| Literature DB >> 35980739 |
Rebecca Schnall1, Jianfang Liu1, Gabriella Alvarez1, Tiffany Porras2, Sarah Ganzhorn1, Samantha Boerner3,4,5, Ming-Chun Huang6, Paul Trujillo1, Patricia Cioe7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of smoking in the United States general population has gradually declined to the lowest rate ever recorded; however, this has not been true for persons with HIV.Entities:
Keywords: HIV; intervention; mHealth; mobile app; persons with HIV; pilot; pilot test; smartwatch; smoking; smoking cessation
Year: 2022 PMID: 35980739 PMCID: PMC9437787 DOI: 10.2196/28626
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JMIR Form Res ISSN: 2561-326X
Figure 1Sample picture of smartwatches used by study participants.
Figure 2Screenshots of the Lumme Quit Smoking app.
Participant characteristics at baseline (n=40).
| Characteristics | Total (n=40)a | Intervention (n=20) | Control (n=20) | ||||||
| Age (years), mean (SD) | 53.7 (9.2) | 53.4 (10.2) | 54.0 (8.5) | .84 | |||||
|
| —b | — | — | >.99 | |||||
|
| Male | 20 (50) | 10 (50) | 10 (50) | — | ||||
|
| Female | 18 (45) | 9 (45) | 9 (45) | — | ||||
|
| Transgender female | 1 (3) | 0 (0) | 1 (5) | — | ||||
|
| Genderqueer | 1 (3) | 1 (5) | 0 (0) | — | ||||
|
| — | — | — | >.99 | |||||
|
| Male | 22 (55) | 11 (55) | 11 (55) | — | ||||
|
| Female | 18 (45) | 9 (45) | 9 (45) | — | ||||
|
| — | — | — | .06 | |||||
|
| Black/African American | 31 (78) | 13 (65) | 18 (90) | — | ||||
|
| White | 1 (3) | 0 (0) | 1 (5) | — | ||||
|
| Multiracial | 1 (3) | 1 (5) | 0 (0) | — | ||||
|
| Unknown | 7 (18) | 6 (30) | 1 (5) | — | ||||
|
| — | — | — | .13 | |||||
|
| Yes | 9 (23) | 7 (35) | 2 (10) | — | ||||
|
| No | 31 (78) | 13 (65) | 18 (90) | — | ||||
|
| — | — | — | .11 | |||||
|
| None | 2 (5) | 0 (0) | 2 (10) | — | ||||
|
| Some high school, no diploma | 12 (30) | 7 (35) | 5 (25) | — | ||||
|
| High school diploma or equivalent | 14 (35) | 8 (40) | 6 (30) | — | ||||
|
| Some college | 8 (20) | 2 (10) | 6 (30) | — | ||||
|
| Associate degree or technical degree | 3 (8) | 3 (15) | 0 (0) | — | ||||
|
| Bachelor/college degree | 1 (3) | 0 (0) | 1 (5) | — | ||||
|
| — | — | — | .63 | |||||
|
| Working full-time | 1 (3) | 1 (5) | 0 (0) | — | ||||
|
| Working part-time | 4 (10) | 1 (5) | 3 (15) | — | ||||
|
| Unemployed | 13 (33) | 6 (30) | 7 (35) | — | ||||
|
| Retired | 4 (10) | 3 (15) | 1 (5) | — | ||||
|
| Disabled | 15 (38) | 7 (35) | 8 (40) | — | ||||
|
| Retired and disabled | 1 (3) | 1 (5) | 0 (0) | — | ||||
|
| Unemployed and disabled | 1 (3) | 0 (0) | 1 (5) | — | ||||
|
| Working part-time and retired | 1 (3) | 1 (5) | 0 (0) | — | ||||
|
| — | — | — | .88 | |||||
|
| <10,000 | 17 (43) | 7 (35) | 10 (50) | — | ||||
|
| 10,000-19,999 | 12 (30) | 7 (35) | 5 (25) | — | ||||
|
| 20,000-39,999 | 2 (5) | 1 (5) | 1 (5) | — | ||||
|
| 40,000-59,999 | 1 (3) | 1 (5) | 0 (0) | — | ||||
|
| Don’t know | 8 (20) | 4 (20) | 4 (20) | — | ||||
|
| — | — | — | .16 | |||||
|
| Health exchange | 1 (3) | 1 (5) | 0 (0) | — | ||||
