Effect of smoking cessation counseling on recovery from alcoholism: findings from a randomized community intervention trial

Service user perceptions of smoking cessation in residential substance use treatment

Introduction

Prevalence of tobacco smoking among adults in substance misuse treatment is much higher than the wider population, yet limited research is available, and residential treatment services have been overlooked as a potential setting for cessation interventions. Exploring the perceptions of service users about smoking cessation in residential rehabilitation is important to gain better understanding of this issue and identify ways to inform future intervention development.

Methods

Ten semi-structured interviews were conducted in the Northwest of England in 2017 with adults (7 male, 3 female) who were currently or had previously been in residential treatment for substance misuse. Five participants were current smokers, three had never smoked, and two were former smokers. Participants were asked about their smoking behaviours, factors relating to smoking and smoking cessation and the relationship between smoking and substance use. All interviews were transcribed and data was analysed thematically.

Results

Study findings highlighted a general consensus amongst participants that residential treatment services offered an ideal opportunity for cessation but there were concerns that doing so might jeopardise recovery. Smoking in substance use treatment services is still the norm and factors such as perceived social and psychological benefits, normative behaviours and lack of perceived risk or prioritisation pose challenges for implementing smoking cessation within this setting, although facilitators such as motivation to change and appropriateness of the setting were also identified.

Conclusions

This study suggests that service users perceive residential treatment services as suitable environments to introduce smoking cessation. To address the needs of adults who smoke and are in recovery from substance use, further research and cooperation from treatment organisations is needed to integrate substance misuse and smoking cessation services. More conclusive evidence on the effectiveness of tackling both issues at the same time is also required.

Smoking As an Outcome Moderator In the Treatment of Alcohol Use Disorders

AIMS

To clarify whether smoking interferes with successful treatment of alcohol use disorder (AUD).

METHODS

The current systematic review investigates the potential moderating effect of smoking on behavioural and pharmacological treatment of AUD. In addition, this review summarizes the results of randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of smoking cessation treatments in subjects with AUD on drinking outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall, the results show that 16 out of the 31 pharmacological and psychotherapeutic alcohol treatment studies showed that being a non-smoker or decreased tobacco consumption during AUD treatment is associated with beneficial drinking outcomes, including reduced drinking, later relapse and prolonged alcohol abstinence. As such, smoking predicts poorer drinking outcomes in alcohol treatments. In the stop-smoking studies in patients with AUD, reduced smoking had virtually no effect on drinking behaviours. The inverse association between smoking and drinking outcome observed here indicates that non-smokers may be more successful to attain alcohol abstinence than smokers do. However, this association does not imply per se that smoking triggers alcohol consumption, since it can also mean that alcohol consumption promotes smoking.

CONCLUSIONS

It is concluded that (continued) tobacco smoking may have a negative moderating effect on the treatment outcome of AUD treatments. To optimize treatment outcome of AUD one may consider informing and counselling patients with AUD about the risks of smoking for treatment outcomes and offering support for smoking cessation.

Integrating a brief alcohol intervention with tobacco addiction treatment in primary care: qualitative study of health care practitioner perceptions

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials of complex interventions are increasingly including qualitative components to further understand factors that contribute to their success. In this paper, we explore the experiences of health care practitioners in a province wide smoking cessation program (the Smoking Treatment for Ontario Patients program) who participated in the COMBAT trial. This trial examined if the addition of an electronic prompt embedded in a Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS)-designed to prompt practitioners to Screen, provide a Brief intervention and Referral to Treatment (SBIRT) to patients who drank alcohol above the amounts recommended by the Canadian Cancer Society guidelines-influenced the proportion of practitioners delivering a brief intervention to their eligible patients. We wanted to understand the factors influencing implementation and acceptability of delivering a brief alcohol intervention for treatment-seeking smokers for health care providers who had access to the CDSS (intervention arm) and those who did not (control arm).

METHODS

Twenty-three health care practitioners were selected for a qualitative interview using stratified purposeful sampling (12 from the control arm and 11 from the intervention arm). Interviews were 45 to 90 min in length and conducted by phone using an interview guide that was informed by the National Implementation Research Network's Hexagon tool. Interview recordings were transcribed and coded iteratively between three researchers to achieve consensus on emerging themes. The preliminary coding structure was developed using the National Implementation Research Network's Hexagon Tool framework and data was analyzed using the framework analysis approach.

RESULTS

Seventy eight percent (18/23) of the health care practitioners interviewed recognized the need to simultaneously address alcohol and tobacco use. Seventy four percent (17/23), were knowledgeable about the evidence of health risks associated with dual alcohol and tobacco use but 57% (13/23) expressed concerns with using the Canadian Cancer Society guidelines to screen for alcohol use. Practitioners acknowledged the value of adding a validated screening tool to the STOP program's baseline questionnaire (19/23); however, following through with a brief intervention and referral to treatment proved challenging due to lack of training, limited time, and fear of stigmatizing patients. Practitioners in the intervention arm (5/11; 45%) might not follow the recommendations from CDSS if these recommendations are not perceived as beneficial to the patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the study show that practitioners' beliefs were reflective of the current social norms around alcohol use and this influenced their decision to offer a brief alcohol intervention. Future interventions need to emphasize both organizational and sociocultural factors as part of the design. The results of this study point to the need to change social norms regarding alcohol in order to effectively implement interventions that target both alcohol and tobacco use in primary care clinics. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03108144. Retrospectively registered 11 April 2017, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03108144.

A Facebook intervention to address cigarette smoking and heavy episodic drinking: A pilot randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Co-occurrence of tobacco use and heavy episodic drinking (HED; 5+ drinks for men and 4+ drinks for women per occasion) is common among young adults; both warrant attention and intervention. In a two-group randomized pilot trial, we investigated whether a Facebook-based smoking cessation intervention addressing both alcohol and tobacco use would increase smoking abstinence and reduce HED compared to a similar intervention addressing only tobacco.

METHODS

Participants were 179 young adults (age 18-25; 49.7% male; 80.4% non-Hispanic white) recruited from Facebook and Instagram who reported smoking 4+ days/week and past-month HED. The Smoking Tobacco and Drinking (STAND) intervention (N = 84) and the Tobacco Status Project (TSP), a tobacco-only intervention (N = 95), both included daily Facebook posts for 90 days and weekly live counseling sessions in private "secret" groups. We verified self-reported 7-day smoking abstinence via remote salivary cotinine tests at 3, 6, and 12 months (with retention at 83%, 66%, and 84%, respectively). Participants self-reported alcohol use.

RESULTS

At baseline, the participants averaged 10.4 cigarettes per day (SD = 6.9) and 8.9 HED occasions in the past month (SD = 8.1), with 27.4% in a preparation stage of change for quitting smoking cigarettes. Participants reported significant improvements in cigarette smoking and alcohol use outcomes over time, with no significant differences by condition. At 12 months, intent-to-treat smoking abstinence rates were 3.5% in STAND vs. 0% in TSP (biochemically verified) and 29.4% in STAND vs. 25.5% in TSP (self-reported). Compared to TSP, participants rated the STAND intervention more favorably for supporting health and providing useful information.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding an alcohol treatment component to a tobacco cessation social media intervention was acceptable and engaging but did not result in significant differences by treatment condition in smoking or alcohol use outcomes. Participants in both conditions reported smoking and drinking less over time, suggesting covariation in behavioral changes.

Evaluation of Very Integrated Program: Health Promotion for Patients With Alcohol and Drug Addiction-A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Compared to the general population, patients with alcohol and drug addiction have an increased risk of additional hazardous lifestyles and suffer from more chronic diseases, adding to their already significantly higher morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to test the efficacy of the Very Integrated Program (VIP) on treatment and health outcomes for patients diagnosed with alcohol and drug addiction.

METHODS

Parallel randomized clinical trial with intervention as add-on to addiction care as usual. A total of 322 patients aged 18 years or older were identified, and the study requirements were fulfilled by 219 patients, 7 of whom participated in a pilot. The intervention was a 6-week intensive, tailored, educational program that included motivational interviewing, a smoking cessation program, dietary and physical activity counseling, and patient education. The main outcome measures were substance-free days, time to relapse, and treatment adherence assessed after 6 weeks and 12 months. Secondary outcomes were lifestyle factors, symptoms of comorbidity, and quality of life. Missing data were imputed conservatively by using data closest to the follow-up date and baseline values in patients with no follow-up.

RESULTS

The 212 patients (intervention, n = 113; control, n = 99) were randomized, and 202 had complete data for primary outcomes. After 6 weeks, there were no significant differences between the groups regarding primary or secondary outcomes. At the 12-month follow-up, the patients in the control group had significantly more total substance-free days (139 days; ranging 0 to 365 vs. 265; 0 to 366, p = 0.021)-specifically among the patients with drug addiction-and higher physical and mental quality of life (45 vs. 58, p = 0.049 and 54 vs. 66, p = 0.037), but not in the per-protocol analysis (60 vs. 46, p = 0.52 and 70 vs. 66, p = 0.74). The sensitivity analyses did not support significant differences between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Overall, adding VIP intervention did not improve outcome of the alcohol or drug addiction care or the lifestyle compared to the addiction care alone. This patient group is still in need of effective programs, and new intervention research is required to develop that.

