Premium
The effect of proactively identifying smokers and offering smoking cessation support in primary care populations: a cluster‐randomized trial
Author(s) -
Murray Rachael L.,
Coleman Timothy,
Antoniak Marilyn,
Stocks Joanne,
Fergus Alexia,
Britton John,
Lewis Sarah A.
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
addiction
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.424
H-Index - 193
eISSN - 1360-0443
pISSN - 0965-2140
DOI - 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02206.x
Subject(s) - smoking cessation , medicine , abstinence , randomized controlled trial , odds ratio , confidence interval , intervention (counseling) , cluster randomised controlled trial , cluster (spacecraft) , family medicine , physical therapy , demography , psychiatry , pathology , sociology , computer science , programming language
Aims To establish whether proactively identifying all smokers in primary care populations and offering smoking cessation support is effective in increasing long‐term abstinence from smoking. Design Cluster randomized controlled trial. Setting Twenty‐four general practices in Nottinghamshire, randomized by practice to active or control intervention. Participants All adult patients registered with the practices who returned a questionnaire confirming that they were current smokers ( n = 6856). Intervention Participants were offered smoking cessation support by letter and those interested in receiving it were contacted and referred into National Health Service (NHS) stop smoking services if required. Measurements Validated abstinence from smoking, use of smoking cessation services and number of quit attempts in continuing smokers at 6 months. Findings Smokers in the intervention group were more likely than controls to report that they had used local cessation services during the study period [16.6% and 8.9%, respectively, adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.57–2.78], and continuing smokers (in the intervention group) were more likely to have made a quit attempt in the last 6 months (37.4% and 33.3%, respectively, adjusted OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.01–1.51). Validated point prevalence abstinence from smoking at 6 months was higher in the intervention than the control groups (3.5% and 2.5%, respectively) but the difference was not statistically significant (adjusted OR controlling for covariates: 1.64, 95% CI 0.92–2.89). Conclusions Proactively identifying smokers who want to quit in primary care populations, and referring them to a cessation service, increased contacts with cessation services and the number of quit attempts. We were unable to detect a significant effect on long‐term cessation rates, but the study was not powered to detect the kind of difference that might be expected.