|
| Medicaid/Medicare | 35 (88) | 19 (95) | 16 (80) | — | ||||
|
| AIDS Drug Assistance Program | 1 (3) | 0 (0) | 1 (5) | — | ||||
|
| Uninsured | 3 (8) | 0 (0) | 3 (15) | — | ||||
|
| — | — | — | .75 | |||||
|
| Yes | 19 (48) | 9 (45) | 10 (50) | — | ||||
|
| No | 21 (53) | 11 (55) | 10 (50) | — | ||||
|
| — | — | — | .61 | |||||
|
| Menthol | 36 (90) | 19 (95) | 17 (85) | — | ||||
|
| Nonmenthol | 4 (10) | 1 (5) | 3 (15) | — | ||||
|
| — | — | — | .61 | |||||
|
| Marlboro | 3 (8) | 1 (5) | 2 (11) | — | ||||
|
| Newport | 36 (92) | 19 (95) | 17 (90) | — | ||||
|
| — | — | — | >.99 | |||||
|
| Clinically significant alcohol problems indicated | 8 (22) | 4 (21) | 4 (22) | — | ||||
|
| Clinically significant alcohol problems not indicated | 29 (78) | 15 (79) | 14 (78) | — | ||||
| CES-Df score, mean (SD) | 15.7 (11.1) | 16.6 (13.1) | 14.8 (8.9) | .61 | |||||
| eCOg (ppmh), mean (SD) | 13.8 (6.4) | 14.5 (6.5) | 13.1 (6.3) | .48 | |||||
| Number of cigarettes smoked daily in past 30 days, mean (SD) | 10.2 (5.3) | 11.1 (6.7) | 9.3 (3.3) | .31 | |||||
| Number of years smoking, mean (SD) | 33.4 (12.1) | 34.2 (10.7) | 32.7 (13.6) | .70 | |||||
| Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence, mean (SD) | 6.4 (2.0) | 6.7 (1.7) | 6.2 (2.3) | .48 | |||||
aColumn percentages may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
bNot applicable.
cn=1 missing.
dCAGE: cut, annoyed, guilty, and eye.
en=3 missing.
fCES-D: Center for Epidemiologic Studies–Depression Scale.
geCO: exhaled carbon monoxide.
hppm: parts per million.
Figure 3Smoking cessation pilot CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) flowchart. ART: antiretroviral therapy; NRT: nicotine replacement therapy.
Differences in outcome measures by study arm.
| Measure | Control (n=20)a | Intervention (n=20) | Total (n=40) | Effect size (95% CI) | ||||||||
|
| Value | 95% CI | Value | 95% CI | Value | 95% CI |
|
| ||||
| 7-day point prevalence abstinence verified via eCOb at 12 weeks, n (%) | 2 (12) | 1.5 to 36.4 | 3 (15) | 3.2 to 37.9 | 5 (14) | 4.5 to 28.8 | 1.27 (0.24 to 6.76) | .77 | ||||
| Self-report 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 12 weeks, n (%) | 4 (24) | 6.8 to 49.9 | 6 (30) | 11.9 to 54.3 | 10 (27) | 13.8 to 44.1 | 1.27 (0.43 to 3.78) | .66 | ||||
| eCO ppmc decrease from baseline to 12 weeks, mean | 17 (2.12) | –0.9 to 5.14 | 20 (3.35) | –0.2 to 6.92 | 37 (2.78) | 0.69 to 4.88 | 0.21 (–0.44 to 0.86) | .59 | ||||
| CES-Dd score, mean | 20 (14.8) | 10.8 to 18.7 | 20 (16.6) | 10.8 to 22.3 | 40 (15.7) | 12.2 to 19.1 | 0.16 (–0.46 to 0.78) | .61 | ||||
| Number of cigarettes smoked per day reported at baseline, mean | 20 (11) | 9.3 to 12.7 | 20 (11.9) | 9.5 to 14.3 | 40 (11.5) | 10 to 12.9 | 0.19 (–0.42 to 0.80) | .55 | ||||
| CAGEe Substance Abuse Screening Tool score at baseline, mean | 18 (0.9) | 0.3 to 1.5 | 19 (0.9) | 0.2 to 1.6 | 37 (0.9) | 0.5 to 1.3 | 0.004 (–0.61 to 0.62) | .99 | ||||
an=3 missing in control group at follow-up.
