full-text ►

Cessation Outcomes Among Quitline Callers in Three States During a National Tobacco Education Campaign

Cessation Outcomes Among Quitline Callers in Three States During a National Tobacco Education Campaign

ORIGINAL RESEARCH — Volume 12 — July 16, 2015

Katrina A. Vickerman, PhD; Lei Zhang, PhD; Ann Malarcher, PhD; Paul Mowery, MA; Chelsea Nash

Suggested citation for this article: Vickerman KA, Zhang L, Malarcher A, Mowery P, Nash C. Cessation Outcomes Among Quitline Callers in Three States During a National Tobacco Education Campaign. Prev Chronic Dis 2015;12:150024. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5888/pcd12.150024.

PEER REVIEWED

On this Page

• Abstract
• Introduction
• Methods
• Results
• Discussion
• Acknowledgments
• Author Information
• References
• Tables

Abstract

Introduction

Antismoking mass media campaigns, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Tips from Former Smokers (Tips) campaign, increase the number of tobacco users calling tobacco quitlines. Few studies have investigated long-term tobacco use cessation for callers during antismoking media campaigns. Studies have suggested that callers during campaigns may be less committed to quitting and have lower quit rates. This study examines tobacco user cessation outcomes 7 months after quitline enrollment during the 2012 Tips campaign (March 19 through June 10, 2012).

Methods

We analyzed data for 715 tobacco users who enrolled in the Nebraska, North Carolina, or Texas state quitline multiple-call programs during the 2012 Tips campaign and responded to a 7-month postenrollment survey (38.5% survey response rate). We used multivariable logistic regression analyses to determine whether 7-day and 30-day point prevalence abstinence rates 7 months after enrollment were related to level of exposure to the campaign.

Results

In multivariable models, only lower nicotine dependence and higher call completion were associated with higher odds of 7-day and 30-day abstinence 7 months after enrollment. Tips campaign exposure was not associated with abstinence.

Conclusion

Once enrolled in quitline counseling, quitline callers achieved similar outcomes regardless of Tips campaign exposure levels. While the campaign did not appear to directly affect odds of tobacco abstinence through quitlines, antismoking mass media campaigns such as Tips are valuable in increasing tobacco users’ exposure to quitlines and thus increasing their likelihood of making a quit attempt and eventually achieving tobacco abstinence.

Acknowledgments

The findings and conclusions in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. This research was funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The Nebraska, North Carolina, and Texas state quitlines funded the collection of the 7-month survey data analyzed in this study as part of their quitline program evaluation plan. The authors thank Tim McAfee, MD, and Susan Zbikowski, PhD, for their review and feedback on this manuscript and for input on the study design. The authors also thank Audrey Snow and Oliver Lundt for their help extracting data for this project. We also acknowledge the 3 state quitlines that participated in the study.

 Top

Author Information

Corresponding Author: Katrina A. Vickerman, Research, Training and Evaluation Services, Alere Wellbeing, 999 Third Ave, Ste 2000, Seattle, WA 98104. Telephone: 206-876-2363. Email:Katrina.Vickerman@alere.com.

Author Affiliations: Lei Zhang, Ann Malarcher, Office on Smoking and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia; Paul Mowery, Biostatistics, Inc, Atlanta, Georgia; Chelsea Nash, Alere Wellbeing, Seattle, Washington.

