Cargando…

Helping low-income smokers quit: findings from a randomized controlled trial comparing specialized quitline services with and without social needs navigation

BACKGROUND: Quitting smoking is especially challenging for low-income smokers due to high stress, high smoking prevalence around them, and limited support for quitting. This study aimed to determine whether any of three interventions designed specifically for low-income smokers would be more effecti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kreuter, Matthew W., Garg, Rachel, Fu, Qiang, Caburnay, Charlene, Thompson, Tess, Roberts, Christina, Sandheinrich, Dominique, Javed, Irum, Wolff, Jennifer M., Butler, Taylor, Grimes, Lauren M., Carpenter, Kelly M., Pokojski, Robin, Engelbrecht, Kristen, Howard, Valerie, McQueen, Amy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10319314/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37408953
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lana.2023.100529
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Quitting smoking is especially challenging for low-income smokers due to high stress, high smoking prevalence around them, and limited support for quitting. This study aimed to determine whether any of three interventions designed specifically for low-income smokers would be more effective than standard tobacco quitline services: a specialized quitline, the specialized quitline with social needs navigation, or the standard quitline with social needs navigation. METHODS: Using a randomized 2 × 2 factorial design, low-income daily cigarette smokers (n = 1944) in Missouri, USA who called a helpline seeking assistance with food, rent or other social needs were assigned to receive Standard Quitline alone (n = 485), Standard Quitline + Social Needs Navigation (n = 484), Specialized Quitline alone (n = 485), or Specialized Quitline + Social Needs Navigation (n = 490). The target sample size was 2000, 500 per group. The main outcome was 7-day self-reported point prevalence abstinence at 6-month follow-up. Multiple imputation was used to impute outcomes for those missing data at 6-month follow-up. Binary logistic regression analyses were used to assess differences between study groups. FINDINGS: Participants were recruited from June 2017 to November 2020; most were African American (1111 [58%]) or White (666 [35%]), female (1396 [72%]), and reported <$10,000 (957 [51%]) or <$20,000 (1529 [82%]) annual pre-tax household income. At 6-month follow-up (58% retention), 101 participants in the Standard Quitline group reported 7-day point prevalence abstinence (20.8% of those assigned at baseline, 38.1% after imputation). Quit rates in the Specialized Quitline (90 quitters, 18.6%, 38.1%) and Specialized Quitline + Social Needs Navigation (103 quitters, 21.0%, 39.8%) were not different from the Standard Quitline. Quit rates for Standard Quitline + Social Needs Navigation (74 quitters, 15.3%, 30.1%) were significantly lower than Standard Quitline (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.50–0.98). INTERPRETATION: A specialized version of a state tobacco quitline was no more effective than standard quitline services in helping low-income smokers quit. Adding social needs navigation to a standard quitline decreased its effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03194958. FUNDING: 10.13039/100000054National Cancer Institute: R01CA201429.