180 likes | 339 Views
EXPERIMENT 1. “Comparing Two web-based Smoking Cessation Programs: Randomized-Controlled Trial” By: McKay et. Al. Summary. Authors believe that internet smoking cessation programs have potential to be an innovative and easy to use smoking cessation aid.
E N D
EXPERIMENT 1 “Comparing Two web-based Smoking Cessation Programs: Randomized-Controlled Trial” By: McKay et. Al
Summary • Authors believe that internet smoking cessation programs have potential to be an innovative and easy to use smoking cessation aid. • Also wanted to test cognitive behavioral program and examine its efficacy. • Recent studies only have short follow-up intervals. • Goal: To determine the effectiveness of an online smoking cessation program as compared with a general health/exercise program adjusted to include smoking.
Methods • Two web-based smoking cessation programs • QSN (Quit Smoking Network) – cognitive behavioral strategies • Active Lives – Control exercise group • Measures • Post-program evaluation of smoking at 3 months and 6 months • Questionnaires about Self-Efficacy, Program usability, and support • IV – QSN vs. Active Lives group • DV – Number of times program was acessed / Smoking at three and six months post-program
Results • Contrary to hypothesis, no significant between programs effectiveness at quitting smoking 3 and 6 months after program. • Participants in QSN group did spend more time with the program and rated it higher on usability. • Possible confounds: • limited access (averaging one time a day) • Material could possibly be forgotten easily due to limited access
Discussion • Potentially replace cognitive therapy with behavioral measures instead. • Cue identification • Researchers suggest finding a way to increase participant engagement • Researchers also experienced a 55% attrition rate at 6 months making follow-ups less accurate.
Study 1 “Concurrent Drinking and Smoking Among College Students” By: Witkiewitz et. al.
Summary • Association between drinking and smoking habits among college-aged students • 98% of student smokers report alcohol use • Few studies of concurrence of behaviors • More drinks per cigarette smoked and vice-versa • Potential dopaminergic reward system overlap
Summary (Cont.) • Purpose: to evaluate potential contextual behavior effects of smoking and drinking • Look for applications to current treatment programs to see if drinking behavior is sufficiently explored in smoking cessation programs
Methods • 111 college age students asked to keep a 21 day diary of smoking and drinking habits • Had 4-5 drinks in one drinking session in the past month • Replied to text/e-mail surveys three times a day and at participant’s will dependent on behavior
Results • Individuals at parties are 3.57 times more likely to smoke cigarettes; 2.17 times more likely at bar • Even stronger correlations with daily smokers • Increase in both behaviors respectively after engaging in the first • Drinking leads to increased desire to smoke and vice-versa
Results (Cont.) • Also more likely to drink more and smoke more cigarettes if both behaviors are engaged in • Discussion section suggests focus on social cues as a potential cause of relapse for smoking.
Experiment 3 “Effects of Brief Cognitive Intervention Aimed at Communicating the Negative Reinforcement Explanation for Smoking on Relevant Cognitions and Urges to Smoke” By: McDermott, Marteau, and Hajek
Summary • Current model of cessation programs is withdrawal symptom management (Nicotine dependence) • Unchanged levels of smoking in the UK (22%) • Taking smokers already in cessation programs • Randomly select individuals to take an additional cognitive intervention focused on negative reinforcement (smoking to remove anxiety)
Methods • IV – Control group vs. Experimental group • Control = video on the health effects of smoking • Experimental = negative reinforcement explanation of smoking • DV – Likert scales on urges to smoke and strength of urges 1 week after smoking
Results • Patients had access to different nicotine addiction medications (potential confound) • No significant difference between groups. • Although the negative reinforcement intervention program was preferred, cognitive intervention did not seem to inhibit urge to smoke.
Results (Cont.) • Potential Confounds • Only consisted of one session with one week in between assessment • Information could have been easily forgotten by participants • Discussion • Patients with higher education levels may benefit more from the cognitive intervention
Sources • McDermott, M. S., Marteau, T. M., & Hajek, P. (2011). Effects of a brief cognitive intervention aimed at communicating the negative reinforcement explanation for smoking on relevant cognitions and urges to smoke. Journal Of Smoking Cessation, 6(2), 112-118. doi:10.1375/jsc.6.2.112 • McKay, H., Danaher, B. G., Seeley, J. R., Lichtenstein, E., & Gau, J. M. (2008). Comparing two web-based smoking cessation programs: Randomized controlled trial. Journal Of Medical Internet Research, 10(5), 68-81. doi:10.2196
Sources (Cont.) • Witkiewitz, K., Desai, S. A., Steckler, G., Jackson, K. M., Bowen, S., Leigh, B. C., & Larimer, M. E. (2012). Concurrent drinking and smoking among college students: An event-level analysis. Psychology Of Addictive Behaviors, 26(3), 649-654. doi:10.1037/a0025363