The effect of a clinical decision support system on prompting an intervention for risky alcohol use in a primary care smoking cessation program: a cluster randomized trial

Background

Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) may promote practitioner adherence to evidence-based guidelines. This study examined if the addition of a CDSS influenced practitioner delivery of a brief intervention with treatment-seeking smokers who were drinking above recommended alcohol consumption guidelines, compared with practitioners who do not receive a CDSS prompt.

Methods

This was a cluster randomized controlled trial conducted in primary health care clinics across Ontario, Canada, implementing the Smoking Treatment for Ontario Patients (STOP) smoking cessation program. Clinics randomized to the intervention group received a prompt when a patient reported consuming alcohol above the Canadian Cancer Society (CCS) guidelines; the control group did not receive computer alerts. The primary outcome was an offer of an appropriate educational alcohol resource, an alcohol reduction workbook for patients drinking above the CCS guidelines, and an abstinence workbook to patients scoring above 20 points in the AUDIT screening tool; the secondary outcome was patient acceptance of the resource. The tertiary outcome was patient abstinence from smoking, and alcohol consumption within CCS guidelines, at 6-month follow-up. Results were analyzed using a generalized estimation approach for fitting logistic regression using a population-averaged method.

Results

Two hundred and twenty-one clinics across Ontario were randomized for this study; 110 to the intervention arm and 111 to the control arm. From the 15,222 patients that enrolled in the smoking cessation program, 15,150 (99.6% of patients) were screened for alcohol use and 5715 patients were identified as drinking above the CCS guidelines. No statistically significant difference between groups was seen in practitioner offer of an educational alcohol resource to appropriate patients (OR = 1.19, 95% CI 0.88–1.64, p = 0.261) or in patient abstinence from smoking and drinking within the CCS guidelines at 6-month follow-up (OR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.71–1.22, p = 0.594). However, a significantly greater proportion of patients in the intervention group accepted the alcohol resource offered to them by their practitioner (OR = 1.48, 95% CI 1.01–2.16, p = 0.045).

Conclusion

A CDSS may not increase the likelihood of practitioners offering an educational alcohol resource, though it may have influenced patients’ acceptance of the resource.

Trial registration

This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03108144, registered on April 11, 2017, “retrospectively registered”.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13012-019-0935-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Telephone counselling for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Telephone services can provide information and support for smokers. Counselling may be provided proactively or offered reactively to callers to smoking cessation helplines.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of telephone support to help smokers quit, including proactive or reactive counselling, or the provision of other information to smokers calling a helpline.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the ICTRP for studies of telephone counselling, using search terms including 'hotlines' or 'quitline' or 'helpline'. Date of the most recent search: May 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials which offered proactive or reactive telephone counselling to smokers to assist smoking cessation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We pooled studies using a random-effects model and assessed statistical heterogeneity amongst subgroups of clinically comparable studies using the I² statistic. In trials including smokers who did not call a quitline, we used meta-regression to investigate moderation of the effect of telephone counselling by the planned number of calls in the intervention, trial selection of participants that were motivated to quit, and the baseline support provided together with telephone counselling (either self-help only, brief face-to-face intervention, pharmacotherapy, or financial incentives).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 104 trials including 111,653 participants that met the inclusion criteria. Participants were mostly adult smokers from the general population, but some studies included teenagers, pregnant women, and people with long-term or mental health conditions. Most trials (58.7%) were at high risk of bias, while 30.8% were at unclear risk, and only 11.5% were at low risk of bias for all domains assessed. Most studies (100/104) assessed proactive telephone counselling, as opposed to reactive forms.Among trials including smokers who contacted helplines (32,484 participants), quit rates were higher for smokers receiving multiple sessions of proactive counselling (risk ratio (RR) 1.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.61; 14 trials, 32,484 participants; I² = 72%) compared with a control condition providing self-help materials or brief counselling in a single call. Due to the substantial unexplained heterogeneity between studies, we downgraded the certainty of the evidence to moderate.In studies that recruited smokers who did not call a helpline, the provision of telephone counselling increased quit rates (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.35; 65 trials, 41,233 participants; I² = 52%). Due to the substantial unexplained heterogeneity between studies, we downgraded the certainty of the evidence to moderate. In subgroup analysis, we found no evidence that the effect of telephone counselling depended upon whether or not other interventions were provided (P = 0.21), no evidence that more intensive support was more effective than less intensive (P = 0.43), or that the effect of telephone support depended upon whether or not people were actively trying to quit smoking (P = 0.32). However, in meta-regression, telephone counselling was associated with greater effectiveness when provided as an adjunct to self-help written support (P < 0.01), or to a brief intervention from a health professional (P = 0.02); telephone counselling was less effective when provided as an adjunct to more intensive counselling. Further, telephone support was more effective for people who were motivated to try to quit smoking (P = 0.02). The findings from three additional trials of smokers who had not proactively called a helpline but were offered telephone counselling, found quit rates were higher in those offered three to five telephone calls compared to those offered just one call (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.44; 2602 participants; I² = 0%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that proactive telephone counselling aids smokers who seek help from quitlines, and moderate-certainty evidence that proactive telephone counselling increases quit rates in smokers in other settings. There is currently insufficient evidence to assess potential variations in effect from differences in the number of contacts, type or timing of telephone counselling, or when telephone counselling is provided as an adjunct to other smoking cessation therapies. Evidence was inconclusive on the effect of reactive telephone counselling, due to a limited number studies, which reflects the difficulty of studying this intervention.

Smoking cessation in the context of recovery from drug and alcohol problems: Prevalence, predictors, and cohort effects in a national U.S. sample

BACKGROUND

Tobacco and alcohol and other drug (AOD) use remain prominent risk factors for morbidity, mortality, and health care utilization. Moreover, these often cluster together within persons, exponentiating health risks. Little is known regarding if and when people resolving AOD problems stop smoking, who stops, and whether recent general population trends toward smoking cessation are evident also among persons more recently entering recovery.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

National cross-sectional sample resolving AOD problems (final sample n = 2002).

ANALYSES

Weighted smoking/cessation prevalence; logistic regressions; Hazard-models estimated time to smoking cessation overall, and for different cohorts entering recovery during one of three decades: a) 2006-2015; b) 1996-2005; c) 1986-1995.

RESULTS

Approximately 30% of U.S. adults in AOD recovery with a smoking history stopped smoking before entering recovery, 7% quit smoking and AOD use concurrently, 26% stopped after entering recovery; 37% still smoked. Among those quitting after entering recovery, the prevalence of smoking cessation 5- and 10-years later was 27.2% and 55.1% respectively for the 2006-2015 cohort and 14.9% and 34.5% in the 1986-1995 cohort; time to smoking cessation also was 60% shorter (5yrs vs. 8yrs). Time to smoking cessation was associated with education and income, but not 12-step participation or AOD treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Smoking rates among those in AOD recovery are more than double that of the general population but those entering recovery in recent years are stopping and stopping sooner. It is plausible that public health-oriented tobacco policy measures and easier access to smoking cessation aids may be contributing to this salutary trend.

Predictors of tobacco and alcohol co-use from ages 15 to 32: The Amsterdam Growth and Health Longitudinal Study

Tobacco and alcohol are often used in tandem over time, but specific predictors of course and patterns of course over time need explication. We examined differences in alcohol and tobacco course among an adolescent population as they transitioned into young adulthood across a 17-year period. Data came from participants (n = 303 for ages 15-21, n = 196 for ages 21 to 32; 52% female and 54% female, respectively) enrolled in the Amsterdam Growth and Health Longitudinal Study, an epidemiologic investigation examining disease across the life span. We utilized parallel latent growth modeling to assess the impact of sex, personality traits, cholesterol, blood pressure, and body mass index (BMI), on initial status and linear change over time in course of tobacco and alcohol. Females reported less alcohol use at adolescent baseline (β = -21.79), less increase during adolescence (β = -7.92, p < .05), slower decrease during young adulthood (β = 4.67, p < .05), and more rapid decline in tobacco use during young adulthood (β = -70.85, p < .05), relative to males. Alcohol and tobacco use baseline status' and change over time were all significantly associated with one another during both adolescence and young adulthood (p < .05; aside from alcohol baseline and slope during young adulthood). Effects of BMI, cholesterol, blood pressure, and personality traits were also observed on tobacco and alcohol course. In light of the strong, but sex dependent relationship between alcohol and tobacco course, particularly from ages 15 to 21, prevention efforts to curb heavy alcohol and tobacco use should consider targeting course taking into account biological sex and other notable covariates. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Smoking Cessation for Those Pursuing Recovery from Substance Use Disorders

This article summarizes the literature regarding the similar biopsychosocial mechanisms of tobacco use and alcohol and substance use disorders, and the evidence for and against the provision of tobacco cessation for those in treatment for alcohol and substance use disorders. The practicality of treatment, focusing on methods, timing, and breadth of intervention strategies, are also presented. Common methodologies that may be used across tobacco use and alcohol and substance use disorder to prevent lapse and relapse are discussed. Physicians can and should adhere to the policy that tobacco use is a common and dangerous comorbid condition that demands concomitant treatment.

