ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This study compares participant' sretention in three phases of smoking cessation interventions, one provided in a health clinic and the subsequent two in community-based settings. METHODS: Smoking cessation interventions were conducted in three phases from 2008 to 2015 in two underserved urban communities with low socioeconomic profiles and high rates of smoking (n = 951). Phase I was conducted in a clinic; Phases II and III were conducted in community venues. In Phases II and III, incremental changes were made based on lessons learned from the previous phases. Retention (attending six or more sessions) was the primary predictor of cessation and was analyzed while controlling for associated factors including age, gender, race, employment, education, and nicotine dependence. RESULTS: Retention increased substantially over the three phases, with rates for attending six or more sessions of 13.8%, 51.9%, and 67.9% in Phases I, II, and III, respectively. Retention was significantly higher in community settings than in the clinic setting (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 6.7; 95% confidence intervals [CI] = 4.6, 9.8). In addition to the intervention in community venues, predictors of retention included age and unemployment. Higher retention was significantly associated with higher quit rates (adjusted OR = 2.4; 95% CI = 1.5, 3.8). CONCLUSIONS: Conducting the intervention in community settings using trained peer motivators rather than health-care providers resulted in significantly higher retention and smoking cessation rates. This was due in part to the ability to tailor cessation classes in the community for specific populations and improving the quality of the intervention based on feedback from participants and community partners.
ABSTRACT
Smoking disproportionally affects minority and underserved populations but only a handful of interventions tailored to these populations have demonstrated effectiveness in real-life situations. We use community-based participatory research (CBPR) to test two interventions delivered by a community-based health care center. METHODS: Participants randomly assigned to individual or group-based intervention for smoking cessation (N= 400). Both included cessation counseling and health education, a contingency behavioral program, Nicotine Replacement Therapy, and health care for other comorbidities. Smoking cessation was verified by expired carbon monoxide at the end of the program. RESULTS: No differences were observed between the two treatment modalities (8.9% and 8.6%, respectively). Those with greater attendance had 1.4 times better odds of cessation per additional session. Retention and follow up proved to be challenging with this population.
Subject(s)
Community-Based Participatory Research , Counseling , Smoking Cessation , Adult , Breath Tests , Carbon Monoxide , Female , Humans , Male , Smoking , Urban PopulationABSTRACT
Tobacco use remains a major public health problem in the U.S. disproportionately affecting underserved communities. The Communities Engaged and Advocating for a Smoke-free Environment (CEASE) initiative is an intervention to address the problem using a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach. This study compares quit rates in a peer-led community-based intervention with those achieved in a clinical setting. The intervention consisted of three Phases. Phase I (n = 404) was a clinic-based trial comparing two types of counseling. Phase II (n = 398) and Phase III (n = 163) interventions were conducted in community venues by trained Peer Motivators. Quit rates at 12-week follow-up increased from 9.4 % in Phase I (clinic-based) to an average of 23.7 % in Phases II and III combined (community-based). The main predictor of smoking cessation was delivery of services in community settings (OR 2.6, 95 % CI 1.7-4.2) while controlling for possible confounders. A community-based approach can significantly guide and improve effectiveness and acceptability of smoking cessation services designed for low-income urban populations. In addition, CBPR can result in better recruitment and retention of the participants.
