跳至主要内容
临床试验/NCT02804880
NCT02804880已完成不适用

Building Capacity and Promoting Smoking Cessation in the Community Via "Quit to Win" Contest 2016: a Single-blind Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial on High Intensity Active Referral and Simple Text Messaging to Achieve Abstinence

The University of Hong Kong1 个研究点 分布在 1 个国家目标入组 1,200 人开始时间: 2016年6月1日最近更新:
适应症
干预措施

试验速览

阶段
不适用
状态
已完成
入组人数
1,200
试验地点
1
主要终点
smoking quit rate change from baseline at 3-month follow-up

研究概览

简要总结

The present study will examine (1) the effectiveness of personalised active referral to smoking cessation (SC) services and text messaging on encouraging SC services (2) explore the use of CBPR model to build capacity and to engage community partners in taking on this important public health issue for sustainability in the community. In addition, process evaluation will be conducted to assess the effectiveness of the recruitment activity and how it is linked with the overall program outcomes.

详细描述

Although smoking prevalence is decreasing in Hong Kong, there are still 641,300 daily smokers (10.5%; Census and Statistics Department, 2015) and half will be killed by smoking (Lam, 2012) which accounts for over 7,000 deaths per year (Lam, Ho, Hedley, Mak, & Peto, 2001). Smoking also accounts for a large amount of medical cost, long-term care and productivity loss of US$688 million (0.6% Hong Kong GDP) (Census & Statistics Department, 2001; McGhee et al., 2006) . Smoking is a highly addictive behavior and it is difficult for smokers with strong nicotine dependence to quit without assistance. On the other hand, reaching and helping the many smokers who have no intention to quit is a challenge, because they are unlikely to seek professional help from smoking cessation services.

The Quit and Win programme provides an opportunity to reach and encourage a large group of smokers to make quit attempt and maintain abstinence. The Quit and Win model posits that smokers participating in the contest will have higher motivation to quit with incentives and better social support (Cahill & Perera, 2011). Studies have found that such quitting contests or incentive programs appeared to reach a large number of smokers and demonstrated a significantly higher quit rate for the quit and win group than for the control group (Cahill & Perera, 2015).

Smoking cessation services in Hong Kong are under-used with most of the adult daily smokers (79.6%) who had never used smoking cessation services (Census and Statistics Department, 2015). Among these smokers, only 2.4% were willing to use the services. Our previous RCT in previous QTW Contest 2015 evaluated the effects of low-intensity active referral (LAR) vs. very brief general SC advice (VBA) on quitting. LAR included onsite AWARD counselling and collection of smokers' personal contact information for SC services providers to connect with the smokers. Findings at 3-month follow-up of this RCT suggested the LAR intervention resulted in significantly higher self-reported quit rate than VBA in the control group (18.7% vs 14.0%. P<0.001).

It is warranted to evaluate if a higher intensity active referral (HAR) and/or text messaging on encouraging SC services use can achieve even higher quit rate when compared with only VBA is given in the control group. Noted the use of text-messaging is the cheaper method than HAR. By using the same design of control group in QTW 2015, we can combine and compare the 2 years QTW intervention of HAR, LAR and text-messaging using network meta-analysis. This will contribute to finding out a more cost-effective way to increase the quit rate through using SC services.

Therefore, the present study will examine (1) the effectiveness of personalised active referral to smoking cessation (SC) services and text messaging on encouraging SC services (2) explore the use of CBPR model to build capacity and to engage community partners in taking on this important public health issue for sustainability in the community. In addition, process evaluation will be conducted to assess the effectiveness of the recruitment activity and how it is linked with the overall program outcomes.

研究设计

研究类型
Interventional
分配方式
Randomized
干预模型
Parallel
主要目的
Health Services Research
盲法
Single (Participant)

入排标准

年龄范围
18 Years 至 —(Adult, Older Adult)
性别
All
接受健康志愿者

入选标准

  • Hong Kong residents aged 18 or above
  • Smoke at least 1 cigarette per day in the past 3 months
  • Able to communicate in Cantonese
  • Exhaled carbon monoxide (CO) 4 ppm or above, assessed by a validated CO smokerlyzer
  • Have Intention to quit / reduce smoking

排除标准

  • Smokers who have difficulties (either physical or cognitive condition) to communicate
  • Currently following other smoking cessation programs

研究组 & 干预措施

Group B

Experimental

LTM + AWARD + Referral Card + A4 leaflet

干预措施: LTM (Behavioral)

Group B

Experimental

LTM + AWARD + Referral Card + A4 leaflet

干预措施: AWARD (Behavioral)

Group B

Experimental

LTM + AWARD + Referral Card + A4 leaflet

干预措施: Referral card (Other)

Group B

Experimental

LTM + AWARD + Referral Card + A4 leaflet

干预措施: A4 leaflet (Other)

Group A

Experimental

HAR + AWARD + Referral Card + A4 leaflet

干预措施: HAR (Behavioral)

Group A

Experimental

HAR + AWARD + Referral Card + A4 leaflet

干预措施: AWARD (Behavioral)

Group A

Experimental

HAR + AWARD + Referral Card + A4 leaflet

干预措施: Referral card (Other)

Group A

Experimental

HAR + AWARD + Referral Card + A4 leaflet

干预措施: A4 leaflet (Other)

Group C

Active Comparator

Brief advice + 12-page booklet

干预措施: Brief advice (Behavioral)

Group C

Active Comparator

Brief advice + 12-page booklet

干预措施: 12-page booklet (Other)

结局指标

主要结局

smoking quit rate change from baseline at 3-month follow-up

时间窗: 3-month follow-up

The primary outcomes are self-reported 7-day point prevalence (pp) quit rate at 3 month among the three groups

smoking quit rate change from baseline at 6-month follow-up

时间窗: 6-month follow-up

The primary outcomes are self-reported 7-day point prevalence (pp) quit rate at 3 month among the three groups

次要结局

  • Biochemical validated quit rate(6-month follow-up)
  • Smoking reduction rate change from baseline at 3-month follow-up(3-month follow-up)
  • Smoking reduction rate change from baseline at 6-month follow-up(6-month follow-up)
  • Smoking quit attempt change from baseline at 3-month follow-up(3-month follow-up)
  • Smoking quit attempt change from baseline at 6-month follow-up(6-month follow-up)
  • quit rate for all subjects change from baseline at 3- and 6-month follow-up(3 and 6 months follow-up)
  • Reduction rate for all subjects change from baseline at 3- and 6-month follow-up(3 and 6 months follow-up)
  • Use of smoking cessation service(3 and 6 months follow-up)
  • Use of smoking cessation service for all subjects(3 and 6 months follow-up)

研究者

申办方类型
Other
责任方
Principal Investigator
主要研究者

Dr. Wang Man-Ping

Assistant Professor

The University of Hong Kong

研究点 (1)

Loading locations...

相似试验