Prevalence, patterns, and correlates of multiple substance use disorders among adult primary care patients

BACKGROUND

Addressing multiple substance use disorders (SUDs) in primary care-based screening and intervention may improve SUD treatment access, engagement, and outcomes. To inform such efforts, research is needed on the prevalence and patterns of multiple SUDs among primary care patients.

METHODS

Data were analyzed from a sample of 2000 adult (aged ≥ 18) primary care patients recruited for a multisite National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network (CTN) study (CTN-0059). Past-year DSM-5 SUDs (tobacco, alcohol, and drug) were assessed by the modified Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Prevalence and correlates of multiple versus single SUDs were examined. Latent class analysis (LCA) was used to explore patterns of multiple SUDs.

RESULTS

Multiple SUDs were found among the majority of participants with SUD for alcohol, cannabis, prescription opioids, cocaine, and heroin. Participants who were male, ages 26-34, less educated, and unemployed had increased odds of multiple SUDs compared to one SUD. Having multiple SUDs was associated with greater severity of tobacco or alcohol use disorder. LCA of the sample identified three classes: class 1 (83.7%) exhibited low prevalence of all SUDs; class 2 (12.0%) had high-moderate prevalence of SUDs for tobacco, alcohol, and cannabis; class 3 (4.3%) showed high prevalence of SUD for tobacco, opioids, and cocaine. LCA-defined classes were distinguished by sex, age, race, education, and employment status.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that primary care physicians should be aware of multiple SUDs when planning treatment, especially among adults who are male, younger, less educated, or unemployed. Interventions that target multiple SUDs warrant future investigation.

The Untreated Addiction: Going Tobacco-Free in a VA Substance Abuse Residential Rehabilitation Treatment Program (SARRTP)

Despite negative effects of tobacco on the human body and the high prevalence of smoking among those who enter treatment for substance use, few residential programs endorse a tobacco-free policy. Conventional wisdom suggests that it is overwhelming to quit more than one substance at a time, and as a result, many clinicians believe that a shift to a tobacco-free treatment environment is unfeasible. However, the most recent scientific literature suggests the opposite: targeting tobacco use during substance use treatment can increase abstinence rates from both smoking and substances of choice. Therefore, the purpose of the current project is to outline the process by which a residential substance use treatment program within a Veterans Affairs (VA) medical center implemented a tobacco-free policy. In addition, preliminary program evaluation data dispels the myth that eliminating tobacco use in a residential treatment program leads to a decline in patient interest and program utilization.

Characteristics and clinical treatment of tobacco smokers enrolled in a VA substance use disorders clinic

Individuals with a substance use disorder (SUD) diagnosis are more than twice as likely to smoke cigarettes as the general population. Emerging research has suggested that treating a substance use disorder simultaneously with tobacco use leads to a higher rate of treatment success for both substances. Despite this, substance use treatment protocols tend not to focus on tobacco use; in fact, traditional substance use treatments often discourage patients from attempting to quit smoking. One rationale is that patients may not be motivated to quit smoking. In the current study, data from veterans enrolled in outpatient treatment for a SUD were examined to assess for general characteristics of smokers as compared to non-smokers as well as to examine motivation to quit smoking. Baseline (i.e., pre-treatment) data from 277 Veterans were used. Charts of smokers in the SUD clinic (SUDC) were reviewed to assess how smoking is handled by SUDC providers, and if smokers attempt cessation. Of 277, 163 (59%) SUDC patients reported that they currently smoke cigarettes (M=16.3 cigarettes per day, SD=11.1). Smokers in the clinic reported greater general impairment than nonsmokers on the Short Index of Problems, F(1248)=8.9, p=0.003, as well as greater specific impairment: Physical Problems, F(1258)=13.5, p=0.000; Interpersonal Problems, F(1262)=5.6, p=0.019; Intrapersonal Problems, F(1260)=6.5, p=0.011, and Social Responsibility, F(1262)=14.7, p=0.000. Smokers in the sample were marginally more anxious than their non-smoking counterparts as measured by the GAD-7, F(1254)=4.6, p=0.053, though they were not significantly more depressed (p=0.19). On a 1-10 scale, smokers reported moderate levels of importance (M=5.4, SD=3.1), readiness (M=5.6, SD=3.2), and confidence (M=5.0, SD=3.0) regarding quitting smoking. Review of smokers' medical records reveal that while SUDC providers assess tobacco use at intake (90%) and offer treatment (86.5%), a substantially small portion of smokers attempt cessation (41.1%) while enrolled in SUDC. Moreover, no patients were enrolled in smoking-specific behavioral interventions while in SUDC, though 78 patients did obtain nicotine replacement or another smoking cessation medication (41% were prescribed by a SUDC provider). Contrary to the belief that treatment-seeking substance users are not motivated to quit smoking, these preliminary analyses demonstrate that Veterans were at least contemplating quitting smoking while they were enrolled in substance use treatment. Further, there is evidence that cigarette smokers have greater impairment caused by substance use, suggesting that this subgroup is of particular high need. Specific treatment recommendations are discussed, including how behavioral health providers in SUD clinics may be better able to capitalize on patients' moderate motivation to quit at intake.

Combining alcohol interventions with tobacco addictions treatment in primary care-the COMBAT study: a pragmatic cluster randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Tobacco and alcohol use present multiplicative risk for aerodigestive cancers. Reducing alcohol consumption improves smoking cessation outcomes and reduces cancer risk. Risky alcohol consumption and smoking are often treated separately despite concurrent treatment potentially leading to better outcomes for each. However, no rapidly scalable program exists for combined interventions in primary care clinics spread across wide geographic areas. This cluster randomized trial aims to report on the effects of a novel clinical decision support system (CDSS) on intervention rates by primary care practitioners addressing risky alcohol use in a smoking cessation program.

METHODS/DESIGN

We will be implementing a clinical decision support system (CDSS) in 221 primary care sites participating in the Smoking Treatment for Ontario Patients (STOP) program across Ontario, Canada. Sites will be blindly allocated to one of two clinical decision support systems guiding practitioners to provide a risky alcohol use intervention to smokers attempting to quit using nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Risky alcohol use is defined as drinking above the Canadian Cancer Society's low-risk drinking guidelines. Primary analysis will measure the proportion of risky drinkers offered an alcohol intervention in each CDSS arm at baseline. Patients will be contacted by phone or email to track smoking cessation and alcohol consumption rates at 6- and 12-month follow-up.

DISCUSSION

Upon completion of the trial, the effect of different clinical decision support systems on practitioner behaviour, and on client tobacco and alcohol use, will be discussed. If the CDSS successfully promotes SBIRT for risky alcohol use in a primary care setting and/or improves patient-level outcomes, including smoking cessation rates and alcohol use reduction, this tool can be used as a model for other web-based behaviour change interventions integrated into primary care practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03108144.

Individual behavioural counselling for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Individual counselling from a smoking cessation specialist may help smokers to make a successful attempt to stop smoking.

OBJECTIVES

The review addresses the following hypotheses:1. Individual counselling is more effective than no treatment or brief advice in promoting smoking cessation.2. Individual counselling is more effective than self-help materials in promoting smoking cessation.3. A more intensive counselling intervention is more effective than a less intensive intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register for studies with counsel* in any field in May 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized or quasi-randomized trials with at least one treatment arm consisting of face-to-face individual counselling from a healthcare worker not involved in routine clinical care. The outcome was smoking cessation at follow-up at least six months after the start of counselling.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Both authors extracted data in duplicate. We recorded characteristics of the intervention and the target population, method of randomization and completeness of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each trial, and biochemically-validated rates where available. In analysis, we assumed that participants lost to follow-up continued to smoke. We expressed effects as a risk ratio (RR) for cessation. Where possible, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect (Mantel-Haenszel) model. We assessed the quality of evidence within each study using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool and the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 49 trials with around 19,000 participants. Thirty-three trials compared individual counselling to a minimal behavioural intervention. There was high-quality evidence that individual counselling was more effective than a minimal contact control (brief advice, usual care, or provision of self-help materials) when pharmacotherapy was not offered to any participants (RR 1.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.40 to 1.77; 27 studies, 11,100 participants; I² = 50%). There was moderate-quality evidence (downgraded due to imprecision) of a benefit of counselling when all participants received pharmacotherapy (nicotine replacement therapy) (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.51; 6 studies, 2662 participants; I² = 0%). There was moderate-quality evidence (downgraded due to imprecision) for a small benefit of more intensive counselling compared to brief counselling (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.53; 11 studies, 2920 participants; I² = 48%). None of the five other trials that compared different counselling models of similar intensity detected significant differences.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-quality evidence that individually-delivered smoking cessation counselling can assist smokers to quit. There is moderate-quality evidence of a smaller relative benefit when counselling is used in addition to pharmacotherapy, and of more intensive counselling compared to a brief counselling intervention.

