Search

To study associations between language acculturation level and changes in cigarette consumption among the diverse and growing U.S.-based Hispanic/Latino population and inform culturally tailored smoking prevention and cessation strategies. In the Hispanic Community Health Survey/Study of Latinos cohort, we used cigarette consumption behaviors at baseline (2008–2011) and follow-up (2014–2017) and a modified Short Acculturation Scale for Hispanics (SASH) language subscale to measure associations of language acculturation (unidimensional) with changes in cigarette consumption and quitting rates. Weighted multivariable linear and logistic regressions were stratified by daily (n = 1397) and nondaily (n = 633) smoking, and either sex, educational attainment, or migration status. Smokers at baseline (n = 2030) on average were aged 42 years old (SE = 0.5) with a mean SASH-language score of 2.3 (SE = 0.1; range = 1–5), indicating more Spanish language use. Among male daily smokers, we observed increases in smoked cigarettes-per-day (CPD) with unit increases in SASH-language score (1.08, 95% CI: 0.24–1.92). Associations with acculturation trended toward greater increases in CPD and lower odds of quitting as educational attainment increased. Language acculturation level is an important determinant for increased smoking behaviors, particularly among men. Our findings are significant in informing smoking reduction programs for the Hispanic/Latino population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We examined the effects of smoking habit change on the risk of depression using the National Health Insurance Service-National Health Screening Cohort database of Korea.Methods: This nationwide population-based cohort study included 88,931 men aged 40 years or older. The participants were divided into baseline heavy (≥20 cigarettes/day), moderate (10-19 cigarettes/day), and light (<10 cigarettes/day) smokers, quitters, and never smokers. Smokers were then categorized as continual smokers, reducers, quitters, and non-smokers based on the two-year change in smoking status between the first and second health examinations. The participants were followed from the index date to 2013 to assess depression status. Cox proportional models were used to examine the effects of smoking habit change on the risk of depression.Results: After a median 7.7 years of follow-up, 2,833 depression cases were identified. Never smokers and long-term quitters had a lower risk of depression than heavy continual smokers (hazard ratio, HR 0.817; 95% CI, confidence interval 0.689-0.967 and HR: 0.691; 95% CI: 0.559-0.853, respectively). Short-term quitters and reducers had a lower risk of depression, but it was not significant. The influence of smoking on depression was prominent among men in their 50 s (HR: 0.585; 95% CI: 0.419-0.820 in long-term quitters, HR:.0.738; 95% CI: 0.570-0.954 in never smokers).Limitations: The information about smoking habits was based on self-reported questionnaires. This study examined only men because the smoking rate among women in Korea is very low.Conclusions: This population-based study found that never smokers and long-term quitters have lower risk of depression. The risk of depression decreased when the amount of smoking decreased, but the difference was not statistically significant. Furthermore, more attention should be paid to middle-aged men when formulating smoking cessation policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Smoking reduction treatment is a promising approach to increase abstinence amongst smokers initially unwilling to quit. However, little is known about which reduction treatment elements increase quit attempts and the uptake of cessation treatment amongst such smokers.Methods: This study is a secondary analysis of a 4-factor randomized factorial experiment conducted amongst primary care patients (N = 517) presenting for regular healthcare visits in Southern Wisconsin who were unwilling to quit smoking but willing to cut down. We evaluated the main and interactive effects of Motivation-phase intervention components on whether participants: 1) made a quit attempt (intentional abstinence ≥24 h) by 6- and 26-weeks post-study enrollment and, 2) used cessation treatment. We also evaluated the relations of quit attempts with abstinence. The four intervention components evaluated were: 1) Nicotine Patch vs. None; 2) Nicotine Gum vs. None; 3) Motivational Interviewing (MI) vs. None; and 4) Behavioral Reduction Counseling (BR) vs. None. Intervention components were administered over 6 weeks, with an option to repeat treatment; participants could request cessation treatment at any point.Results: Nicotine gum significantly increased the likelihood of making a quit attempt by 6 weeks (23% vs. 15% without gum; p < .05). Conversely, nicotine patch reduced quit attempts when used with BR. Patch also discouraged use of cessation treatment (15.8% vs. 23% without patch; p < .05). Aided vs. unaided quit attempts produced abstinence in 42% vs. 10% of participants, respectively.Conclusion: Nicotine gum is a promising Motivation-phase intervention that may spur quit attempts amongst smokers initially unwilling to quit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is limited evidence about the effects of dual electronic cigarette (e-cig) and combustible cigarette use on lung health or other health outcomes. Studies that have evaluated these outcomes have not included estimates of e-cig or cigarette exposure in the analyses.Materials and Methods: Data analyzed were from 263 smokers participating in a randomized controlled trial designed to encourage participants to reduce their combustible cigarette use by substituting with an e-cig or a non-electronic cigarette substitute (cig-sub). t-tests were used to evaluate changes from baseline at 1 month and 3 months in lung function, blood pressure, pulse, exhaled carbon monoxide, and