Explore the vast range of titles available.

In this randomized, controlled trial of smokers employed by a large company, financial incentives for participation in a smoking-cessation program and for smoking cessation confirmed by biochemical testing increased cessation rates at 9 or 12 months (15% for the incentive group vs. 5% for the control group). In this trial of smokers employed by a large company, financial incentives for participation in a smoking-cessation program and for smoking cessation confirmed by biochemical testing increased cessation rates at 9 or 12 months (15% for the incentive group vs. 5% for the control group). Smoking remains the leading preventable cause of premature death in the United States, accounting for approximately 438,000 deaths each year. 1 Seventy percent of smokers report that they want to quit, 2 but annually only 2 to 3% of smokers succeed. 3 , 4 Although smoking-cessation programs and pharmacologic therapies have been associated with higher rates of cessation, rates of participation in such programs and use of such therapies are low. 5 , 6 Work sites offer a promising venue for encouraging smoking cessation because employers are likely to bear many of the excess health care costs and productivity losses that are due to missed work . . .

Abstract Rationale Smoking is the largest contributor to lung cancer risk, and those who continue to smoke after diagnosis have a worse survival. Screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) reduces mortality in high-risk individuals. Smoking cessation is an essential component of a high-quality screening program. Objectives To quantify the effects of smoking history and abstinence on mortality in high-risk individuals who participated in the NLST (National Lung Screening Trial). Methods This is a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial (NLST). Measurements and Main Results Measurements included self-reported demographics, medical and smoking history, and lung cancer–specific and all-cause mortality. Cox regression was used to study the association of mortality with smoking status and pack-years. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were examined for differences in survival based on trial arm and smoking status. Current smokers had an increased lung cancer–specific (hazard ratio [HR], 2.14–2.29) and all-cause mortality (HR, 1.79–1.85) compared with former smokers irrespective of screening arm. Former smokers in the control arm abstinent for 7 years had a 20% mortality reduction comparable with the benefit reported with LDCT screening in the NLST. The maximum benefit was seen with the combination of smoking abstinence at 15 years and LDCT screening, which resulted in a 38% reduction in lung cancer–specific mortality (HR, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.51–0.76). Conclusions Seven years of smoking abstinence reduced lung cancer–specific mortality at a magnitude comparable with LDCT screening. This reduction was greater when abstinence was combined with screening, highlighting the importance of smoking cessation efforts in screening programs.

Mobile health (mHealth) apps have the potential to increase smoking cessation, but little research has been conducted with Aboriginal communities in Australia. We conducted a pilot study to assess the feasibility and acceptability and explore the effectiveness of a novel mHealth app to assist Aboriginal people to quit smoking. A pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) and process evaluation comprising usage analytics data and in-depth interviews was conducted. Current Aboriginal smokers (>16 years old), who were willing to make a quit attempt in the next month, were recruited from Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services and a government telephone coaching service. The intervention was a multifaceted Android or iOS app comprising a personalized profile and quit plan, text and in-app motivational messages, and a challenge feature allowing users to compete with others. The comparator was usual cessation support services. Outcome data collection and analysis were conducted blinded to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was self-reported continuous smoking abstinence verified by carbon monoxide breath testing at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included point prevalence of abstinence and use of smoking cessation therapies and services. A total of 49 participants were recruited. Competing service delivery priorities, the lack of resources for research, and lack of support for randomization to a control group were the major recruitment barriers. At baseline, 23/49 (47%) of participants had tried to quit in recent weeks. At 6-month follow-up, only 1 participant (intervention arm) was abstinent. The process evaluation highlighted low to moderate app usage (3-10 new users per month and 4-8 returning users per month), an average of 2.9 sessions per user per month and 6.3 min per session. Key themes from interviews with intervention participants (n=15) included the following: (1) the powerful influence of prevailing social norms around acceptability of smoking; (2) high usage of mobile devices for phone, text, and social media but very low use of other smartphone apps; (3) the role of family and social group support in supporting quit attempts; and (4) low awareness and utilization of smoking cessation support services. Despite the broad acceptability of the app, participants also recommended technical improvements to improve functionality, greater customization of text messages, integration with existing social media platforms, and gamification features. Smoking cessation apps need to be integrated with commonly used functions of mobile phones and draw on social networks to support their use. Although they have the potential to increase utilization of cessation support services and treatments, more research is needed to identify optimal implementation models. Robust evaluation is critical to determine their impact; however, an RCT design may not be feasible in this setting. Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12616001550493; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=371792 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/76TiV7HA6).

