J F Etter1, T V Perneger. 1. Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Geneva, CMU, case postale, CH-1211 Geneva 4, Switzerland. etter@cmu.unige.ch
Abstract
BACKGROUND: From a public health perspective, prevention of cancer and cardiovascular diseases requires effective smoking cessation programs that can be used on a large scale. OBJECTIVE: To test the effectiveness of a new computer-tailored smoking cessation program vs no intervention. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial, in the French-speaking part of Switzerland, September 20, 1998, to December 31, 1999. Potential participants were randomly selected from a general population register and recruited by mail. Daily cigarette smokers who wished to participate (N = 2934) were randomized to either the program or no intervention. A mean of 1.5 times per 6 months, participants in the active arm received by mail a computer-tailored counseling letter based on their answers to a questionnaire and stage-matched booklets. The counseling letters were tailored to the participants' stage of change (categorized as precontemplation [no intention of quitting smoking in the next 6 months], contemplation [seriously considers quitting in the next 6 months], or preparation [has decided to quit in the next 30 days]), level of tobacco dependence, self-efficacy, and personal characteristics. The outcome measure was self-reported abstinence (no puff of tobacco smoke in the past 4 weeks) 7 months after entry into the program. RESULTS:Abstinence was 2.6 times greater in the intervention group than in the control group (5.8% vs 2.2%, P<.001). The program was effective in "precontemplators" who were not motivated to quit smoking at baseline (intervention vs control, 3.8% vs 0.8%; P =.001) and was effective regardless of perceived difficulty in quitting smoking at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: The program was effective in increasing smoking cessation rates. Because it can reach a large number of smokers, this program can substantially contribute to disease prevention at a population level.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: From a public health perspective, prevention of cancer and cardiovascular diseases requires effective smoking cessation programs that can be used on a large scale. OBJECTIVE: To test the effectiveness of a new computer-tailored smoking cessation program vs no intervention. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial, in the French-speaking part of Switzerland, September 20, 1998, to December 31, 1999. Potential participants were randomly selected from a general population register and recruited by mail. Daily cigarette smokers who wished to participate (N = 2934) were randomized to either the program or no intervention. A mean of 1.5 times per 6 months, participants in the active arm received by mail a computer-tailored counseling letter based on their answers to a questionnaire and stage-matched booklets. The counseling letters were tailored to the participants' stage of change (categorized as precontemplation [no intention of quitting smoking in the next 6 months], contemplation [seriously considers quitting in the next 6 months], or preparation [has decided to quit in the next 30 days]), level of tobacco dependence, self-efficacy, and personal characteristics. The outcome measure was self-reported abstinence (no puff of tobacco smoke in the past 4 weeks) 7 months after entry into the program. RESULTS: Abstinence was 2.6 times greater in the intervention group than in the control group (5.8% vs 2.2%, P<.001). The program was effective in "precontemplators" who were not motivated to quit smoking at baseline (intervention vs control, 3.8% vs 0.8%; P =.001) and was effective regardless of perceived difficulty in quitting smoking at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: The program was effective in increasing smoking cessation rates. Because it can reach a large number of smokers, this program can substantially contribute to disease prevention at a population level.
Authors: David B Buller; Ron Borland; W Gill Woodall; John R Hall; Joan M Hines; Patricia Burris-Woodall; Gary R Cutter; Caroline Miller; James Balmford; Randall Starling; Bryan Ax; Laura Saba Journal: Health Educ Behav Date: 2006-11-17
Authors: Yaojen Chang; Aimee M Near; Karin M Butler; Amanda Hoeffken; Sandra L Edwards; Antoinette M Stroup; Wendy Kohlmann; Amanda Gammon; Saundra S Buys; Marc D Schwartz; Beth N Peshkin; Anita Y Kinney; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Yaojen Chang; Aimee M Near; Karin M Butler; Amanda Hoeffken; Sandra L Edwards; Antoinette M Stroup; Wendy Kohlmann; Amanda Gammon; Saundra S Buys; Marc D Schwartz; Beth N Peshkin; Anita Y Kinney; Jeanne S Mandelblatt Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Jonathan Shuter; Daniela A Morales; Shannon E Considine-Dunn; Lawrence C An; Cassandra A Stanton Journal: J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Date: 2014-09-01 Impact factor: 3.731
Authors: Henri-Jean Aubin; Gérard Peiffer; Anne Stoebner-Delbarre; Eric Vicaut; Yasmine Jeanpetit; Anne Solesse; Geneviève Bonnelye; Daniel Thomas Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2010-02-26 Impact factor: 3.295