Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2014 Jul;16(7):992-9.
doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntu025. Epub 2014 Mar 7.

Evaluating the effect of access to free medication to quit smoking: a clinical trial testing the role of motivation

Bianca F Jardin  1 , Karen L Cropsey  2 , Amy E Wahlquist  3 , Kevin M Gray  1 , Gerard A Silvestri  4 , K Michael Cummings  5 , Matthew J Carpenter  6
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Evaluating the effect of access to free medication to quit smoking: a clinical trial testing the role of motivation

Bianca F Jardin et al. Nicotine Tob Res. 2014 Jul.

Abstract

Introduction: Although the majority of smokers are ambivalent about quitting, few treatments specifically target smokers lacking motivation to quit in the near future. Most existing interventions are instead predicated on the belief that active treatments should only be distributed to smokers interested in quitting, a largely untested assumption.

Methods: In the current clinical trial (N = 157), motivated smokers wanting to quit in the next 30 days were given a 2-week nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) sample and a referral to a quitline (Group MNQ), while unmotivated smokers were randomized to receive the same treatment (Group UNQ) or a quitline referral only (Group UQ). Participants were tracked via telephone for 3 months to assess quitting behaviors and smoking reduction.

Results: Groups significantly differed across all comparisons with regard to incidence of any quit attempt (MNQ: 77%, UNQ: 40%, UQ: 18%, p < .05) and any 24-hr quit attempts (62%, 32%, 16%, p < .05). Clinically meaningful differences emerged in the rates of floating (19%, 17%, 6%) and point prevalence abstinence (17%, 15%, 5%). Compared to participants in Group UQ (11%), a greater proportion of participants in Group MNQ (48%, p = .01) and Group UNQ (31%, p = .01) reduced their daily cigarette consumption by at least half. Proxy measures of cessation readiness (e.g., motivation) favored participants receiving active forms of treatment.

Conclusions: Providing NRT samples engaged both motivated and unmotivated smokers into the quitting process and produced positive changes in smoking outcomes. This suggests that motivation should not be considered a necessary precondition to receiving treatment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Percentage of participants reporting quit attempts and abstinencea across postintervention follow-up period.Note. aFloating abstinence refers to 7-day point prevalence abstinence at any time during the study. bMNQ versus UNQ, p < .01; MNQ versus UQ, p < .01; UNQ versus UQ, p = .01. cMNQ versus UNQ, p < .01; MNQ versus UQ, p < .01; UNQ versus UQ, p = .05. dMNQ versus UQ, p = .04.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Changes in mean motivation and confidence scores for each group across time.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Amodei N., Lamb R. J. (2004). Convergent and concurrent validity of the Contemplation Ladder and URICA scales. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 73, 301–306. 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2003.11.005 - PubMed
    1. Biener L., Abrams D. B. (1991). The Contemplation Ladder: Validation of a measure of readiness to consider smoking cessation. Health Psychology, 10, 360–365 - PubMed
    1. Blumenthal D. S. (2007). Barriers to the provision of smoking cessation services reported by clinicians in underserved communities. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 20, 272–279. 10.3122/jabfm.2007.03.060115 - PubMed
    1. Borrelli B., Mermelstein R. (1994). Goal setting and behavior change in a smoking cessation program. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 18, 69–83
    1. Brown C. (1995). Chaos and catastrophic theories: Quantitative applications in the social sciences. London, UK: Sage

Publication types