Predictors of retention in a randomised trial of smoking cessation in low-socioeconomic status Australian smokers

Courtney, Ryan J.; Clare, Philip; Boland, Veronica; Martire, Kristy A.; Bonevski, Billie; Hall, Wayne; Siahpush, Mohammad; Borland, Ron; Doran, Christopher M.; West, Robert A.; Farrell, Michael; Mattick, Richard P.

doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2016.07.019

Cited by 27 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To detect a potential signal in this short-term trial, the two-month post-enrollment follow-up survey assessed 7-day and 30-day point prevalence abstinence (Brunette et al, 2015; Courtney et al, 2016; Salepci et al, 2016). Due to cost and low demand characteristics for false reporting, the SRNT Subcommittee on Biochemical Verification recommends biochemical confirmation is unnecessary in population-based studies with limited face-to-face contact and studies where the optimal data collection methods are through the mail or telephone (Benowitz et al, 2002).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single-arm trial of the second version of an acceptance & commitment therapy smartphone application for smoking cessation

Bricker

Copeland

Mull

et al. 2017

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The first randomized trial of a smartphone application (app) for adult smoking cessation (SmartQuit 1.0) revealed key features that predict cessation. These findings guided the revision of this Acceptance & Commitment Therapy (ACT)-based application (SmartQuit 2.0), which was primarily tested to examine participant receptivity, short-term cessation and reduction, and the relationship between program completion, smoking cessation and reduction. Secondarily, outcomes were descriptively compared with the SmartQuit1.0 trial. Method Adult participants (78% female, 25% with high school or less education, 30% unemployed) were recruited into the single-arm pilot trial (N = 99) of SmartQuit 2.0 with a two-month follow-up (85% retention). Results Regarding receptivity, 84% of participants were satisfied with SmartQuit 2.0 (vs. 59% for SmartQuit1.0), 73% would recommend it to a friend (vs. 48% for SmartQuit1.0), 81% found the ACT exercises useful for quitting (vs. 44% for SmartQuit1.0). At the 2-month follow-up, the quit rates were 21% for 7-day point prevalence (vs. 23% for SmartQuit1.0), 11% for 30-day point prevalence (vs. 13% for SmartQuit1.0), and 75% of participants reduced their smoking frequency (vs. 57% for SmartQuit1.0). Among program completers (24% of total sample), the quit rates were 33% for 7-day point prevalence, 28% for 30-day point prevalence, and 88% of participants reduced their smoking frequency. Conclusions The revised app had high user receptivity, modest quit rates, and high smoking reduction rates. Program completion may be key to boosting the app’s effectiveness.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single-arm trial of the second version of an acceptance & commitment therapy smartphone application for smoking cessation

Bricker

Copeland

Mull

et al. 2017

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…) and high motivation to quit smoking (Courtney et al . ) and factors that break down barriers of quitting smoking including craving (Wray et al . ) and high nicotine dependence (Cosci et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive, behavioural and psychosocial factors associated with successful and maintained quit smoking status among patients who received smoking cessation intervention with nurses’ counselling

Taniguchi

Tanaka

Sasaki

et al. 2017

Journal of Advanced Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This study has a large sample size and rigorous study design. The telephone-based interviews and assessments (telehealth) will improve the recruitment and retention rate as it will allow greater flexibility for participants to attend interviews (no travel included) (35). All outcome measures at each follow-up interview will be collected by a CRO independent of the research team.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effectiveness, safety and cost‐effectiveness of cytisine versus varenicline for smoking cessation in an Australian population: a study protocol for a randomized controlled non‐inferiority trial

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and aimsSmoking cessation medications are effective, but often underutilized because of costs and side effects. Cytisine is a plant‐based smoking cessation medication with more than 50 years of use in central and eastern Europe. While cytisine has been found to be well‐tolerated and more effective than nicotine replacement therapy, direct comparisons with varenicline have not been conducted. This study evaluates the effectiveness, safety and cost‐effectiveness of cytisine compared with varenicline.DesignTwo‐arm, parallel group, randomized, non‐inferiority trial, with allocation concealment and blinded outcome assessment.SettingAustralian population‐based study.ParticipantsAdult daily smokers (n = 1266) interested in quitting will be recruited through advertisements and Quitline telephone‐based cessation support services.Intervention and comparatorEligible participants will be randomized (1 : 1 ratio) to receive either cytisine capsules (25‐day supply) or varenicline tablets (12‐week supply), prescribed in accordance with the manufacturer's recommended dosing regimen. The medication will be mailed to each participant's nominated residential address. All participants will also be offered standard Quitline behavioural support (up to six 10–12‐minute sessions).MeasurementsAssessments will be undertaken by telephone at baseline, 4 and 7 months post‐randomization. Participants will also be contacted twice (2 and 4 weeks post‐randomization) to ascertain adverse events, treatment adherence and smoking status. The primary outcome will be self‐reported 6‐month continuous abstinence from smoking, verified by carbon monoxide at 7‐month follow‐up. We will also evaluate the relative safety and cost‐effectiveness of cytisine compared with varenicline. Secondary outcomes will include self‐reported continuous and 7‐day point prevalence abstinence and cigarette consumption at each follow‐up interview.CommentsIf cytisine is as effective as varenicline, its lower cost and natural plant‐based composition may make it an acceptable and affordable smoking cessation medication that could save millions of lives world‐wide.

show abstract

Predictors of retention in a randomised trial of smoking cessation in low-socioeconomic status Australian smokers

Abstract: Background High attrition rates can threaten the validity of smoking cessation trial findings. Little

Cited by 27 publications

References 60 publications

Single-arm trial of the second version of an acceptance & commitment therapy smartphone application for smoking cessation

Single-arm trial of the second version of an acceptance & commitment therapy smartphone application for smoking cessation

Cognitive, behavioural and psychosocial factors associated with successful and maintained quit smoking status among patients who received smoking cessation intervention with nurses’ counselling

The effectiveness, safety and cost‐effectiveness of cytisine versus varenicline for smoking cessation in an Australian population: a study protocol for a randomized controlled non‐inferiority trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About