Abstract Introduction Most people who smoke cigarettes are not willing (ie, not ready) to make a quit attempt (QA) at any given time. Unfortunately, interventions intended to increase QAs and the success of QAs are only modestly effective. Identifying processes leading to QAs and quitting success could guide intervention development. Aims and Methods This is a secondary analysis of a randomized factorial trial of 6 weeks of motivation-phase interventions among primary care patients (N = 517) who were initially unwilling to quit but were willing to reduce their smoking. Using logistic regression, we controlled for treatment condition and tested whether baseline or change in smoking-related constructs after 6 weeks of treatment predicted (1) making an at least 24 h QA between weeks 6 and 26 and (2) quitting success at week 26 (7-day point-prevalence abstinence among those who made a QA). Predictors included cigarettes/day, time to first cigarette, motivation to quit, quitting self-efficacy, anticipated urges to smoke if quit, positive affect, negative affect, and time spent around others who smoke. Results In multivariable models that included all smoking-related constructs, changes in the following variables predicted initiating a QA above and beyond other variables: greater baseline time to first cigarette (odds ratio [OR] = 1.60), increases in time to first cigarette (OR = 1.27), and increases in quitting self-efficacy (OR = 1.14). Increased motivation to quit predicted conversion of a QA into quitting success at 26 weeks (OR = 1.36). Conclusion Predictors of making a QA differed from predictors of quitting success. Predictors of QAs and success could each serve as important treatment targets of motivation-phase interventions. Implications Motivation-phase interventions for people initially unwilling to quit smoking cigarettes may be improved by striving to increase their (1) time to first cigarette and quitting self-efficacy to promote QAs and (2) motivation to quit to promote quit success. Future experimental tests of such interventions are needed to identify causal determinants of QAs and quitting success.

Abstract Background Changes in smoking habits and predictors of smoking cessation were examined in the randomized ITALUNG lung cancer screening trial. Methods In three centers, eligible smokers or ex-smokers (55–69 years, ≥20 pack-years in the last 10 years) were randomized to receive annual invitation for low-dose computed tomography for 4 years or usual care. At invitation, subjects received written information for a free smoking cessation program. Quitting outcome was assessed at year 4. Results Among participants who completed baseline assessments and year 4 screening, higher quitting (20.8% vs. 16.7%, p = .029) and lower relapse (6.41% vs. 7.56%, p = .50) rates were observed in the active screening group as compared to the usual-care control group. Corresponding figures in the intention-to-treat analysis were as follows: 16.04% versus 14.64% (p = .059) and 4.88% versus 6.43% (p = .26). Quitting smoking was significantly associated to male gender, lower pack-years, and having pulmonary nodules at baseline. Center-specific analyses showed a threefold statistically significant higher probability to quit associated with participating in the smoking cessation program. A subsample of smokers of the scan group from one center showed higher quitting rates over 12-month follow-up as compared to matched controls from the general population who underwent the same smoking cessation program. Conclusions Consistently with previous reports, in the ITALUNG trial, screened subjects showed significantly higher quit rates than controls, and higher quit rates were associated with both the presence of pulmonary nodules and participating in a smoking cessation program. Maximal effect on quitting outcome was observed with the participation in the smoking cessation program. Implications Participating in lung cancer screening promotes smoking cessation. An effective “teachable moment” may be achieved when the smoking cessation intervention is structured as integral part of the screening clinical visits and conducted by a dedicated team of health care professionals. Standardized guidelines for smoking cessation interventions in lung cancer screening are needed.

