51
|
Conceptual Introduction to the Multiphase Optimization Strategy (MOST). OPTIMIZATION OF BEHAVIORAL, BIOBEHAVIORAL, AND BIOMEDICAL INTERVENTIONS 2018. [DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-72206-1_1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
|
52
|
Petersen A, Mermelstein R, Berg KM, Baker TB, Smith SS, Jorenby D, Piper ME, Schlam TR, Cook JW. Offering smoking treatment to primary care patients in two Wisconsin healthcare systems: Who chooses smoking reduction versus cessation? Prev Med 2017; 105:332-336. [PMID: 28988997 PMCID: PMC6211191 DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.10.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/12/2017] [Revised: 10/03/2017] [Accepted: 10/04/2017] [Indexed: 01/30/2023]
Abstract
Smokers unwilling to make a quit attempt can still benefit from smoking intervention. However, it is unclear what proportion of smokers will enter such a Motivation phase intervention, and whether such an intervention attracts different types of smokers than does abstinence oriented treatment. We conducted a study from June 2010 to October 2013 based on a chronic care model of tobacco treatment among study eligible primary care patients (N=1579; 58% women, 89% White) presenting for regular health care visits in southern Wisconsin, U.S. Medical assistants, prompted via the electronic health record (EHR), invited smokers (n=10,242) to learn more about treatment options to help them either reduce their smoking or quit. Of those invited to learn more who were then reached by study staff, 10.2% (n=1046) reported interest in reduction treatment and 24% (n=2465) reported interest in cessation treatment. Patients who selected and ultimately entered reduction (n=492) versus cessation (n=1087) were more likely to report: older age; a history of anxiety; lower motivation to quit; lower primary dependence motives; more close friends or family who smoke; and a greater interval since their last quit attempt. Results suggest that Motivation phase treatment aimed at smoking reduction may increase the proportion and range of smokers inducted into tobacco treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Angela Petersen
- VA San Diego Healthcare System, 8950 Villa La Jolla Dr. Ste B109, La Jolla, CA 92037, United States; University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, United States.
| | - Robin Mermelstein
- University of Illinois at Chicago, Institute for Health Research and Policy, 544 Westside Research Office Bldg., 1747 West Roosevelt Rd., Chicago, IL 60608, United States
| | - Kristin M Berg
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Madison, WI 53792, United States
| | - Timothy B Baker
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Madison, WI 53792, United States
| | - Stevens S Smith
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Madison, WI 53792, United States
| | - Doug Jorenby
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Madison, WI 53792, United States
| | - Megan E Piper
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Madison, WI 53792, United States
| | - Tanya R Schlam
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Madison, WI 53792, United States
| | - Jessica W Cook
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison, and William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Madison, WI 53792, United States; William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, 2500 Overlook Way, Madison, WI 53792, United States
| |
Collapse
|
53
|
Carroll KM, Kiluk BD. Cognitive behavioral interventions for alcohol and drug use disorders: Through the stage model and back again. PSYCHOLOGY OF ADDICTIVE BEHAVIORS 2017; 31:847-861. [PMID: 28857574 PMCID: PMC5714654 DOI: 10.1037/adb0000311] [Citation(s) in RCA: 76] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
Abstract
Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) approaches have among the highest level of empirical support for the treatment of drug and alcohol use disorders. As Psychology of Addictive Behaviors marks its 30th anniversary, we review the evolution of CBT for the addictions through the lens of the Stage Model of Behavioral Therapies Development. The large evidence base from Stage II randomized clinical trials indicates a modest effect size with evidence of relatively durable effects, but limited diffusion in clinical practice, as is the case for most empirically validated approaches for mental health and addictive disorders. Technology may provide a means for CBT interventions to circumvent the "implementation cliff" in Stages III-V by offering a flexible, low-cost, standardized means of disseminating CBT in a range of novel settings and populations. Moreover, returning to Stage I to reconnect clinical applications of CBT to recent developments in cognitive science and neuroscience holds great promise for accelerating understanding of mechanisms of action. It is critical that CBT not be considered as a static intervention, but rather 1 that constantly evolves and is refined through the stage model until the field achieves a maximally powerful intervention that addresses core features of the addictions. (PsycINFO Database Record
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Brian D Kiluk
- Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine
| |
Collapse
|
54
|
Kamboj SK, Irez D, Serfaty S, Thomas E, Das RK, Freeman TP. Ultra-Brief Mindfulness Training Reduces Alcohol Consumption in At-Risk Drinkers: A Randomized Double-Blind Active-Controlled Experiment. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol 2017; 20:936-947. [PMID: 29016995 PMCID: PMC5737497 DOI: 10.1093/ijnp/pyx064] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/22/2017] [Revised: 07/18/2017] [Accepted: 07/28/2017] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Like other complex psychosocial interventions, mindfulness-based treatments comprise various modality-specific components as well as nonspecific therapeutic ingredients that collectively contribute to efficacy. Consequently, the isolated effects of mindfulness strategies per se remain unclear. Methods Using a randomized double-blind design, we compared the isolated effects of 11-minutes of "supervised" mindfulness instruction against a closely matched active control (relaxation) on subjective, physiological, and behavioral indices of maladaptive alcohol responding in drinkers at risk of harm from alcohol use (n = 68). Simple follow-up instructions on strategy use were provided, but practice was unsupervised and not formally monitored. Results Both groups showed acute reductions in craving after training, although a trend group x time interaction (P = .056) suggested that this reduction was greater in the relaxation group (d = 0.722 P < .001) compared with the mindfulness group (d = 0.317, P = .004). Furthermore, upregulation of parasympathetic activity was found after relaxation (d = 0.562; P < .001) but not mindfulness instructions (d = 0.08; P > .1; group x time interaction: P = .009). By contrast, only the mindfulness group showed a reduction in past-week alcohol consumption at 7-day follow-up (-9.31 units, d = 0.593, P < .001), whereas no significant reduction was seen in the relaxation group (-3.00 units, d = 0.268, P > .1; group x time interaction: P = .026). Conclusion Very brief mindfulness practice can significantly reduce alcohol consumption among at-risk drinkers, even with minimal encouragement to use this strategy outside of the experimental context. The effects on consumption may therefore represent a lower bound of efficacy of "ultra-brief" mindfulness instructions in hazardous drinkers, at least at short follow-up intervals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sunjeev K Kamboj
- Clinical Psychopharmacology Unit (Dr Kamboj, Ms Thomas, and Drs Das and Freeman); Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology (Drs Kamboj, Irez, and Serfaty, Ms Thomas, and Drs Das and Freeman), University College London, United Kingdom
| | - Damla Irez
- Clinical Psychopharmacology Unit (Dr Kamboj, Ms Thomas, and Drs Das and Freeman); Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology (Drs Kamboj, Irez, and Serfaty, Ms Thomas, and Drs Das and Freeman), University College London, United Kingdom
| | - Shirley Serfaty
- Clinical Psychopharmacology Unit (Dr Kamboj, Ms Thomas, and Drs Das and Freeman); Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology (Drs Kamboj, Irez, and Serfaty, Ms Thomas, and Drs Das and Freeman), University College London, United Kingdom
| | - Emily Thomas
- Clinical Psychopharmacology Unit (Dr Kamboj, Ms Thomas, and Drs Das and Freeman); Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology (Drs Kamboj, Irez, and Serfaty, Ms Thomas, and Drs Das and Freeman), University College London, United Kingdom
| | - Ravi K Das
- Clinical Psychopharmacology Unit (Dr Kamboj, Ms Thomas, and Drs Das and Freeman); Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology (Drs Kamboj, Irez, and Serfaty, Ms Thomas, and Drs Das and Freeman), University College London, United Kingdom
| | - Tom P Freeman
- Clinical Psychopharmacology Unit (Dr Kamboj, Ms Thomas, and Drs Das and Freeman); Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology (Drs Kamboj, Irez, and Serfaty, Ms Thomas, and Drs Das and Freeman), University College London, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
55
|
Baker TB. The 2016 Ferno Award Address: Three Things. Nicotine Tob Res 2017; 19:891-900. [PMID: 28201626 PMCID: PMC5896548 DOI: 10.1093/ntr/ntx039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/09/2016] [Accepted: 02/08/2017] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Researchers may optimize smoking treatment by addressing three research topics that have been relatively neglected. First, researchers have neglected to intensively explore how counseling contents affect smoking cessation success. Worldwide, millions of smokers are exposed to different smoking cessation contents and messages, yet existing research evidence does not permit strong inference about the value of particular counseling contents or strategies. Research in this area could enhance smoking outcomes and yield new insights into smoking motivation. Second, researchers have focused great attention on inducing smokers to make quit attempts when they contact healthcare systems; the success of such efforts may have plateaued. Also, the vast majority of quit attempts are self-quit attempts, largely unsuccessful, that occur outside such contacts. Researchers should explore strategies for using healthcare systems as conduits for digital- and other population-based interventions independent of healthcare visits. Such resources should be used to graft timely access to evidence-based intervention onto self-quitting, yielding evidence-based, patient-managed quit attempts. Third, most smoking treatments are assembled via selection of components based on informal synthesis of empirical and impressionistic evidence and are evaluated as a package. However, recent factorial experiments show that components of smoking treatments often interact meaningfully; for example, some components may interfere with the effectiveness of other components. Many extant treatments likely comprise suboptimal sets of components; future treatment development should routinely use factorial experiments to permit the assembly of components that yield additive or synergistic effects.Research in the above three areas should significantly advance our understanding of tobacco use and its treatment. IMPLICATIONS A lack of relevant research, and the likely prospect of significant clinical and public health benefit, underscore the importance of performing research on three topics related to smoking intervention: (1) researchers need to identify which contents of smoking counseling are effective; (2) researchers need to devise innovative strategies that use healthcare systems as conduits of smoking treatment delivery outside of clinical contacts; and (3) researchers need to use factorial designs to guide their development of smoking treatments. Research on these topics should yield complementary evidence that guides the development of more effective smoking treatments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy B Baker
- Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public
Health, Madison, WI
| |
Collapse
|
56
|
Baker TB, Smith SS, Bolt DM, Loh WY, Mermelstein R, Fiore MC, Piper ME, Collins LM. Implementing Clinical Research Using Factorial Designs: A Primer. Behav Ther 2017; 48:567-580. [PMID: 28577591 PMCID: PMC5458623 DOI: 10.1016/j.beth.2016.12.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2016] [Revised: 12/12/2016] [Accepted: 12/26/2016] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
Factorial experiments have rarely been used in the development or evaluation of clinical interventions. However, factorial designs offer advantages over randomized controlled trial designs, the latter being much more frequently used in such research. Factorial designs are highly efficient (permitting evaluation of multiple intervention components with good statistical power) and present the opportunity to detect interactions amongst intervention components. Such advantages have led methodologists to advocate for the greater use of factorial designs in research on clinical interventions (Collins, Dziak, & Li, 2009). However, researchers considering the use of such designs in clinical research face a series of choices that have consequential implications for the interpretability and value of the experimental results. These choices include: whether to use a factorial design, selection of the number and type of factors to include, how to address the compatibility of the different factors included, whether and how to avoid confounds between the type and number of interventions a participant receives, and how to interpret interactions. The use of factorial designs in clinical intervention research poses choices that differ from those typically considered in randomized clinical trial designs. However, the great information yield of the former encourages clinical researchers' increased and careful execution of such designs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy B. Baker
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711
| | - Stevens S. Smith
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1025 W. Johnson St., Madison, WI 53706
| | - Daniel M. Bolt
- University of Wisconsin, Department of Educational Psychology, 1025 W. Johnson St., Madison, WI 53706
| | - Wei-Yin Loh
- University of Wisconsin, Department of Statistics, 1300 University Ave., Madison, WI 53706
| | - Robin Mermelstein
- University of Illinois at Chicago, Institute for Health Research and Policy, 544 Westside Research Office Bldg., 1747 West Roosevelt Rd., Chicago, IL 60608
| | - Michael C. Fiore
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1025 W. Johnson St., Madison, WI 53706
| | - Megan E. Piper
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1025 W. Johnson St., Madison, WI 53706
| | - Linda M. Collins
- The Methodology Center and Department of Human Development & Family Studies, The Pennsylvania State University, 404 Health and Human Development Building, University Park, PA 16802
| |
Collapse
|
57
|
Hsia SL, Myers MG, Chen TC. Combination nicotine replacement therapy: strategies for initiation and tapering. Prev Med 2017; 97:45-49. [PMID: 28257667 DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.12.039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2016] [Revised: 12/19/2016] [Accepted: 12/20/2016] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Several studies and meta-analyses have demonstrated the efficacy of combination nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for patients who wish to quit smoking. However, there is limited guidance with respect to initiation and tapering of combination NRT. We attempt to review the evidence and rationale behind combination NRT, present the dosing used in combination NRT studies, and propose a step-down approach for tapering of combination NRT with integration of behavioral strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie L Hsia
- VA San Diego Healthcare System (VASDHS), 3350 La Jolla Village Drive (119), San Diego, CA 92161, USA.
| | - Mark G Myers
- VA San Diego Healthcare System (VASDHS), 3350 La Jolla Village Drive (119), San Diego, CA 92161, USA; Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gillman Drive, MC 0603, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA.
| | - Timothy C Chen
- VA San Diego Healthcare System (VASDHS), 3350 La Jolla Village Drive (119), San Diego, CA 92161, USA; Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gillman Drive, MC 0603, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
58
|
Toward precision smoking cessation treatment II: Proximal effects of smoking cessation intervention components on putative mechanisms of action. Drug Alcohol Depend 2017; 171:50-58. [PMID: 28013097 PMCID: PMC5262527 DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2016.11.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/14/2016] [Revised: 11/08/2016] [Accepted: 11/22/2016] [Indexed: 11/23/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Understanding how smoking cessation treatments exert their effects can inform treatment development and use. Factorial designs allow researchers to examine whether multiple intervention components affect hypothesized change mechanisms, and whether the affected mechanisms are related to cessation. METHODS This is a secondary data analysis of smokers recruited during primary care visits (N=637, 55% women, 87% white) who were motivated to quit. Participants in this fractional factorial experiment were randomized to one level of each of six intervention factors: Prequit Nicotine Patch vs None, Prequit Nicotine Gum vs None, Preparation Counseling vs None, Intensive In-Person Counseling vs Minimal, Intensive Phone Counseling vs Minimal, and 16 vs 8 Weeks of Combination Nicotine Replacement (nicotine patch+nicotine gum). Data on putative mechanisms (e.g., medication use, withdrawal, self-efficacy) and smoking status were gathered using daily assessments and during follow-up assessment calls. RESULTS Some intervention components influenced hypothesized mechanisms. Prequit Gum and Patch each reduced prequit smoking and enhanced prequit coping and self-efficacy. In-Person Counseling increased prequit motivation to quit, postquit self-efficacy, and postquit perceived intratreatment support. Withdrawal reduction and reduced prequit smoking produced the strongest effects on cessation. The significant effect of combining Prequit Gum and In-Person Counseling on 26-week abstinence was mediated by increased prequit self-efficacy. CONCLUSIONS This factorial experiment identified which putative treatment mechanisms were influenced by discrete intervention components and which mechanisms influenced cessation. Such information supports the combined use of prequit nicotine gum and intensive in-person counseling as cessation interventions that operate via increased prequit self-efficacy.
Collapse
|
59
|
Watkins E, Newbold A, Tester-Jones M, Javaid M, Cadman J, Collins LM, Graham J, Mostazir M. Implementing multifactorial psychotherapy research in online virtual environments (IMPROVE-2): study protocol for a phase III trial of the MOST randomized component selection method for internet cognitive-behavioural therapy for depression. BMC Psychiatry 2016; 16:345. [PMID: 27716200 PMCID: PMC5054552 DOI: 10.1186/s12888-016-1054-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2016] [Accepted: 09/29/2016] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Depression is a global health challenge. Although there are effective psychological and pharmaceutical interventions, our best treatments achieve remission rates less than 1/3 and limited sustained recovery. Underpinning this efficacy gap is limited understanding of how complex psychological interventions for depression work. Recent reviews have argued that the active ingredients of therapy need to be identified so that therapy can be made briefer, more potent, and to improve scalability. This in turn requires the use of rigorous study designs that test the presence or absence of individual therapeutic elements, rather than standard comparative randomised controlled trials. One such approach is the Multiphase Optimization Strategy, which uses efficient experimentation such as factorial designs to identify active factors in complex interventions. This approach has been successfully applied to behavioural health but not yet to mental health interventions. METHODS/DESIGN A Phase III randomised, single-blind balanced fractional factorial trial, based in England and conducted on the internet, randomized at the level of the patient, will investigate the active ingredients of internet cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) for depression. Adults with depression (operationalized as PHQ-9 score ≥ 10), recruited directly from the internet and from an UK National Health Service Improving Access to Psychological Therapies service, will be randomized across seven experimental factors, each reflecting the presence versus absence of specific treatment components (activity scheduling, functional analysis, thought challenging, relaxation, concreteness training, absorption, self-compassion training) using a 32-condition balanced fractional factorial design (2IV7-2). The primary outcome is symptoms of depression (PHQ-9) at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes include symptoms of anxiety and process measures related to hypothesized mechanisms. DISCUSSION Better understanding of the active ingredients of efficacious therapies, such as CBT, is necessary in order to improve and further disseminate these interventions. This study is the first application of a component selection experiment to psychological interventions in depression and will enable us to determine the main effect of each treatment component and its relative efficacy, and cast light on underlying mechanisms, so that we can systematically enhance internet CBT. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN24117387 . Registered 26 August 2014.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Edward Watkins
- Sir Henry Wellcome Building for Mood Disorders Research, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4QG, UK.
| | - Alexandra Newbold
- Sir Henry Wellcome Building for Mood Disorders Research, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4QG UK
| | - Michelle Tester-Jones
- Sir Henry Wellcome Building for Mood Disorders Research, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4QG UK
| | - Mahmood Javaid
- Sir Henry Wellcome Building for Mood Disorders Research, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4QG UK
| | - Jennifer Cadman
- Sir Henry Wellcome Building for Mood Disorders Research, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4QG UK
| | - Linda M. Collins
- The Methodology Center and Department of Human Development and Family Studies, The Pennsylvania State University, Health and Human Development Building, University Park, PA 16802 USA
| | - John Graham
- The Methodology Center and Department of Human Development and Family Studies, The Pennsylvania State University, Health and Human Development Building, University Park, PA 16802 USA
| | - Mohammod Mostazir
- Sir Henry Wellcome Building for Mood Disorders Research, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4QG UK
| |
Collapse
|
60
|
MacPherson L, Collado A, Lejuez CW, Brown RA, Tull MT. Behavioral Activation Treatment for Smoking (BATS) in smokers with depressive symptomatology. ADVANCES IN DUAL DIAGNOSIS 2016. [DOI: 10.1108/add-02-2016-0005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Purpose
Cigarette smoking remains the primary preventable cause of mortality and morbidity globally. The overarching goal of the paper is to disseminate the Behavioral Activation Treatment for Smoking (BATS), which integrates behavioral activation principles with standard treatment guidelines to assist individuals in achieving short- and long-term smoking cessation. Through a series of sequential steps, BATS guides individuals who wish to quit smoking to increase their engagement in healthy, pleasurable, and value-consistent activities.
Design/methodology/approach
The document provides the BATS rationale and contains an abridged manual for use by clinicians and/or researchers in the context of clinical trials. Findings: BATS is accruing empirical evidence that suggests its ability to promote successful smoking cessation outcomes while decreasing any associated depressive symptoms.
Findings
BATS is accruing empirical evidence that suggests its ability to promote successful smoking cessation outcomes while decreasing any associated depressive symptoms.
Practical implications
A description of key components, forms, and strategies to address common treatment barriers are included.
Originality/value
BATS’s strong roots in learning theories and its idiographic nature allow for the intervention to be implemented flexibly across a wide range of settings and smoking populations. The treatment may also be combined seamlessly with pharmacotherapies. BATS targets both cigarette smoking and depressive symptoms, which constitute a significant barrier to cessation, through a common pathway: increasing rewarding activities. The treatment offers a parsimonious complement to standard smoking cessation treatments.
Collapse
|
61
|
Buscemi J, Janke EA, Kugler KC, Duffecy J, Mielenz TJ, St. George SM, Sheinfeld Gorin SN. Increasing the public health impact of evidence-based interventions in behavioral medicine: new approaches and future directions. J Behav Med 2016; 40:203-213. [DOI: 10.1007/s10865-016-9773-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2016] [Accepted: 07/14/2016] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
|
62
|
Utilizing MOST frameworks and SMART designs for intervention research. Nurs Outlook 2016; 64:287-289. [PMID: 27262738 DOI: 10.1016/j.outlook.2016.04.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2016] [Accepted: 04/26/2016] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
|
63
|
Cook JW, Collins LM, Fiore MC, Smith SS, Fraser D, Bolt DM, Baker TB, Piper ME, Schlam TR, Jorenby D, Loh WY, Mermelstein R. Comparative effectiveness of motivation phase intervention components for use with smokers unwilling to quit: a factorial screening experiment. Addiction 2016; 111:117-28. [PMID: 26582140 PMCID: PMC4681585 DOI: 10.1111/add.13161] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2015] [Revised: 09/03/2015] [Accepted: 09/08/2015] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
AIMS To screen promising intervention components designed to reduce smoking and promote abstinence in smokers initially unwilling to quit. DESIGN A balanced, four-factor, randomized factorial experiment. SETTING Eleven primary care clinics in southern Wisconsin, USA. PARTICIPANTS A total of 517 adult smokers (63.4% women, 91.1% white) recruited during primary care visits who were willing to reduce their smoking but not quit. INTERVENTIONS Four factors contrasted intervention components designed to reduce smoking and promote abstinence: (1) nicotine patch versus none; (2) nicotine gum versus none; (3) motivational interviewing (MI) versus none; and (4) behavioral reduction counseling (BR) versus none. Participants could request cessation treatment at any point during the study. MEASUREMENTS The primary outcome was percentage change in cigarettes smoked per day at 26 weeks post-study enrollment; the secondary outcomes were percentage change at 12 weeks and point-prevalence abstinence at 12 and 26 weeks post-study enrollment. FINDINGS There were few main effects, but a significant four-way interaction at 26 weeks post-study enrollment (P = 0.01, β = 0.12) revealed relatively large smoking reductions by two component combinations: nicotine gum combined with BR and BR combined with MI. Further, BR improved 12-week abstinence rates (P = 0.04), and nicotine gum, when used without MI, increased 26-week abstinence after a subsequent aided quit attempt (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS Motivation-phase nicotine gum and behavioral reduction counseling are promising intervention components for smokers who are initially unwilling to quit.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica W. Cook
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705,William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, 2500 Overlook Terrace, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Linda M. Collins
- The Pennsylvania State University, The Methodology Center and Department of Human Development & Family Studies, 404 Health and Human Development Building, University Park, PA 16802
| | - Michael C. Fiore
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Stevens S. Smith
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705
| | - David Fraser
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Daniel M. Bolt
- University of Wisconsin, Department of Educational Psychology, 1025 W. Johnson St., Madison, WI 53706
| | - Timothy B. Baker
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Megan E. Piper
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Tanya R. Schlam
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Douglas Jorenby
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Wei-Yin Loh
- University of Wisconsin, Department of Statistics, 1220 Medical Sciences Center, 1300 University Ave., Madison, WI 53706
| | - Robin Mermelstein
- University of Illinois at Chicago, Institute for Health Research and Policy, 544 Westside Research Office Bldg., 1747 West Roosevelt Rd., Chicago, IL 60608
| |
Collapse
|
64
|
Piper ME, Fiore MC, Smith SS, Fraser D, Bolt DM, Collins LM, Mermelstein R, Schlam TR, Cook JW, Jorenby DE, Loh WY, Baker TB. Identifying effective intervention components for smoking cessation: a factorial screening experiment. Addiction 2016; 111:129-41. [PMID: 26582269 PMCID: PMC4699315 DOI: 10.1111/add.13162] [Citation(s) in RCA: 60] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2015] [Revised: 04/21/2015] [Accepted: 09/08/2015] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
AIMS To identify promising intervention components intended to help smokers to attain and maintain abstinence in their quit smoking attempts. DESIGN A fully crossed, six-factor randomized fractional factorial experiment. SETTING Eleven primary care clinics in southern Wisconsin, USA. PARTICIPANTS A total of 637 adult smokers (55% women, 88% white) motivated to quit smoking who visited primary care clinics. INTERVENTIONS Six intervention components designed to prepare smokers to quit, and achieve and maintain abstinence (i.e. for the preparation, cessation and maintenance phases of smoking treatment): (1) preparation nicotine patch versus none; (2) preparation nicotine gum versus none; (3) preparation counseling versus none; (4) intensive cessation in-person counseling versus minimal; (5) intensive cessation telephone counseling versus minimal; and (6) 16 versus 8 weeks of combination nicotine replacement therapy (nicotine patch + nicotine gum). MEASUREMENTS Seven-day self-reported point-prevalence abstinence at 16 weeks. FINDINGS Preparation counseling significantly improved week 16 abstinence rates (P = .04), while both forms of preparation nicotine replacement therapy interacted synergistically with intensive cessation in-person counseling (P < 0.05). Conversely, intensive cessation phone counseling and intensive cessation in-person counseling interacted antagonistically (P < 0.05)-these components produced higher abstinence rates by themselves than in combination. CONCLUSIONS Preparation counseling and the combination of intensive cessation in-person counseling with preparation nicotine gum or patch are promising intervention components for smoking and should be evaluated as an integrated treatment package.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Megan E Piper
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Michael C Fiore
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Stevens S Smith
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, Madison, WI, USA
| | - David Fraser
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Daniel M Bolt
- University of Wisconsin, Department of Educational Psychology, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Linda M Collins
- The Methodology Center, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA
| | - Robin Mermelstein
- University of Illinois at Chicago, Institute for Health Research and Policy, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Tanya R Schlam
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Jessica W Cook
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, Madison, WI, USA
- William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Douglas E Jorenby
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Wei-Yin Loh
- University of Wisconsin, Department of Statistics, Madison, WI, USA
| | - Timothy B Baker
- Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, Madison, WI, USA
| |
Collapse
|
65
|
Baker TB, Collins LM, Mermelstein R, Piper ME, Schlam TR, Cook JW, Bolt DM, Smith SS, Jorenby DE, Fraser D, Loh WY, Theobald WE, Fiore MC. Enhancing the effectiveness of smoking treatment research: conceptual bases and progress. Addiction 2016; 111:107-16. [PMID: 26581974 PMCID: PMC4681592 DOI: 10.1111/add.13154] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/04/2015] [Revised: 04/21/2015] [Accepted: 09/08/2015] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS A chronic care strategy could potentially enhance the reach and effectiveness of smoking treatment by providing effective interventions for all smokers, including those who are initially unwilling to quit. This paper describes the conceptual bases of a National Cancer Institute-funded research program designed to develop an optimized, comprehensive, chronic care smoking treatment. METHODS This research is grounded in three methodological approaches: (1) the Phase-Based Model, which guides the selection of intervention components to be experimentally evaluated for the different phases of smoking treatment (motivation, preparation, cessation, and maintenance); (2) the Multiphase Optimization Strategy (MOST), which guides the screening of intervention components via efficient experimental designs and, ultimately, the assembly of promising components into an optimized treatment package; and (3) pragmatic research methods, such as electronic health record recruitment, that facilitate the efficient translation of research findings into clinical practice. Using this foundation and working in primary care clinics, we conducted three factorial experiments (reported in three accompanying papers) to screen 15 motivation, preparation, cessation and maintenance phase intervention components for possible inclusion in a chronic care smoking treatment program. RESULTS This research identified intervention components with relatively strong evidence of effectiveness at particular phases of smoking treatment and it demonstrated the efficiency of the MOST approach in terms both of the number of intervention components tested and of the richness of the information yielded. CONCLUSIONS A new, synthesized research approach efficiently evaluates multiple intervention components to identify promising components for every phase of smoking treatment. Many intervention components interact with one another, supporting the use of factorial experiments in smoking treatment development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy B. Baker
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Linda M. Collins
- The Pennsylvania State University, The Methodology Center and Department of Human Development & Family Studies, 404 Health and Human Development Building, University Park, PA 16802
| | - Robin Mermelstein
- University of Illinois at Chicago Institute for Health Research and Policy 544, Westside Research Office Bldg., 1747 West Roosevelt Rd., Chicago, IL 60608
| | - Megan E. Piper
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Tanya R. Schlam
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Jessica W. Cook
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705,William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital, 2500 Overlook Terrace, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Daniel M. Bolt
- University of Wisconsin, Department of Educational Psychology, 1025 W. Johnson St., Madison, WI 53706
| | - Stevens S. Smith
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Douglas E. Jorenby
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705
| | - David Fraser
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Wei-Yin Loh
- University of Wisconsin, Department of Statistics, 1220 Medical Sciences Center 1300 University Ave., Madison, WI 53706
| | - Wendy E. Theobald
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705
| | - Michael C. Fiore
- University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, 1930 Monroe St., Suite 200, Madison, WI 53711,University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Medicine, 1685 Highland Avenue, 5158 Medical Foundation Centennial Building, Madison, WI 53705
| |
Collapse
|