Combined treatment for at-risk drinking and smoking cessation among Puerto Ricans: A randomized clinical trial

Tobacco and alcohol use are linked behaviors that individually and synergistically increase the risk for negative health consequences. This study was a two-group, randomized clinical trial evaluating the efficacy of a behavioral intervention, "Motivation And Problem Solving Plus" (MAPS+), designed to concurrently address smoking cessation and the reduction of at-risk drinking. Targeted interventions may promote coaction, the likelihood that changing one behavior (smoking) increases the probability of changing another behavior (alcohol use). Puerto Ricans (N=202) who were smokers and at-risk drinkers were randomized to standard MAPS treatment focused exclusively on smoking cessation (S-MAPS), or MAPS+, focused on cessation and at-risk drinking reduction. Drinking outcomes included: number of at-risk drinking behaviors, heavy drinking, binge drinking, and drinking and driving. MAPS+ did not have a significant main effect on reducing at-risk drinking relative to S-MAPS. Among individuals who quit smoking, MAPS+ reduced the number of drinking behaviors, the likelihood of meeting criteria for heavy drinking relative to S-MAPS, and appeared promising for reducing binge drinking. MAPS+ did not improve drinking outcomes among individuals who were unsuccessful at quitting smoking. MAPS+ showed promise in reducing at-risk drinking among Puerto Rican smokers who successfully quit smoking, consistent with treatment enhanced coaction. Integrating an alcohol intervention into cessation treatment did not reduce engagement in treatment, or hinder cessation outcomes, and positively impacted at-risk drinking among individuals who quit smoking. Findings of coaction between smoking and drinking speak to the promise of multiple health behavior change interventions for substance use treatment and chronic disease prevention.

Interventions for tobacco use cessation in people in treatment for or recovery from substance use disorders

BACKGROUND

Smoking rates in people with alcohol and other drug dependencies are two to four times those of the general population. Concurrent treatment of tobacco dependence has been limited due to concern that these interventions are not successful in this population or that recovery from other addictions could be compromised if tobacco cessation was combined with other drug dependency treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether interventions for tobacco cessation are associated with tobacco abstinence for people in concurrent treatment for or in recovery from alcohol and other drug dependence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and clinicaltrials.gov databases, with the most recent search completed in August 2016. A grey literature search of conference abstracts from the Society on Nicotine Research and Treatment and the ProQuest database of digital dissertations yielded one additional study, which was excluded.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials assessing tobacco cessation interventions among people in concurrent treatment for alcohol or other drug dependence or in outpatient recovery programmes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study risk of bias and extracted data. We resolved disagreements by consensus. The primary outcome was abstinence from tobacco use at the longest period of follow-up, and the secondary outcome was abstinence from alcohol or other drugs, or both. We reported the strictest definition of abstinence. We summarised effects as risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Two clustered studies did not provide intraclass correlation coefficients, and were excluded from the sensitivity analysis. We used the I² statistic to assess heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-five randomised controlled trials, one ongoing, involving 5796 participants met the criteria for inclusion in this review. Included studies assessed the efficacy of tobacco cessation interventions, including counselling, and pharmacotherapy consisting of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) or non-NRT, or the two combined, in both inpatient and outpatient settings for participants in treatment and in recovery. Most studies did not report information to assess the risk of allocation, selection, and attrition bias, and were classified as unclear.Analyses considered the nature of the intervention, whether participants were in treatment or recovery and the type of dependency. Of the 34 studies included in the meta-analysis, 11 assessed counselling, 11 assessed pharmacotherapy, and 12 assessed counselling in combination with pharmacotherapy, compared to usual care or no intervention. Tobacco cessation interventions were significantly associated with tobacco abstinence for two types of interventions. Pharmacotherapy appeared to increase tobacco abstinence (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.12, 11 studies, 1808 participants, low quality evidence), as did combined counselling and pharmacotherapy (RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.39 to 2.18, 12 studies, 2229 participants, low quality evidence) at the period of longest follow-up, which ranged from six weeks to 18 months. There was moderate evidence of heterogeneity (I² = 56% with pharmacotherapy and 43% with counselling plus pharmacotherapy). Counselling interventions did not significantly increase tobacco abstinence (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.95).Interventions were significantly associated with tobacco abstinence for both people in treatment (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.59 to 2.50) and people in recovery (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.67), and for people with alcohol dependence (RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.81) and people with other drug dependencies (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.43 to 2.40).Offering tobacco cessation therapy to people in treatment or recovery for other drug dependence was not associated with a difference in abstinence rates from alcohol and other drugs (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.03, 11 studies, 2231 participants, moderate evidence of heterogeneity (I² = 66%)).Data on adverse effect of the interventions were limited.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The studies included in this review suggest that providing tobacco cessation interventions targeted to smokers in treatment and recovery for alcohol and other drug dependencies increases tobacco abstinence. There was no evidence that providing interventions for tobacco cessation affected abstinence from alcohol and other drugs. The association between tobacco cessation interventions and tobacco abstinence was consistent for both pharmacotherapy and combined counselling and pharmacotherapy, for participants both in treatment and in recovery, and for people with alcohol dependency or other drug dependency. The evidence for the interventions was low quality due primarily to incomplete reporting of the risks of bias and clinical heterogeneity in the nature of treatment. Certain results were sensitive to the length of follow-up or the type of pharmacotherapy, suggesting that further research is warranted regarding whether tobacco cessation interventions are associated with tobacco abstinence for people in recovery, and the outcomes associated with NRT versus non-NRT or combined pharmacotherapy. Overall, the results suggest that tobacco cessation interventions incorporating pharmacotherapy should be incorporated into clinical practice to reduce tobacco addiction among people in treatment for or recovery from alcohol and other drug dependence.

Does Cigarette Smoking Affect Drug Abuse Treatment?

Does quitting cigarette smoking help or hurt the polydrug user in treatment for drug use? Data were obtained from 407 polydrug users in 15 treatment centers in Los Angeles at baseline and one-year follow-up. Measures: Smoking status, reported drug use, urine test results, SF-36 scores, Hopkins SCL, ASI-alcohol use, -drug use, -psychiatric problems, and ad hoc employment-related problems. Results: Most respondents (95%) reported some lifetime smoking. Over one-year follow-up, 29% reported a change in smoking status. At follow-up, stable former smokers reported fewer psychiatric problems than stable current smokers. Change in smoking status was associated with reduced heroin use, but with increased psychiatric problems and employment-related problems. Stable former smokers consistently reported healthier outcomes than either stable regular smokers or status changers, as reflected in somatization, obsessive/compulsive behavior, depression, and anxiety scores. Conclusions: Long-term but not short-term abstinence from tobacco use in polydrug users undergoing treatment is associated with consistently more favorable health outcomes.

The impact of non-concordant self-report of substance use in clinical trials research

BACKGROUND

Studies comparing self-report substance use data to biochemical verification generally demonstrate high rates of concordance. We argue that these rates are due to the relatively high true negative rate in the general population, and high degree of honestly in treatment seeking individuals. We hypothesized that high risk individuals not seeking treatment would demonstrate low concordance and a high false negative rate of self-reported substance use.

METHODS

A sample of 500 individuals from a smoking cessation clinical trial was assessed over 1 year. Assessments included semi-structured interviews, questionnaires (e.g. Addiction Severity Index, etc.), and urine drug screen assays (UDS). Generalized estimating equations (GEEs) were used to predict false negative reports for various substances across the study and determine the influence of substance use on the primary study outcome of smoking cessation.

RESULTS

Participants demonstrated high false negative rates in reporting substances use, and the false negative rates increased as the study progressed. Established predictors of false negatives generalized to the current sample. High concordance and low false negative rates were found in self-report of nicotine use. A small but significant relationship was found in for effect of biochemically verified substance use on smoking cessation.

CONCLUSIONS

Biochemical verification of substance use is needed in high risk populations involved in studies not directly related to the treatment of substance use, especially in populations with high threat of stigmatization. Testing should continue through the time period of the study for maximal identification of substance use.

The Role of Cross-Cue Reactivity in Coexisting Smoking and Gambling Habits

Cigarette smoking is the most common addictive behaviour co-occurring with problem gambling. Based on classical conditioning, smoking and gambling cues may acquire conditioned stimulus properties that elicit cravings for both behaviours. This study examined cross-cue reactivity in 75 men who were regular smokers, poker players or cigarette-smoking poker players. Participants were exposed to discrete cigarette, poker and neutral cues while skin conductance and psychological urges to smoke and gamble were measured. Results showed evidence of cross-cue reactivity based on skin conductance, and subjective response to smoking cues; subjective response to gambling cues was less clear. Smoking gamblers showed greater skin conductance reactivity to cues, and stronger subjective urges to smoke to smoking and gambling cues, compared to individuals who only smoked or only gambled. This study demonstrates evidence for cross-cue reactivity between a substance and a behavioural addiction, and the results encourage further research.

