BACKGROUND:Individuals living in poverty are more likely to smoke, and they suffer disproportionately from tobacco use. Strategies used to deliver tobacco-cessation interventions often fail to reach smokers living in poverty. Providing tobacco interventions to smokers when they present to community organizations is a potential strategy, but the acceptability and effectiveness of such interventions is unknown. METHODS: In this 2007 pilot study, 295 smokers seeking emergency assistance from the Salvation Army in Wisconsin were randomly assigned to either a very brief (30-second) smoking intervention condition or to a control no-intervention condition. All participants completed a follow-up survey at the end of their visit assessing their satisfaction with the community agency, interest in quitting, and motivation to quit. RESULTS: This brief intervention increased the likelihood that smokers would seek help when they decided to quit (61% vs 44%, p<0.05) but did not affect intention to quit in the next 6 months or perceived difficulty of quitting. The intervention was well received by both participants and Salvation Army staff. CONCLUSIONS: Smokers in this pilot study found it acceptable to have their smoking addressed when seeking services from a community agency. Such interventions may need to be more intense than the one used in this study in order to achieve the goal of increased motivation to quit. Community agencies should consider including brief tobacco-dependence interventions as a secondary mission to improve their clients' health. 2010 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Individuals living in poverty are more likely to smoke, and they suffer disproportionately from tobacco use. Strategies used to deliver tobacco-cessation interventions often fail to reach smokers living in poverty. Providing tobacco interventions to smokers when they present to community organizations is a potential strategy, but the acceptability and effectiveness of such interventions is unknown. METHODS: In this 2007 pilot study, 295 smokers seeking emergency assistance from the Salvation Army in Wisconsin were randomly assigned to either a very brief (30-second) smoking intervention condition or to a control no-intervention condition. All participants completed a follow-up survey at the end of their visit assessing their satisfaction with the community agency, interest in quitting, and motivation to quit. RESULTS: This brief intervention increased the likelihood that smokers would seek help when they decided to quit (61% vs 44%, p<0.05) but did not affect intention to quit in the next 6 months or perceived difficulty of quitting. The intervention was well received by both participants and Salvation Army staff. CONCLUSIONS: Smokers in this pilot study found it acceptable to have their smoking addressed when seeking services from a community agency. Such interventions may need to be more intense than the one used in this study in order to achieve the goal of increased motivation to quit. Community agencies should consider including brief tobacco-dependence interventions as a secondary mission to improve their clients' health. 2010 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Bruce A Christiansen; Kevin M Reeder; Erin G TerBeek; Michael C Fiore; Timothy B Baker Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Man Ping Wang; Yi Nam Suen; William Ho-Cheung Li; Christina Oi-Bun Lam; Socrates Yong-da Wu; Antonio Cho-Shing Kwong; Vienna W Lai; Sophia S Chan; Tai Hing Lam Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Katarzyna Milcarz; Teresa Makowiec-Dąbrowska; Leokadia Bak-Romaniszyn; Dorota Kaleta Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2017-01-27 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Marita Lynagh; Billie Bonevski; Rob Sanson-Fisher; Ian Symonds; Anthony Scott; Alix Hall; Christopher Oldmeadow Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2012-11-27 Impact factor: 3.295