beCO: exhaled carbon monoxide.
cppm: parts per million.
dCES-D: Center for Epidemiologic Studies–Depression Scale.
eCAGE: cut, annoyed, guilty, and eye.
Change in exhaled carbon monoxide in parts per million from baseline to 12 weeks by study arm.
| Arm | Baseline eCOa | eCO at 12 weeks | Effect sizes in change (95% CI) | ||||
|
| Participants, n | Mean (SD) | Participants, n | Mean (SD) |
|
| |
| Control | 20 | 13.1 (6.3) | 17 | 11.6 (7.4) | 0.36 (–0.14 to 0.85) | .16 | |
| Intervention | 20 | 14.5 (6.5) | 20 | 11.2 (9.0) | 0.44 (–0.03 to 0.89) | .06 | |
| Both | 40 | 13.8 (6.4) | 37 | 11.4 (8.2) | 0.41 (0.07 to 0.74) | .02 | |
aeCO: exhaled carbon monoxide.
Exemplars of findings from the in-depth interviews organized by the Fit Between Individuals, Task, and Technology framework.
| FITTa framework construct | Sample quotes from in-depth interview |
| Task-technology fit |
“And it does really help you. It tells you when your day is over. It goes, ‘You have such-and-such more days before you quit.’ That was a good reminder...” “I looked at it a couple times a day. In the beginning when I was smoking, I looked at it almost every time I smoked just to see if it recorded. But after I stopped smoking, I would look at it still...” “...this watch is going to monitor my movement of my hand... I’m not going to be smoking all the time and moving my hand... I already knew that... that I would have to check in and be honest. Honesty was one of my biggest, like I expected to be honest. And that’s what I’ve been...” |
| Individual-technology fit |
“The tips were very useful because everything it says in the tips is true…pros and cons…which is another way you can sit there and say is smoking good or bad. Having the support system on there was cool... anytime I wanted to I could contact the support system anytime I needed to speak to somebody...” “[I used the watch] everywhere. If I was in the bathroom; if I was making a delivery if I was at work. It didn’t matter where it was... I was able to text through the watch... I find that very cool, too.” “I think this whole experience was something good for me... I’ve always wanted to stop smoking... I’ve slowed down enough to maybe be able to stop. And it gave me the encouragement, the power and the push to do it in a way that’s not hard...” [ |
| Individual-task fit |
“It’s extremely helpful, it definitely helped me cut back. I’m more confident with the app and like I said, it’s like a little coach with you all the time, 24/7....” “...[the app] did make things very clear, as far as really specifying your habits... In that respect, it’s been good, because it made you conscious of how much you’re smoking, even though you do it normally without the app and you just smoke, and you don’t think about it...” “[The app was] 100% helpful for an individual that’s really focused on not smoking, on quitting, being focused on quitting and wanting to... I mean that was amazing... to have a watch on and when you’re going like this or you know... they always give you the option to say, well, no, I wasn’t smoking at that time; I was eating or something like that... the individual has to be honest, with themselves...” |
aFITT: Fit Between Individuals, Task, and Technology.