model, comparison of the three groups resulted in higher odds of past-7-day point prevalence abstinence at follow-up at 12 months for those who were abstinent at 3 months compared to those who re-engaged (OR=9.6; 95% CI: 5.2-17.8; Bonferroni adjusted p<0.0001), and relative to those who declined re-engagement (OR=13.4; 95% CI: 6.8-26.3; Bonferroni adjusted p<0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference in smoking abstinence between smokers at 3 months who re-engaged and those who declined re-engagement (OR=1.39; 95% CI: 0.68-2.85). CONCLUSIONS Tobacco Quitlines seeking to select a single initiative by which to maximize abstinence at follow-up at 12 months may benefit from diverting additional resources from the re-engagement of callers whose initial quit attempt failed, toward changes which increase callers' probability of success within the first 3 months of treatment.
AB - INTRODUCTION While tobacco Quitlines are effective in the promotion of smoking cessation, the majority of callers who wish to quit still fail to do so. The aim of this study was to determine if 12-month tobacco Quitline smoking cessation rates could be improved with re-engagement of callers whose first Quitline treatment failed to establish abstinence. METHODS In an adaptive trial, 614 adult smokers, who were active duty, retired, and family of military personnel with TRICARE insurance who called a tobacco Quitline, received a previously evaluated and efficacious four-session tobacco cessation intervention with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). At the scheduled follow-up at 3 months, callers who had not yet achieved abstinence were offered the opportunity to re-engage. This resulted in three caller groups: 1) those who were abstinent, 2) those who were still smoking but willing to re-engage with an additional Quitline treatment; and 3) individuals who were still smoking but declined re-engagement. A propensity score-adjusted logistic regression model was generated to compare past-7-day point prevalence abstinence at 12 months post Quitline consultation. RESULTS Using a propensity score adjusted logistic regression model, comparison of the three groups resulted in higher odds of past-7-day point prevalence abstinence at follow-up at 12 months for those who were abstinent at 3 months compared to those who re-engaged (OR=9.6; 95% CI: 5.2-17.8; Bonferroni adjusted p<0.0001), and relative to those who declined re-engagement (OR=13.4; 95% CI: 6.8-26.3; Bonferroni adjusted p<0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference in smoking abstinence between smokers at 3 months who re-engaged and those who declined re-engagement (OR=1.39; 95% CI: 0.68-2.85). CONCLUSIONS Tobacco Quitlines seeking to select a single initiative by which to maximize abstinence at follow-up at 12 months may benefit from diverting additional resources from the re-engagement of callers whose initial quit attempt failed, toward changes which increase callers' probability of success within the first 3 months of treatment.
KW - abstinence
KW - nicotine replacement therapy
KW - proactive re-engagement
KW - quitline
KW - tobacco cessation intervention
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85152481603&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85152481603&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.18332/TID/159125
DO - 10.18332/TID/159125
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85152481603
SN - 1617-9625
VL - 21
JO - Tobacco Induced Diseases
JF - Tobacco Induced Diseases
M1 - 24
ER -