OBJECTIVE: To examine the efficacy of four individually-delivered Motivational Interviewing counseling sessions for smoking cessation versus a matched intensity comparison condition. METHOD: From 2006-2009, students attending college in the Midwest smoking at least 1 of 30 days were recruited regardless of their interest in quitting. 30 fraternities and sororities were randomized, resulting in 452 participants. RESULTS: No significant differences were found for 30-day cessation between treatment and comparison at end of treatment (31.4% vs 28%, OR=1.20, 95% CI 0.72,1.99) or at follow-up (20.4% vs 24.6%, OR=0.78, 95% CI 0.50,1.22). Predictors of cessation at follow-up, regardless of condition, included more sessions attended (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1,1.8) and more cigarettes smoked in 30 days at baseline (OR 4.7, 95% CI 2.5,8.9). The odds of making at least one quit attempt were significantly greater for those in the smoking group at end of treatment (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.11,2.74) and follow-up (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.11,2.47). Modeling showed reduction in days smoked for both groups. At end of treatment, more frequent smokers in the treatment condition had greater reductions in days smoked. CONCLUSION:Motivational Interviewing for smoking cessation is effective for increasing cessation attempts and reducing days smoked in the short run.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To examine the efficacy of four individually-delivered Motivational Interviewing counseling sessions for smoking cessation versus a matched intensity comparison condition. METHOD: From 2006-2009, students attending college in the Midwest smoking at least 1 of 30 days were recruited regardless of their interest in quitting. 30 fraternities and sororities were randomized, resulting in 452 participants. RESULTS: No significant differences were found for 30-day cessation between treatment and comparison at end of treatment (31.4% vs 28%, OR=1.20, 95% CI 0.72,1.99) or at follow-up (20.4% vs 24.6%, OR=0.78, 95% CI 0.50,1.22). Predictors of cessation at follow-up, regardless of condition, included more sessions attended (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1,1.8) and more cigarettes smoked in 30 days at baseline (OR 4.7, 95% CI 2.5,8.9). The odds of making at least one quit attempt were significantly greater for those in the smoking group at end of treatment (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.11,2.74) and follow-up (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.11,2.47). Modeling showed reduction in days smoked for both groups. At end of treatment, more frequent smokers in the treatment condition had greater reductions in days smoked. CONCLUSION: Motivational Interviewing for smoking cessation is effective for increasing cessation attempts and reducing days smoked in the short run.
Authors: David W Wetter; Susan L Kenford; Samuel K Welsch; Stevens S Smith; Rachel T Fouladi; Michael C Fiore; Timothy B Baker Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Jasjit S Ahluwalia; Kari Jo Harris; Delwyn Catley; Kolawole S Okuyemi; Matthew S Mayo Journal: JAMA Date: 2002 Jul 24-31 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Kari Jo Harris; Jasjit S Ahluwalia; Delwyn Catley; Kolawole S Okuyemi; Matthew S Mayo; Ken Resnicow Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Marc L Steinberg; Jill M Williams; Naomi F Stahl; Patricia Dooley Budsock; Nina A Cooperman Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2015-03-05 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Jonah Popp; John A Nyman; Xianghua Luo; Jill Bengtson; Katherine Lust; Lawrence An; Jasjit S Ahluwalia; Janet L Thomas Journal: Eur J Health Econ Date: 2018-04-23
Authors: José S Marcano Belisario; Michelle N Bruggeling; Laura H Gunn; Serena Brusamento; Josip Car Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2012-12-12
Authors: Julie Wright Nunes; Jane H Greene; Kenneth Wallston; Svetlana Eden; Ayumi Shintani; Tom Elasy; Russell L Rothman; T Alp Ikizler; Kerri L Cavanaugh Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2013-03-27 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Nikole J Cronk; Kari Jo Harris; Solomon W Harrar; Kathrene Conway; Delwyn Catley; Glenn E Good Journal: Subst Use Misuse Date: 2011-01-06 Impact factor: 2.164
Authors: Dennis C Ang; Anthony S Kaleth; Silvia Bigatti; Steven A Mazzuca; Mark P Jensen; Janna Hilligoss; James Slaven; Chandan Saha Journal: Clin J Pain Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 3.442