Promoting Smoking Cessation in the Community Via QTW 2015

Smoking Cessation Intervention Clinical Trial

Official title:

Building Capacity and Promoting Smoking Cessation in the Community Via "Quit to Win" Contest 2015: a Randomized Controlled Trial on Brief Intervention (AWARD Model) and Active Referral to Smoking Cessation Services

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT02539875
• Other study ID #: QTW2015
• Status: Completed
• Phase: N/A
• First received: July 22, 2015
• Last updated: October 24, 2017
• Start date: June 1, 2015
• Est. completion date: April 30, 2017

Study information

• Verified date: November 2016
• Source: The University of Hong Kong
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

Although smoking prevalence is decreasing in Hong Kong, there are still 648,800 daily smokers 10.8% (Census and Statistics Department, 2013) 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, 2008).

Smoking cessation services in Hong Kong are under-used with more than half (60.9%) adult daily smokers who had never used smoking cessation services (Census and Statistics Department, 2013). Among these smokers only 9.6% were willing to use the services. Existing services mostly require self-initiation to seek the services but smokers general lack the will power of initiation. Active referral will help overcome the barriers of self-initiation. There is preliminary evidence that active referral of smokers to smoking cessation hotline services may increase likelihood of smoking abstinence at 12-month follow-up compared with no active referrals (Borland et al., 2008). A recent study has also reported that individuals who used the community-based referral were also more likely to quit than those who did not (43.6% vs 15.3%, P<0.001) (Haas et al., 2015).

Therefore, the present study will examine (1) effectiveness of the active referral and AWARD approaches, (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.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 1306
• Est. completion date: April 30, 2017
• Est. primary completion date: April 30, 2016
• Accepts healthy volunteers: No
• Gender: All
• Age group: 18 Years and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• 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

Exclusion Criteria:

• Smokers who have difficulties (either physical or cognitive condition) to communicate

• Currently following other smoking cessation programs

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Smoking Cessation Intervention

Intervention

Behavioral:
• AWARD and brief leaflet/ Referral leaflet and active referral/ Smoking cessation booklet and general advices
Use AWARD and brief leaflet/ Referral leaflet and active referral/ Smoking cessation booklet and general advices interventions to achieve smoking abstinence

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
China	The Hong Kong Council on Smoking and Health (COSH)	Hong Kong

Sponsors (2)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
The University of Hong Kong	Hong Kong Council on Smoking and Health (COSH)

Country where clinical trial is conducted

China, 

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	smoking quit rate change from baseline at 3-month follow-up	The primary outcomes are self-reported 7-day point prevalence (pp) quit rate at 3 and 6 months among the two groups	3-month follow-up
Primary	smoking quit rate change from baseline at 6-month follow-up	The primary outcomes are self-reported 7-day point prevalence (pp) quit rate	6-month follow-up
Secondary	Biochemical validated quit rate	biochemically validated quit rates at 3 month in the two groups	3-month follow-up
Secondary	Biochemical validated quit rate	biochemically validated quit rates at 6 month in the two groups	6-month follow-up
Secondary	Smoking reduction rate change from baseline at 3-month follow-up	rate of smoking reduction by at least half of baseline amount in the two groups	3-month follow-up
Secondary	Smoking reduction rate change from baseline at 6-month follow-up	rate of smoking reduction by at least half of baseline amount in the two groups	6-month follow-up
Secondary	Smoking quit attempt change from baseline at 3-month follow-up	number of quit attempts at 3 month among the two groups	3-month follow-up
Secondary	Smoking quit attempt change from baseline at 6-month follow-up	number of quit attempts at 6 month among the two groups	6-month follow-up
Secondary	quit rate for all subjects change from baseline at 3-month follow-up	the above cessation and reduction outcomes of all subjects participating in Quit to Win contest 2015	3-month follow-up
Secondary	Reduction rate for all subjects change from baseline at 3-month follow-up	the above cessation and reduction outcomes of all subjects participating in Quit to Win contest 2015	3-month follow-up
Secondary	quit rate for all subjects change from baseline at 6-month follow-up	the above cessation and reduction outcomes of all subjects participating in Quit to Win contest 2015	6-month follow-up
Secondary	Reduction rate for all subjects change from baseline at 6-month follow-up	the above cessation and reduction outcomes of all subjects participating in Quit to Win contest 2015	6-month follow-up
Secondary	quit rate for all subjects change from baseline at 12-month follow-up	the above cessation and reduction outcomes of all subjects participating in Quit to Win contest 2015	12-month follow-up
Secondary	Reduction rate for all subjects change from baseline at 12-month follow-up	the above cessation and reduction outcomes of all subjects participating in Quit to Win contest 2015	12-month follow-up