14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A randomized controlled trial of directive and nondirective smoking cessation coaching through an employee quitline

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Telephone quitlines can help employees quit smoking. Quitlines typically use directive coaching, but nondirective, flexible coaching is an alternative. Call-2-Quit used a worksite-sponsored quitline to compare directive and nondirective coaching modes, and evaluated employee race and income as potential moderators.

          Methods

          An unblinded randomized controlled trial compared directive and nondirective telephone coaching by trained laypersons. Participants were smoking employees and spouses recruited through workplace smoking cessation campaigns in a hospital system and affiliated medical school. Coaches were four non-medical women trained to use both coaching modes. Participants were randomized by family to coaching mode. Participants received up to 7 calls from coaches who used computer assisted telephone interview software to track topics and time. Outcomes were reported smoking abstinence for 7 days at last contact, 6 or 12 months after coaching began. Both worksites implemented new tobacco control policies during the study.

          Results

          Most participants responded to an insurance incentive introduced at the hospital. Call-2-Quit coached 518 participants: 22 % were African-American; 45 % had incomes below $30,000. Income, race, and intervention did not affect coaching completion rates.

          Cessation rates were comparable with directive and nondirective coaching (26 % versus 30 % quit, NS). A full factorial logistic regression model identified above median income (odds ratio = 1.8, p = 0.02), especially among African Americans ( p = 0.04), and recent quit attempts ( OR = 1.6, p = 0.03) as predictors of cessation. Nondirective coaching was associated with high cessation rates among subgroups of smokers reporting income above the median, recent quit attempts, or use of alternative therapies. Waiting up to 4 weeks to start coaching did not affect cessation. Of 41 highly addicted or depressed smokers who had never quit more than 30 days, none quit.

          Conclusion

          Nondirective coaching improved cessation rates for selected smoking employees, but less expensive directive coaching helped most smokers equally well, regardless of enrollment incentives and delays in receiving coaching. Some subgroups had very low cessation rates with either mode of quitline support.

          Trial registration

          ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02730260, Registered March 31, 2016

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: toward an integrative model of change.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Shared decision making and motivational interviewing: achieving patient-centered care across the spectrum of health care problems.

            Patient-centered care requires different approaches depending on the clinical situation. Motivational interviewing and shared decision making provide practical and well-described methods to accomplish patient-centered care in the context of situations where medical evidence supports specific behavior changes and the most appropriate action is dependent on the patient's preferences. Many clinical consultations may require elements of both approaches, however. This article describes these 2 approaches-one to address ambivalence to medically indicated behavior change and the other to support patients in making health care decisions in cases where there is more than one reasonable option-and discusses how clinicians can draw on these approaches alone and in combination to achieve patient-centered care across the range of health care problems.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Smoking cessation quitlines: an underrecognized intervention success story.

              Quitlines providing telephone counseling for smoking cessation derive from behavioral research and theory, have been shown to be effective, and have been adopted and then institutionalized at both the state and national levels. Although psychologists have made seminal contributions to quitline development and evaluation, this accomplishment has gone largely unnoticed by the practice and research communities in clinical, counseling, and health psychology. This article summarizes the development, content, structure, empirical status, and current reach of cessation quitlines. We note the rich research opportunities afforded by quitlines, describe some recent approaches to improving their effectiveness, and suggest that an understanding of how quitlines work could also improve their effectiveness. The implications for practitioners and the potential application of telephone counseling to other disorders are also considered. Copyright 2010 APA, all rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                314-454-8164 , wsumner@dom.wustl.edu
                mwalker@vectoroncology.com
                gabe.highstein@gmail.com
                ifischer@dom.wustl.edu
                yany@wudosis.wustl.edu
                amcqueen@dom.wustl.edu
                fishere@email.unc.edu
                Journal
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2458
                11 July 2016
                11 July 2016
                2016
                : 16
                : 550
                Affiliations
                [ ]Washington University School of Medicine, 660 S. Euclid Ave, Campus Box 8005, St. Louis, Missouri 63110 USA
                [ ]Vector Oncology, Memphis, Tennessee USA
                [ ]Winds of Change at Crosswinds, East Falmouth, Massachussetts USA
                [ ]Peers for Progress; School of Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina USA
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2914-5310
                Article
                3202
                10.1186/s12889-016-3202-y
                4940833
                27400966
                18fcc4f3-e1ed-4696-8d0c-46c928584416
                © The Author(s). 2016

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 25 November 2015
                : 7 June 2016
                Funding
                Funded by: Centers for Disease Control
                Award ID: R01 DP000098
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Public health
                employee health,smoking cessation,quitline,directive coaching,non-directive flexible coaching

                Comments

                Comment on this article