Using a quitline plus low-cost nicotine replacement therapy to help disadvantaged smokers to quit

C L Miller, V Sedivy, C L Miller, V Sedivy

Abstract

Objectives: To trial an intervention in a real-life setting to motivate low-income smokers to try to quit. The intervention under trial was the addition of subsidised nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) to a standard population quitline service.

Design: Participants were low-income smokers, recruited "cold" via either a letter in the mail or a flyer inserted in a local newspaper. The intervention group received the usual service of multisession counselling from the quitline plus access to heavily subsidised NRT. A comparison group received the usual quitline service only. Participants were followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months. Trial participants were also compared with a sample of general callers to the quitline.

Results: The offer of subsidised NRT recruited more than twice as many low-income smokers than the offer of the cessation service alone (intervention group n = 1000; comparison group n = 377). 63% were first-time callers to the quitline. Intervention respondents showed higher levels of nicotine dependence than comparison group respondents. Comparisons of quitting data were confounded by the differences in the respondents at baseline. 73.5% of smokers in the intervention group tried to quit compared to 61.0% in the comparison group. Unadjusted quit rates were higher in the intervention group than in the comparison group at 3 months and 6 months but not at 12 months.

Conclusions: Disadvantaged smokers were easily engaged to call the quitline, particularly when offered subsidised NRT. Disadvantaged smokers using the quitline, with and without subsidised NRT, achieved cessation outcomes comparable to other studies of "mainstream" smokers.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None.

References

    1. Siahpush M, Borland R. Sociodemographic variations in smoking status among Australians aged ⩾18: multivariate results from the 1995 National Health Survey. Aust NZ J Publ Heal 2001;25:438–42
    1. Stead LF, Perera R, Lancaster T. A systematic review of interventions for smokers who contact quitlines. Tob Control 2007;16suppl l:i3–8
    1. Carter SM, Chapman S. Smokers and non-smokers talk about regulatory options in tobacco control. Tob Control 2006;15:398–404
    1. Silagy C, Lancaster T, Stead L, et al. Nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004;(3):CD000146
    1. Zhu S-H, Melcer T, Sun J, et al. Smoking cessation with and without assistance; a population-based analysis. Am J Prev Med 2000;18:305–11
    1. Cummins SE, Bailey L, Campbell S, et al. Tobacco cessation quitlines in North America: a descriptive study. Tob Control 2007;16suppl l:i9–i15
    1. Dowden A, Kalafatelis E, Ryan N. Evaluation of a subsidised NRT exchange card scheme and the quitline subsidised NRT exchange card system New Zealand: BRC Social Marketing and Research, 2004
    1. Grigg M, Glasgow H. Subsidised nicotine replacement therapy. Tob Control 2003;12:238–9
    1. An LC, Schillo BA, Kavanaugh AM, et al. Increased reach and effectiveness of a statewide tobacco quitline after the addition of access to free nicotine replacement therapy. Tob Control 2006;15:286–93
    1. Bauer JE, Carlin-Menter SM, Celestino PB, et al. Giving away free nicotine medications and a cigarette substitute (Better Quit) to promote calls to a quitline. J Public Health Man 2006;12:60–7
    1. Tinkelman D, Wilson SM, Willett J, et al. Offering free NRT through a tobacco quitline: impact on utilisation and quit rates. Tob Control 2007;16suppl l:i42–i46
    1. Hollis JF, McAfee TA, Fellows JL, et al. The effectiveness and cost effectiveness of telephone counselling and the nicotine patch in a state tobacco quitline. Tob Control 2007;16suppl l:i53–i59
    1. Miller N, Frieden TR, Lio SY, et al. Effectiveness of a large-scale distribution programme of free nicotine patches: a prospective evaluation. Lancet 2005;365:1849–54
    1. Australian Electoral Commission AEC Annual Report 2005–06 Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia; 2008
    1. Australian Bureau of Statistics Census of population and housing—socio-economic indexes for areas, South Australia 2001. 2003 November.
    1. Miller C, Wakefield M, Roberts L. Uptake and effectiveness of the Australian telephone Quitline service in the context of a mass media campaign. Tob Control 2003;12suppl II:ii53–ii8
    1. Fellows JL, Bush T, McAfee T, et al. Cost effectiveness of the Oregon quitline “free patch initiative”. Tob Control 2007;16suppl l:i47–i52

Source: PubMed

Sponsors et collaborateurs

Les conditions médicales

Interventions en matière de drogue

3
S'abonner