测试针对烟草大麻共用者的简短戒烟热线干预:随机对照试点研究。

IF 2.1 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Tobacco Use Insights Pub Date : 2024-06-12 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/1179173X241261302
Kelly M Carpenter, Denise D Walker, Kristina Mullis, Helena M Berlin, Etta Short, Harold S Javitz, Beatriz H Carlini
{"title":"测试针对烟草大麻共用者的简短戒烟热线干预:随机对照试点研究。","authors":"Kelly M Carpenter, Denise D Walker, Kristina Mullis, Helena M Berlin, Etta Short, Harold S Javitz, Beatriz H Carlini","doi":"10.1177/1179173X241261302","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Tobacco cannabis co-use is common and becoming more prevalent. Frequent and heavy users of cannabis may struggle to quit smoking. Quitlines offer free cessation treatment in the United States and 25% of quitline callers may also be cannabis users. The present paper describes a randomized pilot study of a tailored intervention for cannabis and cigarette co-users. The intervention combines the quitline smoking cessation treatment with a motivational enhancement therapy-based cannabis intervention. <b>Methods:</b> The randomized pilot study was conducted within four state-funded quitlines with quitline coaches as interventionists. 102 quitline callers who were cannabis and cigarette co-users were randomized to receive treatment as usual (TAU) or the new Quitline Check-Up (QLCU) intervention. Outcomes were collected 90 days post-randomization. Primary outcomes included feasibility and acceptability of delivering the QLCU in the quitline setting. Secondary outcomes included 7-day point prevalence tobacco abstinence, past 30-day cannabis use, and Cannabis Use Disorder Identification Test scores. <b>Results:</b> Study participants were heavy cannabis users, averaging 25 days of use in the past 30; nearly 70% used at a level considered hazardous. Fidelity ratings indicated coaches were successful at delivering the intervention. Treatment engagement was high for both groups (TAU m = 3.4 calls; QLCU m = 3.6 calls) as was treatment satisfaction. Intent-to-treat quit rates (with survey non-responders classified as smokers) were 28.6% for the TAU control group and 24.5% for the QLCU group (<i>P</i> = .45). <b>Discussion:</b> Hazardous cannabis use rates were high in this sample of tobacco cannabis co-users calling quitlines to quit smoking. The intervention for co-users was acceptable and feasible to deliver. No improvements in tobacco cessation outcomes were observed. Pragmatic intervention development within a real-world clinical setting can streamline the intervention development process. More research is needed on tobacco cannabis co-users and who can benefit from a tailored intervention. Registered: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04737772, February 4, 2021.</p>","PeriodicalId":43361,"journal":{"name":"Tobacco Use Insights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11171437/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Testing a Brief Quitline Intervention for Tobacco Cannabis Co-Users: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.\",\"authors\":\"Kelly M Carpenter, Denise D Walker, Kristina Mullis, Helena M Berlin, Etta Short, Harold S Javitz, Beatriz H Carlini\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1179173X241261302\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Tobacco cannabis co-use is common and becoming more prevalent. Frequent and heavy users of cannabis may struggle to quit smoking. Quitlines offer free cessation treatment in the United States and 25% of quitline callers may also be cannabis users. The present paper describes a randomized pilot study of a tailored intervention for cannabis and cigarette co-users. The intervention combines the quitline smoking cessation treatment with a motivational enhancement therapy-based cannabis intervention. <b>Methods:</b> The randomized pilot study was conducted within four state-funded quitlines with quitline coaches as interventionists. 102 quitline callers who were cannabis and cigarette co-users were randomized to receive treatment as usual (TAU) or the new Quitline Check-Up (QLCU) intervention. Outcomes were collected 90 days post-randomization. Primary outcomes included feasibility and acceptability of delivering the QLCU in the quitline setting. Secondary outcomes included 7-day point prevalence tobacco abstinence, past 30-day cannabis use, and Cannabis Use Disorder Identification Test scores. <b>Results:</b> Study participants were heavy cannabis users, averaging 25 days of use in the past 30; nearly 70% used at a level considered hazardous. Fidelity ratings indicated coaches were successful at delivering the intervention. Treatment engagement was high for both groups (TAU m = 3.4 calls; QLCU m = 3.6 calls) as was treatment satisfaction. Intent-to-treat quit rates (with survey non-responders classified as smokers) were 28.6% for the TAU control group and 24.5% for the QLCU group (<i>P</i> = .45). <b>Discussion:</b> Hazardous cannabis use rates were high in this sample of tobacco cannabis co-users calling quitlines to quit smoking. The intervention for co-users was acceptable and feasible to deliver. No improvements in tobacco cessation outcomes were observed. Pragmatic intervention development within a real-world clinical setting can streamline the intervention development process. More research is needed on tobacco cannabis co-users and who can benefit from a tailored intervention. Registered: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04737772, February 4, 2021.