Who enrolls in a self-help cessation program for smokeless tobacco?

To further our understanding of the representativeness of the smokeless tobacco (SLT) user recruited to various treatment settings, and to suggest gaps in services available to SLT users, we first compared participants who enrolled in a self-help cessation program with two samples of nontreatment-seeking SLT users: SLT users identified through a random digit dialing (RDD) survey, and SLT users who came to 1 of 75 dental practices for a routine cleaning visit. We found that those in the self-help SLT cessation program were older, more educated, more likely to have made a serious quit attempt, and used more SLT weekly than those who did not seek treatment. Secondly, we compared SLT users seeking treatment in three different treatment settings varying in accessibility and intensity: self-help study participants, SLT users enrolled in a clinic-based study, and callers to the California Help Line for SLT cessation. Participants differed across the three studies on demographics, some measures of dependence, and history of SLT use.

Conscientiousness, perceived risk, and risk-reduction behaviors: a preliminary study.

Participants (N = 343) from an Oregon community completed surveys at baseline, 3 months, and 12 months to assess personality, the perceived health risk of radon in combination with smoking, and changes in smoking behavior. Conscientiousness predicted instituting a more restrictive household smoking rule (p < .01), and perceived risk predicted reduction in cigarettes smoked per day for men (p < .001). Perceived risk predicted a reduction in the proportion of cigarettes smoked in the home for those who had high (p < .05) but not low or moderate levels of Conscientiousness, a dimension in one personality model. The results demonstrate the importance of Conscientiousness in the prediction of health behavior, particularly behavior that affects others as well as oneself.

Radon and cigarette smoking: perceptions of this synergistic health risk.

Past approaches to the measurement of the perceived risk of combined hazards have failed to demonstrate awareness of synergy (S. E. Hampson et al., 1998; D. Hermand, E. Mullet, & B. Coutelle, 1995; D. Hermand, E. Mullet, & S. Lavieville, 1997). Respondents (N = 650) were provided with information about the synergistic risk of lung cancer from the combination of smoking and radon, and their risk perceptions were assessed on two occasions. At Time 1, using Likert-type scales, there was no evidence of synergistic risk perception. At Time 2, using a scale based on the appraisal of relative risk with anchors allowing for the expression of synergy, the combined hazard of radon and smoking was rated as significantly more of a health risk than the single hazards. The findings are discussed in terms of methodological issues in assessing synergistic risk.

A self-help cessation program for smokeless tobacco users: comparison of two interventions.

While the use of smokeless tobacco products has increased, there has been a paucity of research evaluating interventions to help users quit. This study is the first large-scale randomized trial evaluating two levels of self-help cessation intervention with adult smokeless tobacco (SLT) users. Smokeless users in five Northwest states were recruited to call a toll-free number and 1069 users were randomized to receive one of two interventions, Manual Only (MAN) or Assisted Self-Help (ASH), who received a video and two support phone calls in addition to the manual. The study demonstrated that low-cost minimal interventions done by mail and phone can help a sizable proportion of SLT users quit both SLT and all tobacco use. Follow-up data at 6 months showed that subjects in the ASH condition had a significantly higher quit rate for both smokeless (23.4% vs. 18.4%, p < 0.05) and all tobacco use (21.1% vs. 16.5%, p < 0.05), using an intent-to-treat model. Further analysis revealed that use of the recommended cessation procedures mediated the effect of intervention condition on outcomes. This may be the result of phone counselors getting subjects to carry out behavioral cessation procedures. Public health implications for this intervention are discussed.

Evaluation of a dental office tobacco cessation program: effects on smokeless tobacco use.

We describe a randomized trial designed to evaluate the effectiveness of a smokeless tobacco cessation intervention delivered by dental hygienists as part of a patient's regularly scheduled cleaning visit. Seventy-five practices were randomized to continue their usual care (n=25; 239 smokeless tobacco using patients enrolled) or to receive training to provide a tobacco cessation intervention (n=50; 394 smokeless tobacco using patients enrolled). Patient reports indicated that the training program was successful in getting hygienists to implement the intervention. The intervention produced a strong effect on sustained quitting for smokeless tobacco users but had no impact on secondary outcomes, including unsuccessful quit attempts, future intent to quit using smokeless tobacco, and change in readiness to quit using. Frequency of smokeless tobacco use and receipt of specific components of the intervention, including the video and written materials, predicted sustained cessation. Since this intervention was delivered by dental hygienists as part of a patient's regularly scheduled cleaning visit, it is easily disseminable.

Using the hygiene visit to deliver a tobacco cessation program: results of a randomized clinical trial.

To examine the effectiveness of advising patients who use tobacco to quit, the authors conducted a randomized clinical trial to test a brief office-based intervention with all tobacco users in 75 fee-for-service dental practices in Oregon. The authors found that the dental hygienist-delivered intervention was effective in getting smokeless tobacco users to quit at three and 12 months and to sustain abstinence at both three and 12 months. They found that the program was not effective for cigarette smokers. The authors discuss the public health implications of program dissemination and widespread program adoption.