Ayesha Ali1, Cameron M Kaplan2, Karen J Derefinko2, Robert C Klesges3. 1. Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee. Electronic address: ayesha.ali@uthsc.edu. 2. Department of Preventive Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, Tennessee. 3. Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Abstract
CONTEXT: To provide a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis on smoking interventions targeting smokers not ready to quit, a population that makes up approximately 32% of current smokers. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Twenty-two studies on pharmacological, behavioral, and combination smoking-cessation interventions targeting smokers not ready to quit (defined as those who reported they were not ready to quit at the time of the study) published between 2000 and 2017 were analyzed. The effectiveness (measured by the number needed to treat) and cost effectiveness (measured by costs per quit) of interventions were calculated. All data collection and analyses were performed in 2017. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Smoking interventions targeting smokers not ready to quit can be as effective as similar interventions for smokers ready to quit; however, costs of intervening on this group may be higher for some intervention types. The most cost-effective interventions identified for this group were those using varenicline and those using behavioral interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Updating clinical recommendations to provide cessation interventions for this group is recommended. Further research on development of cost-effective treatments and effective strategies for recruitment and outreach for this group are needed. Additional studies may allow for more nuanced comparisons of treatment types among this group.
CONTEXT: To provide a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis on smoking interventions targeting smokers not ready to quit, a population that makes up approximately 32% of current smokers. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Twenty-two studies on pharmacological, behavioral, and combination smoking-cessation interventions targeting smokers not ready to quit (defined as those who reported they were not ready to quit at the time of the study) published between 2000 and 2017 were analyzed. The effectiveness (measured by the number needed to treat) and cost effectiveness (measured by costs per quit) of interventions were calculated. All data collection and analyses were performed in 2017. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Smoking interventions targeting smokers not ready to quit can be as effective as similar interventions for smokers ready to quit; however, costs of intervening on this group may be higher for some intervention types. The most cost-effective interventions identified for this group were those using varenicline and those using behavioral interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Updating clinical recommendations to provide cessation interventions for this group is recommended. Further research on development of cost-effective treatments and effective strategies for recruitment and outreach for this group are needed. Additional studies may allow for more nuanced comparisons of treatment types among this group.
Authors: John R Hughes; Stephen I Rennard; James R Fingar; Sandy K Talbot; Peter W Callas; Karl O Fagerstrom Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2011-06-07 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Matthew J Carpenter; John R Hughes; Kevin M Gray; Amy E Wahlquist; Michael E Saladin; Anthony J Alberg Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2011-11-28
Authors: Lindsay F Stead; Rafael Perera; Chris Bullen; David Mant; Jamie Hartmann-Boyce; Kate Cahill; Tim Lancaster Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2012-11-14
Authors: Jennifer Prah Ruger; Milton C Weinstein; S Katherine Hammond; Margaret H Kearney; Karen M Emmons Journal: Value Health Date: 2007-09-13 Impact factor: 5.725
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: Gillian D Sanders; Peter J Neumann; Anirban Basu; Dan W Brock; David Feeny; Murray Krahn; Karen M Kuntz; David O Meltzer; Douglas K Owens; Lisa A Prosser; Joshua A Salomon; Mark J Sculpher; Thomas A Trikalinos; Louise B Russell; Joanna E Siegel; Theodore G Ganiats Journal: JAMA Date: 2016-09-13 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Matthew J Carpenter; Amy E Wahlquist; Jennifer Dahne; Kevin M Gray; Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer; K Michael Cummings; Robert Davis; Brent M Egan Journal: Addiction Date: 2020-01-30 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Jessica L Engle; Robin Mermelstein; Timothy B Baker; Stevens S Smith; Tanya R Schlam; Megan E Piper; Douglas E Jorenby; Linda M Collins; Jessica W Cook Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2019-02-16 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Kathryn L Taylor; Randi M Williams; Tengfei Li; George Luta; Laney Smith; Kimberly M Davis; Cassandra A Stanton; Raymond Niaura; David Abrams; Tania Lobo; Jeanne Mandelblatt; Jinani Jayasekera; Rafael Meza; Jihyoun Jeon; Pianpian Cao; Eric D Anderson Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2022-10-06 Impact factor: 11.816
Authors: Brian Chen; Gerard A Silvestri; Jennifer Dahne; Kyueun Lee; Matthew J Carpenter Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2022-01-28 Impact factor: 6.473
Authors: Jessica W Cook; Timothy B Baker; Michael C Fiore; Linda M Collins; Megan E Piper; Tanya R Schlam; Daniel M Bolt; Stevens S Smith; Deejay Zwaga; Douglas E Jorenby; Robin Mermelstein Journal: Addiction Date: 2021-05-19 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Pianpian Cao; Laney Smith; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Jihyoun Jeon; Kathryn L Taylor; Amy Zhao; David T Levy; Randi M Williams; Rafael Meza; Jinani Jayasekera Journal: JNCI Cancer Spectr Date: 2022-07-01