AIMS: To assess the effects of a smoking cessation program for recovering alcoholics on use of alcohol, tobacco and illicit drugs after discharge from residential treatment. DESIGN AND SETTING: A randomized community intervention trial design was employed in which 12 residential drug treatment centers in Iowa, Kansas and Nebraska were matched and then randomly assigned to the intervention or control condition. PARTICIPANTS: Approximately 50 adult residents (inpatients) from each site were followed for 12 months after treatment discharge. INTERVENTION: Participating residents in the six intervention centers received a4-part, individually tailored, smoking cessation program while those in the six control sites received usual care. FINDINGS: Both moderate and heavy drinking rates were reduced in the intervention group. Intervention site participants were significantly more likely than controls to report alcohol abstinence at both the 6-month (OR = 1.59, 95%CI: 1.09-2.35) and 12-month assessment (OR = 1.84, 95%CI: 1.28-2.92). Illicit drug use rates were comparable. Effect of the intervention on tobacco quit rates was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Counseling alcoholics in treatment to quit smoking does not jeopardize the alcohol recovery process. However, low-intensity tobacco interventions are unlikely to yield high tobacco quit rates.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: To assess the effects of a smoking cessation program for recovering alcoholics on use of alcohol, tobacco and illicit drugs after discharge from residential treatment. DESIGN AND SETTING: A randomized community intervention trial design was employed in which 12 residential drug treatment centers in Iowa, Kansas and Nebraska were matched and then randomly assigned to the intervention or control condition. PARTICIPANTS: Approximately 50 adult residents (inpatients) from each site were followed for 12 months after treatment discharge. INTERVENTION: Participating residents in the six intervention centers received a 4-part, individually tailored, smoking cessation program while those in the six control sites received usual care. FINDINGS: Both moderate and heavy drinking rates were reduced in the intervention group. Intervention site participants were significantly more likely than controls to report alcohol abstinence at both the 6-month (OR = 1.59, 95%CI: 1.09-2.35) and 12-month assessment (OR = 1.84, 95%CI: 1.28-2.92). Illicit drug use rates were comparable. Effect of the intervention on tobacco quit rates was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Counseling alcoholics in treatment to quit smoking does not jeopardize the alcohol recovery process. However, low-intensity tobacco interventions are unlikely to yield high tobacco quit rates.
Authors: Sharon E Connor; Robert L Cook; Mary I Herbert; Stephen M Neal; Jennifer T Williams Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Rosemarie A Martin; Damaris J Rohsenow; Selene Varney MacKinnon; David B Abrams; Peter M Monti Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2005-11-28 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Damaris J Rohsenow; Rosemarie A Martin; Peter M Monti; Suzanne M Colby; Anne M Day; David B Abrams; Alan D Sirota; Robert M Swift Journal: J Subst Abuse Treat Date: 2013-10-14