INTRODUCTION: To determine the smoking reduction patterns of light smokers (≤ 10 CPD) and whether reduction predicts future cessation. METHODS: Study is a secondary analysis of data that were derived from a 2 × 2 randomized study that assessed the efficacy of nicotine gum (vs. placebo) and counseling (motivational interviewing vs. health education) for smoking cessation among 755 light smokers. Participants were categorized into three groups based on self-reported CPD smoked at time of study enrollment compared with CPD smoked a year prior to enrollment. That is, (a) those who reduced number of cigarettes per day (CPD), (b) those who smoked the same number of CPD, and (c) those who increased their number of CPD. Sociodemographic and smoking characteristics were assessed at enrollment as well as cotinine-verified 7-day smoking abstinence rates at the Week 26 follow-up assessment. A stepwise logistic regression model to predict the probability abstinence at 26-week follow-up was also performed. RESULTS: Compared with a year prior to enrollment, 43.7% of participants reduced, 35.2% smoked the same, and 21.2% increased their CPD. Compared with those who smoked the same or increased their CPD, those who had reduced their CPD were older, more likely to be males, smoked fewer CPD at enrollment, initiated smoking at a younger age, and less likely to be nicotine dependent. Adjusted logistic regression showed that those who had reduced their smoking prior to enrollment were more likely to quit at Week 26 (odds ratio [OR] = 1.77; 95% CI = 1.062-2.957; p = .029). DISCUSSION: Findings suggest that reducing number of CPD smoked prior to enrolling in a clinical trial is a positive predictor of abstinence. Therefore, encouraging smoking reduction prior to attempting cessation may enhance cessation outcomes for light smokers.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: To determine the smoking reduction patterns of light smokers (≤ 10 CPD) and whether reduction predicts future cessation. METHODS: Study is a secondary analysis of data that were derived from a 2 × 2 randomized study that assessed the efficacy of nicotine gum (vs. placebo) and counseling (motivational interviewing vs. health education) for smoking cessation among 755 light smokers. Participants were categorized into three groups based on self-reported CPD smoked at time of study enrollment compared with CPD smoked a year prior to enrollment. That is, (a) those who reduced number of cigarettes per day (CPD), (b) those who smoked the same number of CPD, and (c) those who increased their number of CPD. Sociodemographic and smoking characteristics were assessed at enrollment as well as cotinine-verified 7-day smoking abstinence rates at the Week 26 follow-up assessment. A stepwise logistic regression model to predict the probability abstinence at 26-week follow-up was also performed. RESULTS: Compared with a year prior to enrollment, 43.7% of participants reduced, 35.2% smoked the same, and 21.2% increased their CPD. Compared with those who smoked the same or increased their CPD, those who had reduced their CPD were older, more likely to be males, smoked fewer CPD at enrollment, initiated smoking at a younger age, and less likely to be nicotine dependent. Adjusted logistic regression showed that those who had reduced their smoking prior to enrollment were more likely to quit at Week 26 (odds ratio [OR] = 1.77; 95% CI = 1.062-2.957; p = .029). DISCUSSION: Findings suggest that reducing number of CPD smoked prior to enrolling in a clinical trial is a positive predictor of abstinence. Therefore, encouraging smoking reduction prior to attempting cessation may enhance cessation outcomes for light smokers.
Authors: Kolawole S Okuyemi; Kimber P Richter; Jasjit S Ahluwalia; Michael C Mosier; Niaman Nazir; Ken Resnicow Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2002 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Kolawole S Okuyemi; Kari Jo Harris; Monica Scheibmeir; Won S Choi; Joshua Powell; Jasjit S Ahluwalia Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2002 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Kristen M Hassmiller; Kenneth E Warner; David Mendez; David T Levy; Eduardo Romano Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Kolawole S Okuyemi; Jasjit S Ahluwalia; Rachel Banks; Kari Jo Harris; Michael C Mosier; Niaman Nazir; Joshua Powell Journal: Ethn Dis Date: 2004 Impact factor: 1.847
Authors: Chris T Bolliger; Jean-Pierre Zellweger; Tobias Danielsson; Xandra van Biljon; Annik Robidou; Ake Westin; André P Perruchoud; Urbain Säwe Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Anne M Joseph; Stephen S Hecht; Sharon E Murphy; Harry Lando; Steven G Carmella; Myron Gross; Robin Bliss; Chap T Le; Dorothy K Hatsukami Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Amiya A Ahmed; Kanan Patel; Margaret A Nyaku; Raya E Kheirbek; Vera Bittner; Gregg C Fonarow; Gerasimos S Filippatos; Charity J Morgan; Inmaculada B Aban; Marjan Mujib; Ravi V Desai; Richard M Allman; Michel White; Prakash Deedwania; George Howard; Robert O Bonow; Ross D Fletcher; Wilbert S Aronow; Ali Ahmed Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2015-06-02 Impact factor: 8.790
Authors: Brian Hitsman; Phoenix A Matthews; George D Papandonatos; Kenzie A Cameron; Sarah S Rittner; Nivedita Mohanty; Timothy Long; Ronald T Ackermann; Edgardo Ramirez; Jeremy Carr; Emmanuel Cordova; Cherylee Bridges; Crystal Flowers-Carson; Aida Luz Giachello; Andrew Hamilton; Christina C Ciecierski; Melissa A Simon Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2022-10-07 Impact factor: 3.626
Authors: Laurie Krupski; K Michael Cummings; Andrew Hyland; Shannon Carlin-Menter; Benjamin A Toll; Martin C Mahoney Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2013-03-11 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Susan J Bondy; J Charles Victor; Lori M Diemert; Graham C Mecredy; Michael Chaiton; K Stephen Brown; Joanna E Cohen; Paul W McDonald; Roberta Ferrence; John M Garcia; Peter Selby; Robert Schwartz Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2012-12-10 Impact factor: 4.244