Cargando…

Ups and downs of a peer-based smoking cessation intervention help tailored to hospital-employees with low socioeconomic status: The RESPEKT Study

INTRODUCTION: Smoking is one of the most important determinants of socioeconomic inequality in mortality. Few studies have tested which interventions are effective in smokers with low socioeconomic status (SES). METHODS: All hospitals in the Capital Region of Denmark were included and randomized to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pisinger, Charlotta, Koch, Maj-Britt Bjerre, Hjortsø, Else, Jørgensen, Torben, Glümer, Charlotte
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: European Publishing on behalf of the European Network for Smoking and Tobacco Prevention (ENSP) 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7205107/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32411850
http://dx.doi.org/10.18332/tpc/91426
_version_ 1783530182832816128
author Pisinger, Charlotta
Koch, Maj-Britt Bjerre
Hjortsø, Else
Jørgensen, Torben
Glümer, Charlotte
author_facet Pisinger, Charlotta
Koch, Maj-Britt Bjerre
Hjortsø, Else
Jørgensen, Torben
Glümer, Charlotte
author_sort Pisinger, Charlotta
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Smoking is one of the most important determinants of socioeconomic inequality in mortality. Few studies have tested which interventions are effective in smokers with low socioeconomic status (SES). METHODS: All hospitals in the Capital Region of Denmark were included and randomized to intervention or control groups. The target-group was smokers with low SES. Intervention hospitals: smokers in the target-group assisted researchers to tailor a group-based smoking cessation intervention. Further they helped recruiting smoking colleagues and motivating them to stay abstinent. Control hospitals: ‘as usual’. Unforeseen organizational challenges led to a change of study design; the hospital-level assessment was reduced to two cross-sectional surveys. RESULTS: Response rates in hospitals’ smoking status survey were very low. Smoking status was reported by 1876 out of 7003 employees at baseline and 2280 out of 7496 employees at 1-year follow-up. Two cross-sectional surveys showed no significant difference in self-reported smoking at 1-year follow-up between intervention and control hospitals (p=0.262). We recruited 100 smokers in the group-based smoking cessation intervention tailored to smokers with low SES (corresponding to approx. 10% of smokers in target-group); 32.4% of these were validated as continuously abstinent at 6 months follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Involving smokers with low SES as partners at an early stage of study design facilitated both recruitment and development of the intervention. Despite high validated long-term abstinence rates in smoking cessation groups in the intervention hospitals we found no apparent effect of the intervention at hospital-level after one year. However, larger involvement of the target-group seems feasible and is recommended.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7205107
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher European Publishing on behalf of the European Network for Smoking and Tobacco Prevention (ENSP)
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72051072020-05-14 Ups and downs of a peer-based smoking cessation intervention help tailored to hospital-employees with low socioeconomic status: The RESPEKT Study Pisinger, Charlotta Koch, Maj-Britt Bjerre Hjortsø, Else Jørgensen, Torben Glümer, Charlotte Tob Prev Cessat Research Paper INTRODUCTION: Smoking is one of the most important determinants of socioeconomic inequality in mortality. Few studies have tested which interventions are effective in smokers with low socioeconomic status (SES). METHODS: All hospitals in the Capital Region of Denmark were included and randomized to intervention or control groups. The target-group was smokers with low SES. Intervention hospitals: smokers in the target-group assisted researchers to tailor a group-based smoking cessation intervention. Further they helped recruiting smoking colleagues and motivating them to stay abstinent. Control hospitals: ‘as usual’. Unforeseen organizational challenges led to a change of study design; the hospital-level assessment was reduced to two cross-sectional surveys. RESULTS: Response rates in hospitals’ smoking status survey were very low. Smoking status was reported by 1876 out of 7003 employees at baseline and 2280 out of 7496 employees at 1-year follow-up. Two cross-sectional surveys showed no significant difference in self-reported smoking at 1-year follow-up between intervention and control hospitals (p=0.262). We recruited 100 smokers in the group-based smoking cessation intervention tailored to smokers with low SES (corresponding to approx. 10% of smokers in target-group); 32.4% of these were validated as continuously abstinent at 6 months follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Involving smokers with low SES as partners at an early stage of study design facilitated both recruitment and development of the intervention. Despite high validated long-term abstinence rates in smoking cessation groups in the intervention hospitals we found no apparent effect of the intervention at hospital-level after one year. However, larger involvement of the target-group seems feasible and is recommended. European Publishing on behalf of the European Network for Smoking and Tobacco Prevention (ENSP) 2018-06-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7205107/ /pubmed/32411850 http://dx.doi.org/10.18332/tpc/91426 Text en © 2018 Pisinger C http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
spellingShingle Research Paper
Pisinger, Charlotta
Koch, Maj-Britt Bjerre
Hjortsø, Else
Jørgensen, Torben
Glümer, Charlotte
Ups and downs of a peer-based smoking cessation intervention help tailored to hospital-employees with low socioeconomic status: The RESPEKT Study
title Ups and downs of a peer-based smoking cessation intervention help tailored to hospital-employees with low socioeconomic status: The RESPEKT Study
title_full Ups and downs of a peer-based smoking cessation intervention help tailored to hospital-employees with low socioeconomic status: The RESPEKT Study
title_fullStr Ups and downs of a peer-based smoking cessation intervention help tailored to hospital-employees with low socioeconomic status: The RESPEKT Study
title_full_unstemmed Ups and downs of a peer-based smoking cessation intervention help tailored to hospital-employees with low socioeconomic status: The RESPEKT Study
title_short Ups and downs of a peer-based smoking cessation intervention help tailored to hospital-employees with low socioeconomic status: The RESPEKT Study
title_sort ups and downs of a peer-based smoking cessation intervention help tailored to hospital-employees with low socioeconomic status: the respekt study
topic Research Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7205107/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32411850
http://dx.doi.org/10.18332/tpc/91426
work_keys_str_mv AT pisingercharlotta upsanddownsofapeerbasedsmokingcessationinterventionhelptailoredtohospitalemployeeswithlowsocioeconomicstatustherespektstudy
AT kochmajbrittbjerre upsanddownsofapeerbasedsmokingcessationinterventionhelptailoredtohospitalemployeeswithlowsocioeconomicstatustherespektstudy
AT hjortsøelse upsanddownsofapeerbasedsmokingcessationinterventionhelptailoredtohospitalemployeeswithlowsocioeconomicstatustherespektstudy
AT jørgensentorben upsanddownsofapeerbasedsmokingcessationinterventionhelptailoredtohospitalemployeeswithlowsocioeconomicstatustherespektstudy
AT glumercharlotte upsanddownsofapeerbasedsmokingcessationinterventionhelptailoredtohospitalemployeeswithlowsocioeconomicstatustherespektstudy