Uma S Nair1,2, Melanie L Bell2,3, Nicole P Yuan1,2, Betsy C Wertheim1,2, Cynthia A Thomson1,2. 1. 1 Department of Health Promotion Sciences, Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA. 2. 2 University of Arizona Cancer Center, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA. 3. 3 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Smokers with comorbid health conditions have a disproportionate burden of tobacco-related death and disease. A better understanding of differences in quit rates among smokers with comorbid health conditions can guide tailoring of quitline services for subgroups. The objective of this study was to examine self-reported tobacco cessation rates among Arizona Smokers' Helpline callers with chronic health conditions (CHCs) and/or a mental health condition (MHC). METHODS: We analyzed data from quitline telephone callers (n = 39 779) who enrolled in and completed at least 1 behavioral counseling session (ie, coaching call). We categorized callers as CHC only (cardiovascular disease/respiratory-related/cancer; 32%), MHC only (eg, mood/anxiety/substance dependence; 13%), CHC + MHC (25%), or no comorbid condition (30%). We assessed 30-day abstinence at 7-month follow-up for 16 683 clients (41.9%). We used logistic regression analysis to test associations between comorbidity and quit outcomes after controlling for relevant variables (eg, nicotine dependence). RESULTS: Overall quit rates were 45.4% for those with no comorbid condition, 43.3% for those with a CHC only, 37.0% for those with an MHC only, and 33.3% for those with CHC + MHC. Compared with other groups, the CHC + MHC group had the lowest odds of quitting (adjusted odds ratio = 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.69). CONCLUSION: Having a comorbid condition was associated with lower quit rates, and smokers with co-occurring CHCs and MHCs had the lowest quit rates. Quitlines should evaluate more intensive, evidence-driven, tailored services for smoking cessation among callers with comorbid conditions.
OBJECTIVE: Smokers with comorbid health conditions have a disproportionate burden of tobacco-related death and disease. A better understanding of differences in quit rates among smokers with comorbid health conditions can guide tailoring of quitline services for subgroups. The objective of this study was to examine self-reported tobacco cessation rates among Arizona Smokers' Helpline callers with chronic health conditions (CHCs) and/or a mental health condition (MHC). METHODS: We analyzed data from quitline telephone callers (n = 39 779) who enrolled in and completed at least 1 behavioral counseling session (ie, coaching call). We categorized callers as CHC only (cardiovascular disease/respiratory-related/cancer; 32%), MHC only (eg, mood/anxiety/substance dependence; 13%), CHC + MHC (25%), or no comorbid condition (30%). We assessed 30-day abstinence at 7-month follow-up for 16 683 clients (41.9%). We used logistic regression analysis to test associations between comorbidity and quit outcomes after controlling for relevant variables (eg, nicotine dependence). RESULTS: Overall quit rates were 45.4% for those with no comorbid condition, 43.3% for those with a CHC only, 37.0% for those with an MHC only, and 33.3% for those with CHC + MHC. Compared with other groups, the CHC + MHC group had the lowest odds of quitting (adjusted odds ratio = 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.69). CONCLUSION: Having a comorbid condition was associated with lower quit rates, and smokers with co-occurring CHCs and MHCs had the lowest quit rates. Quitlines should evaluate more intensive, evidence-driven, tailored services for smoking cessation among callers with comorbid conditions.
Entities:
Keywords:
health promotion; health services; smoking; tobacco cessation
Authors: Melissa J Azur; Elizabeth A Stuart; Constantine Frangakis; Philip J Leaf Journal: Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: Chad D Morris; Gary J Tedeschi; Jeanette A Waxmonsky; Mandy May; Alexis A Giese Journal: J Am Psychiatr Nurses Assoc Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 2.385
Authors: Katrina A Vickerman; Gillian L Schauer; Ann M Malarcher; Lei Zhang; Paul Mowery; Chelsea M Nash Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2015-07-26 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Robert West; Martin Raw; Ann McNeill; Lindsay Stead; Paul Aveyard; John Bitton; John Stapleton; Hayden McRobbie; Subhash Pokhrel; Adam Lester-George; Ron Borland Journal: Addiction Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Michael Chaiton; Lori Diemert; Joanna E Cohen; Susan J Bondy; Peter Selby; Anne Philipneri; Robert Schwartz Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-06-09 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Benjamin R Brady; Patrick A O'Connor; Mark P Martz; Taylor Grogg; Uma S Nair Journal: J Behav Health Serv Res Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 1.505
Authors: Adrienne B Lent; Patrick A O'Connor; Ryan C Reikowsky; Uma S Nair; Melanie L Bell Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2018-08-10 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Uma S Nair; Elizabeth S Miller; Melanie L Bell; Sharon Allen; Bradley N Collins; Alicia M Allen Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Commun Date: 2020-04-23
Authors: Joanna M Streck; Cecilia L Bergeria; Maria A Parker; Danielle R Davis; Michael DeSarno; Stacey C Sigmon; John R Hughes; Diann E Gaalema; Sarah H Heil; Jennifer W Tidey; Maxine L Stitzer; Matthew Rothman; Stephen T Higgins Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2018-10-15