Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Quit in general practice: a cluster randomized trial of enhanced in-practice support for smoking cessation

Quit in general practice: a cluster randomized trial of enhanced in-practice support for smoking... AbstractObjectives.To evaluate the uptake and effectiveness of tailored smoking cessation support, provided primarily by the practice nurse (PN), and compare this to other forms of cessation support.Methods.Three arm cluster randomized controlled trial conducted in 101 general practices in Sydney and Melbourne involving 2390 smokers. The Quit with PN intervention was compared to Quitline referral and a usual care control group. Smoking cessation pharmacotherapy was recommended to all groups. Outcomes were assessed by self-report at 3- and 12-month follow-up. Uptake of the interventions is also reported.Results.The three groups were similar at baseline. Follow-up at 12 months was 82%. The sustained and point prevalence abstinence rates, respectively, at 3 months by group were: PN intervention 13.1% and 16.3%; Quitline referral 10.8% and 14.2%; Usual GP care 11.4% and 15.0%. At 12 months, the rates were: PN intervention 5.4% and 17.1%; Quitline referral 4.4% and 18.8%; Usual GP care 2.9% and 16.4%. Only 43% of patients in the PN intervention group attended to see the nurse. Multilevel regression analysis showed no effect of the intervention overall, but patients who received partial or complete PN support were more likely to report sustained abstinence [partial support odds ratio (OR) 2.27; complete support OR 5.34].Conclusion.The results show no difference by group on intention to treat analysis. Those patients who received more intensive PN intervention were more likely to quit. This may have been related to patient motivation or an effect of PN led cessation support. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Family Practice Oxford University Press

Quit in general practice: a cluster randomized trial of enhanced in-practice support for smoking cessation

Download PDF
8 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/quit-in-general-practice-a-cluster-randomized-trial-of-enhanced-in-I3y9F7gMB6

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
ISSN
0263-2136
eISSN
1460-2229
DOI
10.1093/fampra/cmu089
pmid
25670206
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

AbstractObjectives.To evaluate the uptake and effectiveness of tailored smoking cessation support, provided primarily by the practice nurse (PN), and compare this to other forms of cessation support.Methods.Three arm cluster randomized controlled trial conducted in 101 general practices in Sydney and Melbourne involving 2390 smokers. The Quit with PN intervention was compared to Quitline referral and a usual care control group. Smoking cessation pharmacotherapy was recommended to all groups. Outcomes were assessed by self-report at 3- and 12-month follow-up. Uptake of the interventions is also reported.Results.The three groups were similar at baseline. Follow-up at 12 months was 82%. The sustained and point prevalence abstinence rates, respectively, at 3 months by group were: PN intervention 13.1% and 16.3%; Quitline referral 10.8% and 14.2%; Usual GP care 11.4% and 15.0%. At 12 months, the rates were: PN intervention 5.4% and 17.1%; Quitline referral 4.4% and 18.8%; Usual GP care 2.9% and 16.4%. Only 43% of patients in the PN intervention group attended to see the nurse. Multilevel regression analysis showed no effect of the intervention overall, but patients who received partial or complete PN support were more likely to report sustained abstinence [partial support odds ratio (OR) 2.27; complete support OR 5.34].Conclusion.The results show no difference by group on intention to treat analysis. Those patients who received more intensive PN intervention were more likely to quit. This may have been related to patient motivation or an effect of PN led cessation support.

Journal

Family Practice – Oxford University Press

Published: Apr 1, 2015

There are no references for this article.