RESEARCH PAPER
Ups and downs of a peer-based smoking cessation intervention help tailored to hospital-employees with low socioeconomic status: The RESPEKT Study
 
More details
Hide details
1
Center for Clinical Research and Prevention, Bispebjerg-Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
2
Institute of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
3
Rygestopkonsulenterne Aps
4
Capital Region of Denmark, Denmark
5
Research Center for Prevention and Health, Denmark
6
Center for Diabetes, Copenhagen, Denmark
Publish date: 2018-06-12
Submission date: 2017-11-21
Final revision date: 2018-05-04
Acceptance date: 2018-05-22
 
Tob. Prev. Cessation 2018;4(June):24
KEYWORDS:
TOPICS:
ABSTRACT:
Introduction:
Smoking is one of the most important determinants of socioeconomic inequality in mortality. Few studies have tested which interventions are effective in smokers with low socioeconomic status (SES).

Methods:
All hospitals in the Capital Region of Denmark were included and randomized to intervention or control groups. The target-group was smokers with low SES. Intervention hospitals: smokers in the target-group assisted researchers to tailor a group-based smoking cessation intervention. Further they helped recruiting smoking colleagues and motivating them to stay abstinent. Control hospitals: ‘as usual’. Unforeseen organizational challenges led to a change of study design; the hospital-level assessment was reduced to two cross-sectional surveys.

Results:
Response rates in hospitals’ smoking status survey were very low. Smoking status was reported by 1876 out of 7003 employees at baseline and 2280 out of 7496 employees at 1-year follow-up. Two cross-sectional surveys showed no significant difference in self-reported smoking at 1-year follow-up between intervention and control hospitals (p=0.262). We recruited 100 smokers in the group-based smoking cessation intervention tailored to smokers with low SES (corresponding to approx. 10% of smokers in target-group); 32.4% of these were validated as continuously abstinent at 6 months follow-up.

Conclusions:
Involving smokers with low SES as partners at an early stage of study design facilitated both recruitment and development of the intervention. Despite high validated long-term abstinence rates in smoking cessation groups in the intervention hospitals we found no apparent effect of the intervention at hospitallevel after one year. However, larger involvement of the target-group seems feasible and is recommended.

CORRESPONDING AUTHOR:
Charlotta Pisinger   
Center for Clinical Research and Prevention, Bispebjerg- Frederiksberg Hospital, Hovedvejen, Entrance 5, Nordre Fasanvej 57, DK-2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
 
REFERENCES (17):
1. Kulik MC, Menvielle G, Eikemo TA, Bopp M, Jasilionis D, Kulhanova I et al.: Educational inequalities in three smoking-related causes of death in 18 European populations. Nicotine Tobacco Research 2014, 16(5):507-518. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntt175
2. Thomson GW, Wilson NA, O'Dea D, Reid PJ, Howden-Chapman P: Tobacco spending and children in low income households. Tobacco Control 2002, 11(4):372-375. doi:10.1136/tc.11.4.372
3. Koch MB, Diderichsen F, Gronbaek M, Juel K: What is the association of smoking and alcohol use with the increase in social inequality in mortality in Denmark? A nationwide register-based study. BMJ Open 2015, 5(5):e006588. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006588
4. Kotz D, West R: Explaining the social gradient in smoking cessation: it's not in the trying, but in the succeeding. Tobacco Control 2009, 18(1):43-46. doi:10.1136/tc.2008.025981
5. Hiscock R, Bauld L, Amos A, Fidler JA, Munafo M: Socioeconomic status and smoking: a review. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 2012, 1248:107-123. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06202.x
6. Siahpush M, McNeill A, Borland R, Fong GT: Socioeconomic variations in nicotine dependence, self-efficacy, and intention to quit across four countries: findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Survey. Tobacco Control 2006, 15 Suppl 3:iii71-iii75. doi:10.1136/tc.2004.008763
7. Brown T, Platt S, Amos A: Equity impact of European individual-level smoking cessation interventions to reduce smoking in adults: a systematic review. European Journal of Public Health 2014, 24(4):551-556. doi:10.1093/eurpub/cku065
8. Courtney RJ, Naicker S, Shakeshaft A, Clare P, Martire KA, Mattick RP: Smoking Cessation among Low-Socioeconomic Status and Disadvantaged Population Groups: A Systematic Review of Research Output. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2015, 12(6):6403-6422. doi:10.3390/ijerph120606403
9. Neumann T, Rasmussen M, Ghith N, Heitmann BL, Tonnesen H: The Gold Standard Programme: smoking cessation interventions for disadvantaged smokers are effective in a real-life setting. Tobacco Control 2013, 22(6):e9. doi:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050194
10. Magtengaard Robinson K, Lykke M, Helbech Hansen B, Jeppesen M, Prip Buhelt L, Juel C, Glmer C: Sundhedsprofil for region og kommuner 2013. In. Region Hovedstaden, Center for Sundhed: Forskningscenter for Forebyggelse og Sundhed, 2014.
11. Mindell JS, Giampaoli S, Goesswald A, Kamtsiuris P, Mann C, Mannisto S, Morgan K, Shelton NJ, Verschuren WM, Tolonen H: Sample selection, recruitment and participation rates in health examination surveys in Europe--experience from seven national surveys. BMCMed ResMethodol 2015, 15:78.
12. Castaldelli-Maia JM, Ventriglio A, Bhugra D: Tobacco smoking: From 'glamour' to 'stigma'. A comprehensive review. Psychiatry Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences 2016, 70(1):24-33. doi:10.1111/pcn.12365
13. Vicedirektor Center for Sundhed Else H, Personalepolitisk chef for Enhed for Organisation og Ledelse Svend Skovmand E: Respektstudiet. In.; 2016.
14. Marcano Belisario JS, Bruggeling MN, Gunn LH, Brusamento S, Car J: Interventions for recruiting smokers into cessation programmes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012, 12:CD009187. doi: 10.1002/14651858.cd009187.pub2
15. Jamrozik K, Vessey M, Fowler G, Wald N, Parker G, van Vunakis H: Controlled trial of three different antismoking interventions in general practice. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1984, 288(6429):1499-1503. doi:10.1136/bmj.288.6429.1499
16. Twyman L, Bonevski B, Paul C, Bryant J: Perceived barriers to smoking cessation in selected vulnerable groups: a systematic review of the qualitative and quantitative literature. BMJ Open 2014, 4(12):e006414. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006414
17. Cahill K, Lancaster T: Workplace interventions for smoking cessation. CochraneDatabaseSystRev 2014, 2:CD003440. doi: 10.1002/14651858.cd003440.pub3
eISSN:2459-3087