Effectiveness of a Telephone-Based Motivational Intervention for Smoking Cessation in Patients With Crohn Disease: A Randomized, Open-Label, Controlled Clinical Trial.
Ester Navarro Correal, Francesc Casellas Jorda, Natalia Borruel Sainz and 6 others
PMID 34269705WHAT IT FOUND
Nurse-led telephone motivational calls, added to initial brief cessation advice and a leaflet, did not produce a clear difference in quitting motivation or stage of change compared with usual care at 1 year.
Key findings
01At 1 year, the primary outcomes of motivation to quit and stage of change did not differ significantly between groups; 28 (41.8%) in the intervention group and 21 (30.9%) in the control group changed stage.
02At study end, 23 patients stopped smoking; 20.9% in the intervention group and 13.2% in the control group were nonsmokers, but this difference was not statistically significant (p = .237).
03Of the 23 patients who stopped smoking, 16 reported quitting on their own, 4 used pharmacological treatment, and 3 used alternative methods.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study was small, and 9 of 144 randomized patients were lost to follow-up. It was open-label, so patients and researchers knew which group each patient was in. All patients received initial brief cessation advice and a leaflet before randomization, so the separate effect of the repeated motivational calls cannot be separated. The control group did not receive the same number of telephone contacts without cessation advice. Only patients with home Internet access and an e-mail account were eligible. The primary outcomes were motivation and stage of change, not smoking cessation, so the quit-rate finding is secondary.
Declared interests
No conflicts of interest were declared.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that the repeated motivational calls alone cause more quitting. All patients received initial brief cessation advice and a leaflet, and the study cannot separate the contribution of any single component. The 20.9% nonsmoker percentage in the intervention group versus 13.2% in controls was not statistically significant (p = .237).