Sheila M Alessi1, Nancy M Petry2. 1. Department of Medicine, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT salessi@uchc.edu. 2. Department of Medicine, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION:Individuals with substance use disorders (SUDs) experience increased smoking-related morbidity and mortality but severely compromised smoking treatment benefits. Residential SUD treatment settings may be particularly positioned to target smoking, with ever-increasing smoking bans and culture shifts, but most smokers continue smoking. This study examined the effects of contingency management (CM) for increasing smoking abstinence in residential patients. METHODS:Smokers interested in quitting were recruited from a residential SUD program for men and were randomized to frequent smoking monitoring with behavioral support (monitoring; n = 21) or that plus smoking abstinence-contingent (expired carbon monoxide [CO] ≤ 6 ppm; urinary cotinine ≤ 30ng/ml) incentives (CM, n = 24) for 4 weeks. After setting a quit date, procedures included daily behavioral support and smoking self-reports, 2 CO samples (a.m./p.m.) Monday through Friday, and cotinine tests on Mondays. CM participants received escalating draws for prizes ($1, $20, and $100 values) for negative tests; positive and missed samples reset draws. Follow-ups involved samples, self-reported smoking, and self-efficacy (weeks 4, 8, 12, and 24). RESULTS: Percent days CO-negative was higher with CM (median [interquartile range] 51.7% [62.8%]) compared to monitoring (0% [32.1%]) (p = .002). Cigarettes per day declined and point-prevalence abstinence increased through follow-up (p < .01), without significant group by time effects (p > .05). Abstinence self-efficacy increased overall during the intervention and more with CM compared to monitoring and was associated with abstinence across conditions through follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: CM improved some measures of response to smoking treatment in residential SUD patients.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: Individuals with substance use disorders (SUDs) experience increased smoking-related morbidity and mortality but severely compromised smoking treatment benefits. Residential SUD treatment settings may be particularly positioned to target smoking, with ever-increasing smoking bans and culture shifts, but most smokers continue smoking. This study examined the effects of contingency management (CM) for increasing smoking abstinence in residential patients. METHODS: Smokers interested in quitting were recruited from a residential SUD program for men and were randomized to frequent smoking monitoring with behavioral support (monitoring; n = 21) or that plus smoking abstinence-contingent (expired carbon monoxide [CO] ≤ 6 ppm; urinary cotinine ≤ 30ng/ml) incentives (CM, n = 24) for 4 weeks. After setting a quit date, procedures included daily behavioral support and smoking self-reports, 2 CO samples (a.m./p.m.) Monday through Friday, and cotinine tests on Mondays. CM participants received escalating draws for prizes ($1, $20, and $100 values) for negative tests; positive and missed samples reset draws. Follow-ups involved samples, self-reported smoking, and self-efficacy (weeks 4, 8, 12, and 24). RESULTS: Percent days CO-negative was higher with CM (median [interquartile range] 51.7% [62.8%]) compared to monitoring (0% [32.1%]) (p = .002). Cigarettes per day declined and point-prevalence abstinence increased through follow-up (p < .01), without significant group by time effects (p > .05). Abstinence self-efficacy increased overall during the intervention and more with CM compared to monitoring and was associated with abstinence across conditions through follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: CM improved some measures of response to smoking treatment in residential SUD patients.
Authors: C J Gwaltney; S Shiffman; G J Norman; J A Paty; J D Kassel; M Gnys; M Hickcox; A Waters; M Balabanis Journal: J Consult Clin Psychol Date: 2001-06
Authors: Joseph Guydish; Barbara Tajima; Agatha Kulaga; Roberto Zavala; Lawrence S Brown; Alan Bostrom; Douglas Ziedonis; Mable Chan Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2012-03-15 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Damaris J Rohsenow; Jennifer W Tidey; Rosemarie A Martin; Suzanne M Colby; Alan D Sirota; Robert M Swift; Peter M Monti Journal: J Subst Abuse Treat Date: 2015-03-12
Authors: Caitlin Notley; Sarah Gentry; Jonathan Livingstone-Banks; Linda Bauld; Rafael Perera; Jamie Hartmann-Boyce Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-07-17
Authors: Danielle R Davis; Allison N Kurti; Joan M Skelly; Ryan Redner; Thomas J White; Stephen T Higgins Journal: Prev Med Date: 2016-08-08 Impact factor: 4.018