Individualized Treatment for Tobacco Dependence in Addictions Treatment Settings: The Role of Current Depressive Symptoms on Outcomes at 3 and 6 Months

INTRODUCTION

Individuals with concurrent tobacco dependence and other addictions often report symptoms of low mood and depression and as such may have more difficulty quitting smoking. We hypothesized that current symptoms of depression would be a significant predictor of quit success among a group of smokers receiving individualized treatment for tobacco dependence within addiction treatment settings.

METHODS

Individuals in treatment for other addictions were enrolled in a smoking cessation program involving brief behavioral counseling and individualized dosing of nicotine replacement therapy. The baseline assessment included the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ9) for depression. Smoking cessation outcomes were measured at 3 and 6 months post-enrollment. Bivariate associations between cessation outcomes and PHQ9 score were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 1,196 subjects enrolled to date, 1,171 (98%) completed the PHQ9. Moderate to severe depression (score >9) was reported by 28% of the sample, and another 29% reported mild depression (score between 5 and 9). Contrary to the extant literature and other findings by our own group, there was no association between current depression and cessation outcome at either 3 months (n = 1,171) (17.0% in those with PHQ9 > 9 vs. 19.8% in those with PHQ9 < 5, p = .32) or 6 months (n = 834) (17.8% vs. 18.9%, p = .74).

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to our hypothesis, depression severity as measured by the PHQ9 did not predict cessation outcome in this clinical population. A possible explanation may be the individualized treatment and supportive environment of an addictions treatment setting. These data indicate that patients in an addictions treatment setting can successfully quit smoking regardless of current depressive symptoms.

Exploring Issues of Comorbid Conditions in People Who Smoke

Smoking affects comorbid disease outcomes, and patients with comorbid conditions may have unique characteristics that are important to consider when treating tobacco use. However, addressing tobacco in patients being treated for comorbid conditions is not a consistent practice. Recognizing the need for a "call-to-action" to address tobacco use in people with comorbid conditions, the Tobacco Treatment Network within the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT) convened a Comorbidities Workgroup to explore the relationship between smoking and comorbid disease to identify common themes including: the harms associated with continued tobacco use, the frequency of comorbid disease and tobacco use, the potential effect of comorbid disease on the ability to quit tobacco use, the association between tobacco use and suboptimal disease-specific treatment response, and evidence regarding potential approaches to improve addressing tobacco use in patients with comorbid disease. Five candidate conditions (psychiatric, cancer, cardiovascular, pulmonary, and human immunodeficiency virus infected patients) were explored. Across comorbid conditions, smoking adversely affects treatment efficacy and promotes other adverse health conditions. People with comorbid conditions who smoke are motivated to quit and respond to evidence-based smoking cessation treatments. However, tobacco cessation is not regularly incorporated into the clinical care of many individuals with comorbidities. Optimal strategies for addressing tobacco use within each comorbid disease are also not well defined. Further work is needed to disseminate evidence-based care into clinical practice for smokers with comorbid disease and addiction research should consider comorbid conditions as an important construct to explore.

IMPLICATIONS

This article explores how physical and psychiatric conditions may interact in the treatment of tobacco dependence, and discusses the need for smoking cessation as a critical component of comorbid condition management. Five common comorbid domains-psychiatric, cancer, pulmonary, cardiovascular, and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-are highlighted to illustrate how these different conditions might interact with smoking with respect to prevalence and harm, motivation to quit, and cessation treatment utilization and success.

Cigarette Smoking During Substance Use Disorder Treatment: Secondary Outcomes from a National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network study

INTRODUCTION

The majority of patients enrolled in treatment for substance use disorders (SUDs) also use tobacco. Many will continue to use tobacco even during abstinence from other drugs and alcohol, often leading to smoking-related illnesses. Despite this, little research has been conducted to assess the influence of being a smoker on SUD treatment outcomes and changes in smoking during a treatment episode.

METHODS

In this secondary analysis, cigarette smoking was evaluated in participants completing outpatient SUD treatment as part of a multi-site study conducted by the National Drug Abuse Treatment Clinical Trials Network. Analyses included the assessment of changes in smoking and nicotine dependence via the Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence during the 12-week study among all smokers (aim #1), specifically among those in the experimental treatment group (aim #2), and the moderating effect of being a smoker on treatment outcomes (aim #3).

RESULTS

Participants generally did not reduce or quit smoking throughout the course of the study. Among a sub-set of participants with higher baseline nicotine dependence scores randomized to the control arm, scores at the end of treatment were lower compared to the experimental arm, though measures of smoking quantity did not appear to decrease. Further, being a smoker was associated with poorer treatment outcomes compared to non-smokers enrolled in the trial.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence that patients enrolled in community-based SUD treatment continue to smoke, even when abstaining from drugs and alcohol. These results add to the growing literature encouraging the implementation of targeted, evidence-based interventions to promote abstinence from tobacco among SUD treatment patients.

Smoking and Gambling Disorder: Does Tobacco Use Influence Treatment Outcome?

The purpose of this study was to verify whether tobacco use influenced treatment outcome in a population of treatment seeking individuals with gambling disorder. Gambling disorder is defined as persistent and maladaptive gambling behaviour which meets four or more outlined criteria in the DSM-5. Tobacco use is the most frequent comorbidity with gambling disorder. A total of 676 treatment seeking individuals with gambling disorder were assessed at the National Problem Gambling Clinic in London. We analysed differences in socio-demographic, clinical and gambling variables between smokers and non-smokers and the relation between smoking behaviour and treatment completion and outcome. 46.4% (314) of our sample were daily tobacco users and were significantly younger, less likely to be in a stable relationship, more likely to be unemployed and have a lower education level. They were also significantly more likely to score higher on the AUDIT-C score and were significantly more likely to have used drugs in the last 30 days. There was no significant difference in PGSI score between smokers and non-smokers. We found that tobacco smokers did not have higher PGSI scores than non-smokers. Moreover, there was no significant difference between tobacco users and nonusers in terms of treatment completion and treatment outcome.

Concurrent alcohol and tobacco treatment: Effect on daily process measures of alcohol relapse risk

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of alcohol treatment along with concurrent smoking treatment or delayed smoking treatment on process measures related to alcohol relapse risk.

METHOD

Alcohol dependent smokers (N = 151) who were enrolled in an intensive outpatient alcohol treatment program and were interested in smoking cessation were randomized to a concurrent smoking cessation (CSC) intervention or to a waiting list for delayed smoking cessation (DSC) intervention scheduled to begin 3 months later. Daily assessments of relapse process measures were obtained using an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) system for 12 weeks after the onset of smoking treatment in the CSC condition, and before beginning smoking treatment in the DSC condition. Smoking outcomes were assessed at 2 and 13 weeks after starting treatment.

RESULTS

Seven-day carbon monoxide (CO) verified smoking abstinence in the CSC condition was 50.5% at 2 weeks and 19.0% at 13 weeks compared with 2.2% abstinence at 2 weeks and 0% abstinence at 13 weeks for those in the DSC condition. Drinking outcomes were not significantly different for CSC versus DSC treatment conditions. On daily IVR assessments, CSC participants had significantly lower positive alcohol outcome expectancies relative to DSC participants. Multilevel modeling (MLM) analyses of within-person effects across the 12 weeks of daily monitoring showed that daily smoking abstinence was significantly associated with same day reports of lower alcohol consumption, lower urge to drink, lower negative affect, lower positive alcohol outcome expectancies, greater alcohol abstinence self-efficacy, greater alcohol abstinence readiness to change, and greater perceived self-control demands.

CONCLUSIONS

Analyses of process measures provide support for recommending smoking intervention concurrent with intensive outpatient alcohol treatment. (PsycINFO Database Record

Bupropion-SR for smoking reduction and cessation in alcohol-dependent outpatients: a naturalistic, open-label study

BACKGROUND

We sought to determine whether sustained-release bupropion (bupropion-SR) reduces smoking and promotes smoking cessation among alcohol-dependent (AD) smokers while they are in early recovery from alcohol.

METHODS

We conducted an open-label, naturalistic study among AD smokers enrolled in an outpatient treatment program. The treatment group (n=58) was offered bupropion-SR and brief smoking cessation counseling. A control group (n=57) was matched to the treatment group by age, sex, ethnicity, cigarette use, and years of alcohol dependence. The controls received no smoking cessation intervention. We collected tobacco and alcohol abstinence data for 6 months after enrollment.

RESULTS

Participants in the treatment group were more likely to abstain from smoking than controls, at any of the followup time points. The treatment group smoked less cigarettes per day (CPD) at baseline, 30 days and 180 days post-baseline, compared to controls. These findings persisted after adjusting for possible covariates.

CONCLUSION

Bupropion-SR may be helpful to quit or reduce smoking for recently abstinent AD individuals.

A randomized trial of concurrent smoking-cessation and substance use disorder treatment in stimulant-dependent smokers

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of concurrent treatments for substance use disorder and nicotine-dependence for stimulant-dependent patients.

METHOD

A randomized, 10-week trial with follow-up at 3 and 6 months after smoking quit date conducted at 12 substance use disorder treatment programs between February 2010 and July 2012. Adults meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for cocaine and/or methamphetamine dependence and interested in quitting smoking were randomized to treatment as usual (n = 271) or treatment as usual with smoking-cessation treatment (n = 267). All participants received treatment as usual for substance use disorder treatment. Participants assigned to treatment as usual with concurrent smoking-cessation treatment received weekly individual smoking cessation counseling and extended-release bupropion (300 mg/d) during weeks 1-10. During post-quit treatment (weeks 4-10), participants assigned to treatment as usual with smoking-cessation treatment received a nicotine inhaler and contingency management for smoking abstinence. Weekly proportion of stimulant-abstinent participants during the treatment phase, as assessed by urine drug screens and self-report, was the primary outcome. Secondary measures included other substance/nicotine use outcomes and treatment attendance.

RESULTS

There were no significant treatment effects on stimulant-use outcomes, as measured by the primary outcome and stimulant-free days, on drug-abstinence, or on attendance. Participants assigned to treatment as usual with smoking-cessation treatment, relative to those assigned to treatment as usual, had significantly better outcomes for drug-free days at 6-month follow-up (χ(2)(1) = 4.09, P <.05), with a decrease in drug-free days from baseline of -1.3% in treatment as usual with smoking-cessation treatment and of -7.6% in treatment as usual. Participants receiving treatment as usual with smoking-cessation treatment, relative to those receiving treatment as usual, had significantly better outcomes on smoking point-prevalence abstinence (25.5% vs 2.2%; χ(2)(1) = 44.69, P < .001; OR =18.2).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that providing smoking-cessation treatment to illicit stimulant-dependent patients in outpatient substance use disorder treatment will not worsen, and may enhance, abstinence from nonnicotine substance use.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01077024.

Motivational interviewing versus brief advice for cigarette smokers in residential alcohol treatment

Residential treatment for substance use disorders (SUD) provides opportunity for smoking intervention. A randomized controlled trial compared: (1) motivational interviewing (MI) to brief advice (BA), (2) in one session or with two booster sessions, for 165 alcoholics in SUD treatment. All received nicotine replacement (NRT). MI and BA produced equivalent confirmed abstinence, averaging 10% at 1 month, and 2% at 3, 6 and 12 months. However, patients with more drug use pretreatment (>22 days in 6 months) given BA had more abstinence at 12 months (7%) than patients in MI or with less drug use (all 0%). Boosters produced 16-31% fewer cigarettes per day after BA than MI. Substance use was unaffected by treatment condition or smoking cessation. Motivation to quit was higher after BA than MI. Thus, BA plus NRT may be a cost-effective way to reduce smoking for alcoholics with comorbid substance use who are not seeking smoking cessation.

The effect of snus on alcohol-related cigarette administration in dependent and non-dependent smokers

INTRODUCTION

Alcohol has been found to increase tobacco smoking in both dependent daily smokers (DDS) and nondependent nondaily smokers (NNS), yet little attention has been directed toward examining how different treatments/products modify drinking-related smoking behavior.

METHODS

This study examined the acute effects of snus (4mg of nicotine) on alcohol-related smoking responses in 18 DDS and 17 NNS. During each double-blind session, participants were randomly assigned to receive one of the following combinations: alcohol and snus, alcohol and placebo snus, placebo alcohol and snus, or placebo alcohol and placebo snus. Participants consumed their assigned beverage before absorbing their session's product, and after 30min participants could self-administer puffs of their preferred brand of cigarette over a 60-minute period using a progressive ratio task.

RESULTS

Alcohol significantly increased tobacco craving (p<.001) and tended to decrease latency to start smoking (p=.021) but only among NNS. In contrast, snus tended to decrease the number of puffs earned and how hard DDS worked for puffs in both beverage conditions (ps≤.019) but it did not alter the smoking behavior of NNS. Craving was not significantly impacted by snus in either type of smoker.

DISCUSSION

These findings raise the possibility that different processes mediate alcohol and cigarette co-use in NNS and DDS and suggest that snus may be effective in reducing alcohol-related cigarette use in DDS specifically.

Pilot randomized trial on mindfulness training for smokers in young adult binge drinkers

Background

We report results of a pilot study designed to test a novel smoking cessation intervention, Mindfulness Training for Smokers (MTS), in smokers age 18-29 years with regular episodes of binge drinking. Mindfulness is a cognitive skill of applying close moment-to-moment attention to experience with a mental posture of acceptance and non-reactivity. The MTS intervention consisted of six weekly classes that provided instruction on how to use mindfulness to manage known precursors of smoking relapse including smoking triggers, strong emotions, stressful situations, addictive thoughts, urges, and withdrawal symptoms.

Methods

The MTS intervention was compared to Interactive Learning for Smokers (ILS), a time/intensity matched control group using daily non-directed walking instead of mindfulness meditation. Recruitment was conducted primarily at local technical colleges. Primary outcome measures included biochemically-confirmed smoking abstinence and reduction in alcohol use at the end of treatment (2-weeks post-quit attempt).

Results

The sample (N = 55) was 70.9% male, with a mean age of 21.9 years, and a mean of 11.76 alcoholic drinks consumed per week. Intent-to-treat analysis showed biochemically-confirmed 7-day point prevalence abstinence rates at 2-weeks post-quit for MTS = 20.0% and ILS = 4.0%, p = .08. Secondary analysis showed number of drinks per week in the first 2-weeks post-quit correlated with smoking relapse at 2-weeks post-quit (p < .01).

Conclusions

This pilot study demonstrated that Mindfulness Training for Smokers shows promise for smoking cessation and alcohol use reduction in treating young adult smokers with alcohol abuse. Results suggest the need for a study with larger sample size and methods that reduce attrition.

Trial registration

ClnicalTrial.gov, NCT01679236

Characterizing smoking, cessation services, and quit interest across outpatient substance abuse treatment modalities

The majority of individuals seeking treatment for substance use disorders are cigarette smokers, yet smoking cessation is rarely addressed during treatment. Conducting a detailed smoking-related characterization of substance abuse treatment patients across treatment modalities may facilitate the development of tailored treatment strategies. This study administered a battery of self-report instruments to compare tobacco use, quit attempts, smoking knowledge and attitudes, program services, and interest in quitting among smoking patients enrolled in opioid replacement therapy (ORT) versus non-opioid replacement (non-ORT). ORT compared with non-ORT participants smoked more heavily, had greater tobacco dependence, and endorsed greater exposure to smoking cessation services at their treatment programs. Favorable attitudes towards cessation during treatment were found within both groups. These data identify several potential clinical targets, most notably including confidence in abstaining and attitudes toward cessation pharmacotherapies that may be addressed by substance abuse treatment clinics.

Telephone counselling for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Telephone services can provide information and support for smokers. Counselling may be provided proactively or offered reactively to callers to smoking cessation helplines.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of proactive and reactive telephone support via helplines and in other settings to help smokers quit.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register for studies of telephone counselling, using search terms including 'hotlines' or 'quitline' or 'helpline'. Date of the most recent search: May 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

randomized or quasi-randomised controlled trials in which proactive or reactive telephone counselling to assist smoking cessation was offered to smokers or recent quitters.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One author identified and data extracted trials, and a second author checked them. The main outcome measure was the risk ratio for abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up. We selected the strictest measure of abstinence, using biochemically validated rates where available. We considered participants lost to follow-up to be continuing smokers. Where trials had more than one arm with a less intensive intervention we used only the most similar intervention without the telephone component as the control group in the primary analysis. We assessed statistical heterogeneity amongst subgroups of clinically comparable studies using the I² statistic. We considered trials recruiting callers to quitlines separately from studies recruiting in other settings. Where appropriate, we pooled studies using a fixed-effect model. We used a meta-regression to investigate the effect of differences in planned number of calls, selection for motivation, and the nature of the control condition (self help only, minimal intervention, pharmacotherapy) in the group of studies recruiting in non-quitline settings.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-seven trials met the inclusion criteria. Some trials were judged to be at risk of bias in some domains but overall we did not judge the results to be at high risk of bias. Among smokers who contacted helplines, quit rates were higher for groups randomized to receive multiple sessions of proactive counselling (nine studies, > 24,000 participants, risk ratio (RR) for cessation at longest follow-up 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26 to 1.50). There was mixed evidence about whether increasing the number of calls altered quit rates but most trials used more than two calls. Three studies comparing different counselling approaches during a single quitline contact did not detect significant differences. Of three studies that tested the provision of access to a hotline two detected a significant benefit and one did not.Telephone counselling not initiated by calls to helplines also increased quitting (51 studies, > 30,000 participants, RR 1.27; 95% CI 1.20 to 1.36). In a meta-regression controlling for other factors the effect was estimated to be slightly larger if more calls were offered, and in trials that specifically recruited smokers motivated to try to quit. The relative extra benefit of counselling was smaller when it was provided in addition to pharmacotherapy (usually nicotine replacement therapy) than when the control group only received self-help material or a brief intervention.A further eight studies were too diverse to contribute to meta-analyses and are discussed separately. Two compared different intensities of counselling, both of which detected a dose response; one of these detected a benefit of multiple counselling sessions over a single call for people prescribed bupropion. The others tested a variety of interventions largely involving offering telephone counselling as part of a referral or systems change and none detected evidence of effect.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Proactive telephone counselling aids smokers who seek help from quitlines. Telephone quitlines provide an important route of access to support for smokers, and call-back counselling enhances their usefulness. There is limited evidence about the optimal number of calls. Proactive telephone counselling also helps people who receive it in other settings. There is some evidence of a dose response; one or two brief calls are less likely to provide a measurable benefit. Three or more calls increase the chances of quitting compared to a minimal intervention such as providing standard self-help materials, or brief advice, or compared to pharmacotherapy alone.

