The physician-delivered smoking intervention project
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
Objective: To determine factors that affect how much physicians trained to use a patient-centered smoking intervention intervene with their smoking patients.
Design: Forty internal medicine residents and ten internal medicine attending physicians trained in a patient-centered counseling approach were randomized to an algorithm condition (provision of intervention algorithm at each patient visit) or a no-algorithm condition. Smoking intervention steps used by physicians with patients were assessed with Patient Exit Interviews (PEIs).
Setting: Ambulatory clinic; academic medical center.
Patients: Five hundred twenty-seven adult smokers seen in clinic between June 1990 and April 1992.
Main results: There was no difference in overall PEI scores or in individual PEI steps taken between the algorithm and no-algorithm conditions. Two patient baseline factors (reporting thinking of stopping smoking within six months and higher Fagerstrom Tolerance Score) and one physician factor (older age) were significantly predictive of higher PEI score.
Conclusion: Provision of an intervention algorithm at each patient visit does not increase the likelihood that trained physicians who are cued to intervene will perform more of the intervention steps taught. Trained physicians are more likely to intervene with smokers who are more nicotine-dependent and who expect and desire to stop smoking.
- Ockene JK. Are we pushing the limits of public health interventions for smoking cessation? Health Psychol. 1992;11:277–9. CrossRef
- Ockene JK. Physician-delivered interventions for smoking cessation: strategies for increasing effectiveness. Prev Med. 1987;16:723–37. CrossRef
- Fiore MC, Novotny TE, Pierce JP, et al. Methods used to quit smoking in the United States: do cessation programs help? JAMA. 1990;263:2760–5. CrossRef
- Ockene JK, Quirk M, Goldberg RJ, et al. A residents training program for the development of smoking intervention skills. Arch Intern Med. 1988;148:1039–45. CrossRef
- Ockene JK, Kristeller J, Goldberg R, et al. Increasing the efficacy of physician-delivered smoking intervention: a randomized clinical trial. J Gen Intern Med. 1991;6:1–8. CrossRef
- SAS Institute Inc. SAS/STAT User’s Guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc., 1988.
- Ockene JK, Aney J, Goldberg RJ, Kar JM, Williams JW. A survey of Massachusetts physicians’ smoking intervention practices. Am J Prev Med. 1988;4(1):14–20.
- Windsor RA, Lowe JB, Perkins LL, et al. Health Education for Pregnant Smokers: Its behavioral impact and cost benefit. Am J Public Health. 1993;83(2):201–206. CrossRef
- Simmons RA. Stop Smoking and Take Charge for You and Your Baby: A Smoking Cessation Intervention with Low-income Pregnant Women Enrolled in the WIC Nutrition Program. Dissertation. Los Angeles: University of California, 1990; #9023280.
- Hebert Jr., Kabat GC. Distribution of smoking and its association with lung cancer: implications for studies on the association of fat with cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1991;83:872–4. CrossRef
- Ockene JK, Hosmer DW, Williams JW, Goldberg RJ, Ockene IS, Raia TJ. Factors related to patient smoking status. Am J Public Health. 1987;77:356–7. CrossRef
- The physician-delivered smoking intervention project
Journal of General Internal Medicine
Volume 9, Issue 7 , pp 379-384
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Additional Links
- psychosocial factors
- smoking cessation
- patient-centered counseling
- intervention algorithm
- Industry Sectors
- Author Affiliations
- 1. the Department of Medicine, Division of Preventive and Behavioral Medicine, the University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts
- 3. the Department of Medicine, Division of General Medicine, the University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts
- 4. the Department of Family and Community Medicine, the University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts