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
Center for Clinical Research and Prevention, Bispebjerg-Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
Institute of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
Rygestopkonsulenterne Aps
Capital Region of Denmark, Denmark
Research Center for Prevention and Health, Denmark
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
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).

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.

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.

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.

Charlotta Pisinger   
Center for Clinical Research and Prevention, Bispebjerg- Frederiksberg Hospital, Hovedvejen, Entrance 5, Nordre Fasanvej 57, DK-2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark
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