Tobacco dependence diagnosis and treatment in Veterans Health Administration residential substance use disorder treatment programs

AIMS

To explore tobacco dependence (TD) diagnosis and treatment utilization, and identify predictors of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) among veterans with substance use disorders (SUDs) enrolled in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) SUD residential treatment programs (SRTPs).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

VHA SRTPs, which treat veterans with SUD and multiple severe psychosocial deficits, from 1 October 2009 to 31 September 2010.

PARTICIPANTS

Identified tobacco users among veterans with SUD treated in SRTPs during fiscal year 2010 (FY10).

MEASUREMENTS

Rates of documented TD diagnosis and pharmacotherapy were assessed nationally, regionally and by facility. Patient-level predictors of NRT were examined using a mixed-effects logistic regression model with facility as a random effect.

FINDINGS

A total of 12 097 of the 15 320 veterans in SRTPs in FY10 (79%) were identified as probable tobacco users. Among these, 33% had a documented TD diagnosis, 34% were treated with pharmacotherapy and only 11% were both diagnosed and treated for TD while in SRTP. NRT was more common among patients with a current documented TD diagnosis, recent history of TD treatment, comorbid mental health disorder, age 55 years or younger and identified as white.

CONCLUSIONS

Most veterans in Veterans Health Administration substance use disorders residential treatment programs appear to use tobacco, yet only one in 10 receives a documented ICD-9 TD diagnosis and pharmacotherapy while in a substance use disorders residential treatment program.

Medications for substance use disorders

In this article, the authors briefly review the pharmacotherapeutic agents that are currently available for the treatment of substance use disorders. Nicotine replacement therapies are most effective for tobacco cessation. Naltrexone, acamprosate, and disulfiram are effective for reducing alcohol use. The most effective pharmacotherapies for opiate use disorders are agonist therapies, including methadone and buprenorphine. The authors also examine recent advances in medication development for other substance use disorders such as stimulant addiction. The role of medication adherence and behavioral treatments and the integration of behavioral and pharmacotherapeutic interventions are also discussed.

Cognitive behavioral smoking cessation during alcohol detoxification treatment: a randomized, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Among alcohol-dependent subjects tobacco smoking is very common and causes a variety of health risks. Therefore, it is necessary to reach this high-risk population early with appropriate smoking interventions.

METHODS

Smokers in alcohol detoxification treatment were offered to participate in a smoking cessation study. A total of 103 patients was enrolled and randomly assigned to either the experimental group (EG) receiving a cognitive behavioral smoking cessation treatment (CBT) or the control group (CG) receiving autogenic training. Smoking outcomes were measured by self-report and carbon monoxide levels, directly after intervention and 6 months later, where additionally alcohol outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

There were no differences in smoking quit rates directly after intervention. However, patients in the EG were significantly more likely to reduce their daily cigarette use compared to CG (p=.046). Sub-group analyses revealed that heavy smokers (FTND score ≥ 7) seemed to profit most in the EG regarding cigarette reduction. After 6 months, these positive effects had leveled out. No evidence was found that smoking cessation might jeopardize alcohol outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that alcohol-dependent smokers are interested in smoking interventions even during alcohol detoxification. CBT is promising in short-term smoking outcomes and in the approach of harm reduction, however, long-term effects are desirable. These findings underline the feasibility and the importance to provide smoking cessation interventions to patients in alcohol detoxification treatments.

Medical students' attention to multiple risk behaviors: a standardized patient examination

BACKGROUND

Risk behaviors tend to cluster, particularly among smokers, with negative health effects. To optimize patients' health and wellbeing, health care providers ideally would assess and intervene upon the multiple risks with which patients may present.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined medical students' skills in assessing and treating multiple risk behaviors.

DESIGN

Using a randomized experimental design, medical students' counseling interactions were evaluated with a standardized patient presenting with sexual health concerns and current tobacco use with varied problematic drinking status (alcohol-positive or alcohol-negative).

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred and fifty-six third-year medical students.

MAIN MEASURES

Student and standardized patient completed measures evaluated student knowledge, attitudes, and clinical performance.

KEY RESULTS

Overall, most students assessed tobacco use (85%); fewer assessed alcohol use (54%). Relative to the alcohol-negative case, students seeing the alcohol-positive case were less likely to assess sexually transmitted disease history (80% vs. 91%, p = 0.042), or patients' readiness to quit smoking (41% vs. 60%, p = 0.025), and endorsed greater attitudinal barriers to tobacco treatment (p = 0.030). Patient satisfaction was significantly lower for the alcohol-positive than the alcohol-negative case; clinical performance ratings moderated this relationship.

CONCLUSIONS

When presented with a case of multiple risks, medical students performed less effectively and received lower patient satisfaction ratings. Findings were moderated by students' overall clinical performance. Paradigm shifts are needed in medical education that emphasize assessment of multiple risks, new models of conceptualizing behavior change as a generalized process, and treatment of the whole patient for optimizing health outcomes.

The implementation of smoking cessation counseling in substance abuse treatment

Research on the implementation of smoking cessation counseling within substance abuse treatment organizations is limited. This study examines associations among counselors' implementation of therapy sessions dedicated to smoking cessation, organizational factors, and counselor-level variables. A two-level hierarchical linear model including organization- and counselor-level variables was estimated using survey data collected from 1,794 counselors working in 359 treatment organizations. Overall implementation of smoking cessation counseling was low. In the final model, implementation was positively associated with counselors' knowledge of the Public Health Service's clinical practice guideline, perceived managerial support, and belief that smoking cessation had a positive impact on recovery. Private versus public funding and presence of a formal smoking cessation program were organization-level variables which interacted with these counselor-level effects. These results highlight the importance of organizational contexts as well as counselors' knowledge and attitudes for effective implementation of smoking cessation counseling in substance abuse treatment organizations.

Neuroscience exposure and perceptions of client responsibility among addictions counselors

Members of the National Association of Alcoholism and Drug Abuse Counselors (n = 231) participated in a survey concerning their view of the role of personal responsibility in addictions treatment and its relation to their exposure to neuroscience (i.e., the amount to which members considered themselves familiar with current neuroscience research). We used the two-dimensional model of responsibility (Responsible/not responsible for development × Responsible/not responsible for recovery) proposed by P. Brickman et al. (1982) to guide our assessment of responsibility, thus inquiring about counselors' views of clients' responsibility for both the development of a substance-related addiction and its resolution. Findings suggest that counselors rate biological factors as most influential in the development of an addiction and assign clients less personal responsibility for the development of an addiction than for recovery from an addiction. Counselors' level of neuroscience exposure was negatively correlated with their ratings of client responsibility for the development of an addiction but positively correlated to ratings of client responsibility for recovery. This suggests that counselors are integrating neuroscientific findings with what is learned from other modes of enquiry in a way that diminishes the view that clients are responsible for addiction development but accentuates the view that clients are responsible for recovery. We explore reasons for why this is and why this approach may be beneficial.

Implementation of a tobacco-free regulation in substance use disorder treatment facilities

We assessed the impact of a statewide tobacco-free services regulation on facility administrators' attitudes and the integration of tobacco dependence treatment into substance use disorder services. We surveyed substance use disorder treatment facility administrators in New York before (n = 285) and after (n = 205) tobacco-free services regulation implementation about their attitudes, their perceptions of staff and patient attitudes, and the facilities' services. We analyzed data on admissions and tobacco treatment pharmacotherapy administration. We found increased tobacco screening and cessation services offered, increased use of tobacco pharmacotherapy, and increased support for tobacco-free campus policies. Although patient resistance was a challenge, administrators reported a decrease in patient resistance to tobacco-free policies. Patient admissions did not decrease after the regulation went into effect. Tobacco-free services regulations in substance use disorder treatment facilities can be feasibly implemented, which has the potential to decrease the extremely high rates of tobacco use among people with substance use disorders.

Good and Bad Times for Treating Cigarette Smoking in Drug Treatment

Most substance abuse treatment facilities do not routinely treat cigarette smoking even though most of their clients smoke and many will die from tobacco-related illness. This study is a secondary analysis of a national survey of the prevalence and type of tobacco treatment services available in methadone maintenance treatment. It presents qualitative and quantitative information on provider attitudes regarding tobacco treatment in drug treatment. One clinic leader (either a medical director, head nurse, or clinic director) from all 697 U.S. facilities was invited to participate in the study. Most (38%) clinic leaders thought the best time to treat patients for nicotine dependence was whenever the patient wanted treatment. One in four clinic leaders reported they or one of their staff had advised patients to delay quitting smoking cigarettes. Fewer (14%) believed that patients in some way benefited from cigarette smoking; these benefits included managing mood disturbances (calming, reducing anxiety, depression, stress, anger) and substituting for illicit drug abuse. This suggests that some providers might rely on cigarettes in lieu of psychotherapy or prescription medications to address patients' mood disorders such as depression, anger, and anxiety. One tactic for disseminating tobacco treatment in drug treatment might involve identifying the purported benefits of tobacco and training providers in alternative methods for delivering these benefits.