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":43361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Tobacco Use Insights\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11171437/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Tobacco Use Insights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1179173X241261302\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tobacco Use Insights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1179173X241261302","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:烟草大麻共用很常见,而且越来越普遍。经常大量吸食大麻的人可能很难戒烟。在美国,戒烟热线提供免费戒烟治疗,25% 的戒烟热线来电者可能也是大麻使用者。本文介绍了一项针对大麻和香烟共同使用者的定制干预的随机试点研究。该干预将戒烟热线戒烟治疗与基于动机增强疗法的大麻干预相结合。研究方法:随机试点研究在四个州资助的戒烟热线内进行,由戒烟热线辅导员担任干预人员。102 位同时吸食大麻和香烟的戒烟热线来电者被随机分配接受常规治疗(TAU)或新的戒烟热线检查(QLCU)干预。结果在随机后 90 天收集。主要结果包括在戒烟热线环境中提供 QLCU 的可行性和可接受性。次要结果包括 7 天点戒烟率、过去 30 天大麻使用情况和大麻使用障碍鉴定测试得分。研究结果研究参与者是大麻的重度使用者,过去 30 天内平均吸食 25 天;近 70% 的吸食量达到了危险水平。保真度评级表明,教练成功实施了干预措施。两组的治疗参与度都很高(TAU m = 3.4 call;QLCU m = 3.6 call),治疗满意度也很高。TAU对照组的意向戒烟率(调查未应答者被归类为吸烟者)为28.6%,QLCU组为24.5%(P = .45)。讨论:在致电戒烟热线戒烟的烟草大麻共同使用者样本中,大麻的有害使用率很高。对共同使用者的干预是可接受的,也是可行的。戒烟效果未见改善。在真实的临床环境中进行务实的干预开发可以简化干预开发过程。需要对烟草大麻共同使用者以及哪些人可以从定制干预中受益进行更多研究。已注册:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04737772,2021 年 2 月 4 日。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Testing a Brief Quitline Intervention for Tobacco Cannabis Co-Users: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.

Background: Tobacco cannabis co-use is common and becoming more prevalent. Frequent and heavy users of cannabis may struggle to quit smoking. Quitlines offer free cessation treatment in the United States and 25% of quitline callers may also be cannabis users. The present paper describes a randomized pilot study of a tailored intervention for cannabis and cigarette co-users. The intervention combines the quitline smoking cessation treatment with a motivational enhancement therapy-based cannabis intervention. Methods: The randomized pilot study was conducted within four state-funded quitlines with quitline coaches as interventionists. 102 quitline callers who were cannabis and cigarette co-users were randomized to receive treatment as usual (TAU) or the new Quitline Check-Up (QLCU) intervention. Outcomes were collected 90 days post-randomization. Primary outcomes included feasibility and acceptability of delivering the QLCU in the quitline setting. Secondary outcomes included 7-day point prevalence tobacco abstinence, past 30-day cannabis use, and Cannabis Use Disorder Identification Test scores. Results: Study participants were heavy cannabis users, averaging 25 days of use in the past 30; nearly 70% used at a level considered hazardous. Fidelity ratings indicated coaches were successful at delivering the intervention. Treatment engagement was high for both groups (TAU m = 3.4 calls; QLCU m = 3.6 calls) as was treatment satisfaction. Intent-to-treat quit rates (with survey non-responders classified as smokers) were 28.6% for the TAU control group and 24.5% for the QLCU group (P = .45). Discussion: Hazardous cannabis use rates were high in this sample of tobacco cannabis co-users calling quitlines to quit smoking. The intervention for co-users was acceptable and feasible to deliver. No improvements in tobacco cessation outcomes were observed. Pragmatic intervention development within a real-world clinical setting can streamline the intervention development process. More research is needed on tobacco cannabis co-users and who can benefit from a tailored intervention. Registered: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04737772, February 4, 2021.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Tobacco Use Insights
Tobacco Use Insights PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
自引率
4.50%
发文量
32
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Predictors of Successful Tobacco Cessation After Receiving an E-Cigarette Based Smoking Cessation Intervention. Prospective Association Between Tobacco Use and at-Risk Alcohol Consumption Among Swedish Adolescents: Outlining the Influence of Tobacco Product, Frequency of Use and Gender in the LoRDIA Cohort. The Irish Smoking Ban Legislation, Astride the Celtic Tiger, Trail-Blazed a Can-Do Tobacco Control Culture. Cigarette Smoking, Mental Health, Depression, Maryland Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey, 2020. Smoking Status and Premature Death Among Japanese Rural Community-Dwelling Persons.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1