BackgroundSupporting people to quit smoking is one of the most powerful interventions to improve health. The Emergency Department (ED) represents a potentially valuable opportunity to deliver a smoking cessation intervention if it is sufficiently resourced. The objective of this trial was to determine whether an opportunistic ED-based smoking cessation intervention can help people to quit smoking.MethodsIn this multicentre, parallel-group, randomised controlled superiority trial conducted between January and August 2022, adults who smoked daily and attended one of six UK EDs were randomised to intervention (brief advice, e-cigarette starter kit and referral to stop smoking services) or control (written information on stop smoking services). The primary outcome was biochemically validated abstinence at 6 months.ResultsAn intention-to-treat analysis included 972 of 1443 people screened for inclusion (484 in the intervention group, 488 in the control group). Of 975 participants randomised, 3 were subsequently excluded, 17 withdrew and 287 were lost to follow-up. The 6-month biochemically-verified abstinence rate was 7.2% in the intervention group and 4.1% in the control group (relative risk 1.76; 95% CI 1.03 to 3.01; p=0.038). Self-reported 7-day abstinence at 6 months was 23.3% in the intervention group and 12.9% in the control group (relative risk 1.80; 95% CI 1.36 to 2.38; p<0.001). No serious adverse events related to taking part in the trial were reported.ConclusionsAn opportunistic smoking cessation intervention comprising brief advice, an e-cigarette starter kit and referral to stop smoking services is effective for sustained smoking abstinence with few reported adverse events.Trial registration number NCT04854616.

Tobacco use continues to take the lives of many, and targeted interventions can counter this health burden. One possible target population is patients who have had a smoking-related diagnosis, as they may have a greater drive to quit. To assess whether patients with previous cardiac or pulmonary conditions directly attributable to smoking have greater rates of abstinence post-discharge from hospitalization in the CHART-NY trial. CHART-NY was a randomized comparative effectiveness trial comparing a more intensive versus a less intensive smoking cessation intervention after hospital discharge. We divided the 1618 CHART-NY participants into a smoking-related history group of 597 and a nonsmoking-related history group of 1021 based on cardiac or pulmonary conditions in a retrospective chart review. We conducted chi-squared analyses on baseline characteristics. Using follow-up survey data, we conducted chi-squared analyses on abstinence outcomes and made logistic regression models for the predictive value of smoking-related conditions on abstinence. A total of 1059 and 1084 participants in CHART-NY who completed both 2- and 6-month follow-up surveys respectively. Self-reported 30-day abstinence at 2- and 6-month follow-up and survey data for baseline characteristics. Those abstinent at 6-month follow-up were more likely to have a smoking-attributable history (OR = 1.40, 95% CI 1.09-1.81). When stratified based on intervention, only the intensive counseling group was significant (OR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.08-2.17). The regression model using a smoking-related comorbidity score was significant at 6 months (OR = 1.29, p = 0.03), and the multivariate logistic regression model analyzing each smoking-related condition separately demonstrated significance for myocardial infarction at 6 months (OR = 1.66, p = 0.03). People who smoke who have experienced smoking-related conditions may be more likely to benefit from smoking cessation interventions, especially intensive telephone-based counseling. Multiple conditions had an additive effect in predicting long-term abstinence after intervention, and myocardial infarction had the greatest predictive value.