[Guidelines for smoking cessation - update 2010]

In 2005, the ÖGP (Austrian Society of Pneumology) worked out the first standards of smoking cessation. With many new therapies, it is timely to update the guidelines of smoking cessation. This time all relevant professionals who are active in smoking cessation in Austria worked together in a big consensus process, not only the diverse medical professionals such as internists, pneumologists, or gynecologists but also psychotherapists, psychologists, and nurses. The Austrian standards for smoking cessation is closely related to the Update for smoking cessation 2008 of the USDHHS (US Department of Health and Human Services) and the Cochrane Reports. Ten main recommendations for smoking cessation have been worked out. The guidelines for smoking cessation was reviewed by three international reviewers.

Sex differences in smoking cessation outcomes of a tailored program for individuals with substance use disorders and mental illness

Tobacco use is highly prevalent among individuals with a history of substance use disorders (SUD) and/or mental illness (MI). Despite evidence of differences in smoking cessation (SC) outcomes between women and men, few studies have formally evaluated sex differences among SUD and/or MI populations. For 258 participants (62% male, mean age=48.6 years) with an SUD and/or MI enrolled in a tobacco dependence clinic (TDC) program, we examined SC outcomes and compared men's and women's predictors of end-of-treatment abstinence. Individuals with an MI, social support for quitting, and a greater number of visits to the TDC program were more likely to be female; whereas males were characterized by having an SUD, older age, smoking a greater number of cigarettes per day, and having higher confidence in quitting smoking. In the intent-to-treat analysis, end-of-treatment smoking cessation was 32.2% (females=35.4% vs males=30.2, χ(2)=0.74, df=1, p=.390). Among females, baseline expired carbon monoxide (CO) level and a greater number of visits to the program were significantly predictive of SC; among males, having a history of alcohol, heroin and other opioids, and marijuana use were predictive of unsuccessful SC, whereas baseline expired CO level and a greater number of visits to the program were predictive of SC. These factors may be important in the design of enhanced tailored treatments and development of future SC programs for individuals with SUD and MI.

Stage-based interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

The transtheoretical model is the most widely known of several stage-based theories of behaviour. It proposes that smokers move through a discrete series of motivational stages before they quit successfully. These are precontemplation (no thoughts of quitting), contemplation (thinking about quitting), preparation (planning to quit in the next 30 days), action (quitting successfully for up to six months), and maintenance (no smoking for more than six months). According to this influential model, interventions which help people to stop smoking should be tailored to their stage of readiness to quit, and are designed to move them forward through subsequent stages to eventual success. People in the preparation and action stages of quitting would require different types of support from those in precontemplation or contemplation.

OBJECTIVES

Our primary objective was to test the effectiveness of stage-based interventions in helping smokers to quit.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's specialised register for trials, using the terms ('stage* of change', 'transtheoretical model*', 'trans-theoretical model*, 'precaution adoption model*', 'health action model', 'processes of change questionnaire*', 'readiness to change', 'tailor*') and 'smoking' in the title or abstract, or as keywords. The latest search was in August 2010.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials, which compared stage-based interventions with non-stage-based controls, with 'usual care' or with assessment only. We excluded trials which did not report a minimum follow-up period of six months from start of treatment, and those which measured stage of change but did not modify their intervention in the light of it.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data in duplicate on the participants, the dose and duration of intervention, the outcome measures, the randomization procedure, concealment of allocation, and completeness of follow up.The main outcome was abstinence from smoking for at least six months. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence, and preferred biochemically validated rates where reported. Where appropriate we performed meta-analysis to estimate a pooled risk ratio, using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 41 trials (>33,000 participants) which met our inclusion criteria. Four trials, which directly compared the same intervention in stage-based and standard versions, found no clear advantage for the staging component. Stage-based versus standard self-help materials (two trials) gave a relative risk (RR) of 0.93 (95% CI 0.62 to 1.39). Stage-based versus standard counselling (two trials) gave a relative risk of 1.00 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.22). Six trials of stage-based self-help systems versus any standard self-help support demonstrated a benefit for the staged groups, with an RR of 1.27 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.59). Twelve trials comparing stage-based self help with 'usual care' or assessment-only gave an RR of 1.32 (95% CI 1.17 to 1.48). Thirteen trials of stage-based individual counselling versus any control condition gave an RR of 1.24 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.42). These findings are consistent with the proven effectiveness of these interventions in their non-stage-based versions. The evidence was unclear for telephone counselling, interactive computer programmes or training of doctors or lay supporters. This uncertainty may be due in part to smaller numbers of trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on four trials using direct comparisons, stage-based self-help interventions (expert systems and/or tailored materials) and individual counselling were neither more nor less effective than their non-stage-based equivalents. Thirty-one trials of stage-based self help or counselling interventions versus any control condition demonstrated levels of effectiveness which were comparable with their non-stage-based counterparts. Providing these forms of practical support to those trying to quit appears to be more productive than not intervening. However, the additional value of adapting the intervention to the smoker's stage of change is uncertain. The evidence is not clear for other types of staged intervention, including telephone counselling, interactive computer programmes and training of physicians or lay supporters. The evidence does not support the restriction of quitting advice and encouragement only to those smokers perceived to be in the preparation and action stages.

The tobacco-dependence clinic: intensive tobacco-dependence treatment in an addiction services outpatient setting

We present outcomes from an intensive tobacco-dependence treatment program for addiction services clients at three different sites. Data from 202 participants were analyzed. For individuals who completed the program, the abstinence rate was 43%. Not having a primary substance use history and a lower carbon monoxide (CO) level at intake predicted abstinence; whereas being female, the particular site of intervention, receiving both nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and oral medication, and having a lower CO level at baseline predicted program completion. Drug treatment clients can successfully quit smoking at rates similar to the general population when given access to intensive tobacco-dependence treatment. 

Failure to treat tobacco use in mental health and addiction treatment settings: a form of harm reduction?

In mental health and addiction treatment settings, failure to treat tobacco dependence has been rationalized by some as a clinical approach to harm reduction. That is, tobacco use is viewed as a less harmful alternative to alcohol or illicit drug use and/or other self-harm behaviors. This paper examines the impact of providers' failure to treat tobacco use on patients' alcohol and illicit drug use and associated high-risk behaviors. The weight of the evidence in the literature indicates: (1) tobacco use is a leading cause of death in patients with psychiatric illness or addictive disorders; (2) tobacco use is associated with worsened substance abuse treatment outcomes, whereas treatment of tobacco dependence supports long-term sobriety; (3) tobacco use is associated with increased (not decreased) depressive symptoms and suicidal risk behavior; (4) tobacco use adversely impacts psychiatric treatment; (5) tobacco use is a lethal and ineffective long-term coping strategy for managing stress, and (6) treatment of tobacco use does not harm mental health recovery. Failure to treat tobacco dependence in mental health and addiction treatment settings is not consistent with a harm reduction model. In contrast, emerging evidence indicates treatment of tobacco dependence may even improve addiction treatment and mental health outcomes. Providers in mental health and addiction treatment settings have an ethical duty to intervene on patients' tobacco use and provide available evidence-based treatments.

Psychiatric disorders in smokers seeking treatment for tobacco dependence: relations with tobacco dependence and cessation

OBJECTIVE

The present research examined the relation of psychiatric disorders to tobacco dependence and cessation outcomes.

METHOD

Data were collected from 1,504 smokers (58.2% women; 83.9% White; mean age = 44.67 years, SD = 11.08) making an aided smoking cessation attempt as part of a clinical trial. Psychiatric diagnoses were determined with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview structured clinical interview. Tobacco dependence was assessed with the Fagerström Test of Nicotine Dependence (FTND) and the Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives (WISDM).

RESULTS

Diagnostic groups included those who were never diagnosed, those who had ever been diagnosed (at any time, including in the past year), and those with past-year diagnoses (with or without prior diagnosis). Some diagnostic groups had lower follow-up abstinence rates than did the never diagnosed group (ps < .05). At 8 weeks after quitting, strong associations were found between cessation outcome and both past-year mood disorder and ever diagnosed anxiety disorder. At 6 months after quitting, those ever diagnosed with an anxiety disorder (OR = .72, p = .02) and those ever diagnosed with more than one psychiatric diagnosis (OR = .74, p = .03) had lower abstinence rates. The diagnostic categories did not differ in smoking heaviness or the FTND, but they did differ in dependence motives assessed with the WISDM.

CONCLUSION

Information on recent or lifetime psychiatric disorders may help clinicians gauge relapse risk and may suggest dependence motives that are particularly relevant to affected patients. These findings also illustrate the importance of using multidimensional tobacco dependence assessments.