 Top

References

1. US Department of Health and Human Services. The health consequences of smoking: 50 years of progress: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta (GA): US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health; 2014.
2. Tobacco Use and Dependence Guideline Panel. Treating tobacco use and dependence: 2008 update. Clinical practice guideline. Rockville (MD): US Department of Health and Human Services; 2008.
3. Hollis JF, McAfee TA, Fellows JL, Zbikowski SM, Stark M, Riedlinger K. The effectiveness and cost effectiveness of telephone counselling and the nicotine patch in a state tobacco quitline. Tob Control 2007;16(Suppl 1):i53–9. CrossRef PubMed
4. McAfee T, Davis KC, Alexander RL Jr, Pechacek TF, Bunnell R. Effect of the first federally funded US antismoking national media campaign. Lancet 2013;382(9909):2003–11. CrossRefPubMed
5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Increases in quitline calls and smoking cessation website visitors during a national tobacco education campaign — March 19–June 10, 2012. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2012;61(34):667–70. PubMed
6. Zhang L, Vickerman K, Malarcher A, Mowery P. Intermediate cessation outcomes among quitline callers during a national tobacco education campaign. Nicotine Tob Res 2014;16(11):1478–86. CrossRef PubMed
7. Carroll T, Rock B. Generating Quitline calls during Australia’s National Tobacco Campaign: effects of television advertisement execution and programme placement. Tob Control 2003;12(90002, Suppl 2):ii40–4. CrossRef PubMed
8. Farrelly M, Mann N, Watson K, Pechacek T. The influence of television advertisements on promoting calls to telephone quitlines. Health Educ Res 2013;28(1):15–22. CrossRef PubMed
9. Mosbaek CH, Austin DF, Stark MJ, Lambert LC. The association between advertising and calls to a tobacco quitline. Tob Control 2007;16(Suppl 1):i24–9. CrossRef PubMed
10. Vallone DM, Duke JC, Cullen J, McCausland KL, Allen JA. Evaluation of EX: a national mass media smoking cessation campaign. Am J Public Health 2011;101(2):302–9. CrossRef PubMed
11. Wakefield MA, Spittal MJ, Yong HH, Durkin SJ, Borland R. Effects of mass media campaign exposure intensity and durability on quit attempts in a population-based cohort study. Health Educ Res 2011;26(6):988–97. CrossRef PubMed
12. Durkin SJ, Biener L, Wakefield MA. Effects of different types of antismoking ads on reducing disparities in smoking cessation among socioeconomic subgroups. Am J Public Health 2009;99(12):2217–23. CrossRef PubMed
13. Niederdeppe J, Fiore MC, Baker TB, Smith SS. Smoking-cessation media campaigns and their effectiveness among socioeconomically advantaged and disadvantaged populations. Am J Public Health 2008;98(5):916–24. CrossRef PubMed
14. Nonnemaker JM, Farrelly MC, Kamyab K, MacMonegle AJ. Do different styles of antismoking ads influence the types of smokers who call quitlines? Health Educ Res 2013;28(1):23–30.CrossRef PubMed
15. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Best practices for comprehensive tobacco control programs — 2014. Atlanta (GA): Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2014.
16. Bandura A. Social cognitive theory. In: Vasta R, editor. Annals of child development. Vol. 6. Six theories of child development. Greenwich (CT): JAI Press; 1989. p. 1–60.
17. Heatherton TF, Kozlowski LT, Frecker RC, Rickert W, Robinson J. Measuring the heaviness of smoking: using self-reported time to the first cigarette of the day and number of cigarettes smoked per day. Br J Addict 1989;84(7):791–9. CrossRef PubMed
18. Izrael D, Battaglia MP, Frankel MR. Extreme survey weight adjustment as a component of sample balancing (aka raking). Proceedings of the SAS Global Forum. 2009 March 22–25; Cary, North Carolina.
19. Hyland A, Borland R, Li Q, Yong HH, McNeill A, Fong GT, et al. Individual-level predictors of cessation behaviours among participants in the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey. Tob Control 2006;15(Suppl 3):iii83–94. CrossRef PubMed
20. Stead LF, Perera R, Lancaster T. A systematic review of interventions for smokers who contact quitlines. Tob Control 2007;16(Suppl 1):i3–8. CrossRef PubMed
21. Zbikowski SM, Jack LM, McClure JB, Deprey M, Javitz HS, McAfee TA, et al. Utilization of services in a randomized trial testing telephone- and web-based interventions for smoking cessation. Nicotine Tob Res 2011;13(5):319–27. CrossRef PubMed
22. Bush T, Zbikowski SM, Mahoney L, Deprey M, Mowery P, Cerutti B. State quitlines and cessation patterns among adults with selected chronic diseases in 15 states, 2005-2008. Prev Chronic Dis 2012;9:E163. CrossRef PubMed
23. Zhu SH, Lee M, Zhuang YL, Gamst A, Wolfson T. Interventions to increase smoking cessation at the population level: how much progress has been made in the last two decades? Tob Control 2012;21(2):110–8. CrossRef PubMed
24. Bright MA, Davis K, Babb S, Bunnell R, Rodes R, Alexander R, et al. Cancer related news from the CDC: impact of a national tobacco education campaign on weekly quitline calls and website visitors. Oncology Times 2014;36(1):30–2. CrossRef
25. Zhang L, Vickerman K, Malarcher A, Carpenter K. Changes in quitline caller characteristics during a national tobacco education campaign. Nicotine Tob Res 2015. CrossRef PubMed
26. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. State Tobacco Activities Tracking and Evaluation (STATE) system. http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/statesystem. Accessed May 18, 2015.
27. Bush T, Zbikowski S, Mahoney L, Deprey M, Mowery PD, Magnusson B. The 2009 US federal cigarette tax increase and quitline utilization in 16 states. J Environ Public Health 2012;314740.CrossRef PubMed
28. North American Quitline Consortium. Results from the 2012 NAQC Annual Survey of Quitlines. Webinar presentation October 23, 2012. http://www.naquitline.org/?page=2012Survey. Accessed June 4, 2015.
29. Nash CM, Vickerman KA, Kellogg ES, Zbikowski SM. Utilization of a Web-based vs integrated phone/Web cessation program among 140,000 tobacco users: an evaluation across 10 free state quitlines. J Med Internet Res 2015;17(2):e36. http://www.jmir.org/2015/2/e36/ Accessed May 31, 2015 CrossRef PubMed