Abstract Introduction The US Food and Drug Administration is considering implementing a reduced-nicotine standard for cigarettes. Given the high rate of smoking among people with serious mental illness (SMI), it is important to examine the responses of these smokers to very low nicotine content (VLNC) cigarettes. Methods This trial compared the effects of VLNC (0.4 mg nicotine/g tobacco) and normal nicotine content cigarettes (15.8 mg/g) over a 6-week period in non-treatment-seeking smokers with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or bipolar disorder (n = 58). Linear regression was used to examine the effects of cigarette condition on cigarettes per day, subjective responses, nicotine and tobacco toxicant exposure, craving, withdrawal symptoms, and psychiatric symptoms. Results At week 6, participants in the VLNC condition smoked fewer cigarettes per day, had lower breath carbon monoxide levels, lower craving scores, and rated their study cigarettes lower in satisfaction, reward, enjoyment, and craving reduction than those in the normal nicotine content condition (ps < .05). Week 6 psychiatric and extrapyramidal symptoms did not differ by condition, except for scores on a measure of parkinsonism, which were lower in the VLNC condition (p < .05). There were no differences across conditions on total nicotine exposure, 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol, withdrawal symptoms, or responses to abstinence. Conclusions These results suggest that a reduced-nicotine standard for cigarettes would reduce smoking among smokers with SMI. However, the lack of effect on total nicotine exposure indicates VLNC noncompliance, suggesting that smokers with SMI may respond to a reduced-nicotine standard by substituting alternative forms of nicotine. Implications Results from this trial suggest that a reduced-nicotine standard for cigarettes would reduce smoking rates and smoke exposure in smokers with SMI, without increasing psychiatric symptoms. However, noncompliance with VLNC cigarettes was observed, suggesting that these smokers might respond to a reduced-nicotine standard by substituting alternative forms of nicotine.

Abstract Introduction Because 30% of cigarettes sold in the United States are characterized as menthol cigarettes, it is important to understand how menthol preference may affect the impact of a nicotine reduction policy. Methods In a recent trial, non-treatment-seeking smokers were randomly assigned to receive very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNC; 0.4 mg nicotine/g tobacco) or normal nicotine cigarettes (NNC; 15.5 mg/g) for 20 weeks. On the basis of preference, participants received menthol or non-menthol cigarettes. We conducted multivariable regression analyses to examine whether menthol preference moderated the effects of nicotine content on cigarettes per day (CPD), breath carbon monoxide (CO), urinary total nicotine equivalents (TNE), urinary 2-cyanoethylmercapturic acid (CEMA), and abstinence. Results At baseline, menthol smokers (n = 346) reported smoking fewer CPD (14.9 vs. 19.2) and had lower TNE (52.8 vs. 71.6 nmol/mg) and CO (17.7 vs. 20.5 ppm) levels than non-menthol smokers (n = 406; ps < .05). At week 20, significant interactions indicated that menthol smokers had smaller treatment effects than non-menthol smokers for CPD (–6.4 vs. –9.3), TNE (ratio of geometric means, 0.22 vs. 0.10) and CEMA (ratio, 0.56 vs. 0.37; ps < .05), and trended toward a smaller treatment effect for CO (–4.5 vs. –7.3 ppm; p = .06). Odds ratios for abstinence at week 20 were 1.88 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.8 to 4.4) for menthol and 9.11 (95% CI = 3.3 to 25.2) for non-menthol VLNC smokers (p = .02) relative to the NNC condition. Conclusions Although menthol smokers experienced reductions in smoking, toxicant exposure, and increases in quitting when using VLNC cigarettes, the magnitude of change was smaller than that observed for non-menthol smokers. Implications Results of this analysis suggest that smokers of menthol cigarettes may respond to a nicotine reduction policy with smaller reductions in smoking rates and toxicant exposure than would smokers of non-menthol cigarettes.

There is a paucity of studies applying Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) for longitudinal analysis of smoking cessation outcomes within the framework of a cluster randomized trial, especially among tuberculosis (TB) patients. In this study, a GEE model which accounts for repeated measures and cluster-level effects was implemented to identify factors associated with smoking cessation among TB patients. The data included 375 TB patients who were smokers and given TB treatment during 2013–2016 in Kanchipuram and Villupuram districts under a cluster randomized trial. GEE modeling provided robust, population-averaged estimates while accounting for intra-cluster correlation, confirming the sustained impact of these interventions. The model demonstrated that smoking cessation interventions, when integrated with TB treatment, had an impact on cessation outcomes in these populations.