首页> 外文期刊>Addiction >A controlled trial of an expert system and self-help manual intervention based on the stages of change versus standard self-help materials in smoking cessation.
【24h】

A controlled trial of an expert system and self-help manual intervention based on the stages of change versus standard self-help materials in smoking cessation.

机译:根据戒烟过程中变更阶段和标准自助材料的不同,对专家系统和自助式人工干预进行对照试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

AIM: To examine the population impact and effectiveness of the Pro-Change smoking cessation course based on the Transtheoretical Model (TTM) compared to standard self-help smoking cessation literature. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Sixty-five West Midlands general practices. PARTICIPANTS: Randomly sampled patients recorded as smokers by their general practitioners received an invitation letter and 2471 current smokers agreed. INTERVENTIONS: Responders were randomized to one of four interventions. The control group received standard self-help literature. In the Manual intervention group, participants received the Pro-Change system, a self-help workbook and three questionnaires at 3-monthly intervals, which generated individually tailored feedback. In the Phone intervention group, participants received the Manual intervention plus three telephone calls. In the Nurse intervention group, participants received the Manual intervention plus three visits to the practice nurse. MEASUREMENTS: Biochemically confirmed point prevalence of being quit and 6-month sustained abstinence, 12 months after study commencement. FINDINGS: A total of 9.1% of registered current smokers participated, of whom 83.0% were not ready to quit. Less than half of participants returned questionnaires to generate second and third individualized feedback. Telephone calls reached 75% of those scheduled, but few participants visited the nurse. There were small differences between the three Pro-Change arms. The odds ratio (95% confidence intervals) for all Pro-Change arms combined versus the control arm were 1.50 (0.85-2.67) and 1.53 (0.76-3.10), for point prevalence and 6-month abstinence, respectively. This constitutes 2.1% of the TTM group versus 1.4% of the control group achieving confirmed 6-month sustained abstinence. CONCLUSIONS: There was no statistically significant benefit of the intervention apparent in this trial and the high relapse of quitters means that any population impact is small.
机译:目的:根据跨理论模型(TTM),与标准的自助戒烟文献进行比较,研究改变前戒烟课程对人口的影响和有效性。设计:随机对照试验。地点:西米德兰兹郡的六十五条一般惯例。参与者:全科医生记录为吸烟者的随机抽样患者收到邀请信,并同意2471名当前吸烟者。干预措施:将应答者随机分为四种干预措施之一。对照组接受标准的自助文献。在手动干预小组中,参与者每隔三个月收到一次Pro-Change系统,一份自助工作簿和三份问卷,这些问卷产生了个性化的反馈。在“电话”干预组中,参与者收到了“手动”干预以及三个电话。在护士干预小组中,参与者接受了手动干预,以及对实习护士的三次拜访。测量:在研究开始后的12个月,经生化确认为戒烟的患病率和6个月的持续禁欲。结果:共有9.1%的现有登记吸烟者参加,其中83.0%的人还没有准备好戒烟。不到一半的参与者返回问卷以生成第二和第三项个性化反馈。电话访问量达到了计划的75%,但是很少有参与者去看护士。三个Pro-Change部门之间的差异很小。所有Pro-Change组与对照组的比值比(95%置信区间)分别为1.50(0.85-2.67)和1.53(0.76-3.10),分别是点流行率和6个月的禁欲。这占TTM组的2.1%,而对照组的1.4%达到了确定的6个月持续禁欲。结论:该试验没有明显的统计学意义的干预效果,戒烟者的高复发率意味着对人群的影响很小。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号