weight. Linear mixed effects models were used to test associations between health outcomes and study product group, including exposure to the study products (e-cig and cig-sub times used and days used in the past 7 days) and cigarettes per day (CPD).Results: There were few significant differences between the groups for lung function indices at any time point in the unadjusted analyses. There were significant reductions in diastolic blood pressure and pulse at 1 month in the unadjusted analyses for those in the e-cig group compared to the cig-sub group. CPD decreased significantly more for the e-cig group than for the cig-sub group at both time points. There were no significant associations between any measured health outcomes and group in the linear mixed effects models.Conclusion: E-cig use did not contribute to significant changes in health outcome markers as compared with use of a non-electronic cig-sub. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mecamylamine is a nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) antagonist that was recently used in a clinical trial to treat alcohol use disorder (AUD) in both smokers and non-smokers. The current manuscript reports a reanalysis of data from this clinical trial in which we examine changes in smoking that occurred over the course of the trial. We focused on examining the effects of mecamylamine on smoking and the association between reductions in alcohol use and smoking. Participants were the subgroup of smokers who participated in the clinical trial of mecamylamine (10 mg/day) to treat their AUD (n = 76). Smoking was assessed prior to randomization and tracked throughout the course of the 12-week medication treatment phase. Participants were categorized as treatment responders or non-responders based on their changes in drinking over the course of the clinical trial. Participants showed a reduction in smoking over the course of the clinical trial, but there were no significant differences in smoking outcomes between the mecamylamine and placebo groups. Among moderate/high dependence smokers, those who successfully reduced drinking showed a significant reduction in cigarettes smoked per day over the clinical trial. Mecamylamine had no detectable effect on smoking outcomes. Reductions in alcohol use predicted more favorable smoking outcomes among moderate/high tobacco dependence smokers irrespective of medication condition. The reduction in smoking among patients who decreased their alcohol use responders highlights an opportunity for patients being treated for AUD to reduce their smoking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Despite previous evidence supporting the use of the Cigarette Purchase Task (CPT) as a valid tool for assessing smoking reinforcement, research assessing how environmental changes affect CPT performance is scarce.Aims: This study addressed for the first time the differential effect of treatment condition [Cognitive Behavioral Treatment (CBT) + Behavioral Activation (BA) versus CBT + BA + Contingency Management (CM)] on cigarette demand among treatment seeking smokers with depressive symptoms. It also sought to assess whether reductions in smoking consumption arranged over the course of an intervention for smoking cessation impact on in-treatment cigarette demand.Method: Participants were 92 smokers with depressive symptoms from a randomized clinical trial that received eight weeks of either CBT + BA or CBT + BA + CM. Individuals completed the CPT 8 times; the first during the intake visit and the remaining 7 scheduled once a week in midweek sessions. Cotinine samples were collected in each session.Results: Participants receiving CBT + BA + CM showed higher reduction in cigarette demand across sessions than participants receiving CBT + BA, although this comparison was only significant for the intensity index (p = .004). Cotinine was positively related to cigarette demand (all p values < .001), although this association became less prominent across sessions. In-treatment cotinine decreases were associated with demand reductions (all p values < .001), but this association was not significant for elasticity.Conclusions: Reductions in nicotine intake arranged over the course of an intervention for smoking cessation impact in-treatment cigarette demand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To compare the effectiveness of quitting immediately and cutting down to quit in promoting smoking abstinence among smokers in an outpatient clinic.Methods: A total of 100 subjects were randomized into two groups, 50 in the quit immediately group, who received an intervention on abruptly quitting, and 50 in the cut down to quit group, who received an intervention on gradual reduction. All subjects were followed up at 6 and 12 months via telephone. The intention-to-treat principle was used.Results: At the 6-month follow-up, the self-reported quit rate of subjects in the quit immediately group was significantly higher than in the cut down to quit group (18.0% vs. 4.0%, p = 0.04). However, this difference was not significant at the 12-month follow-up (12.0% vs. 4.0%, p = 0.16).Conclusion: These data suggest that quitting immediately might be more effective than cutting down to quit at 6 months but not at 12 months.Practice Implications: It is crucial to allow smokers to select quitting immediately or reducing the number of cigarettes smoked. Further studies are warranted to compare the effectiveness of various approaches for achieving smoking abstinence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is limited evidence on how cigarette smokers use electronic cigarettes (ECIGs) for smoking cessation and reduction. This study used concept mapping, a participatory mixed-methods research approach, to identify ECIG use behaviors and device characteristics perceived to be associated with cigarette smoking cessation or reduction.Methods: Current ECIG users aged 18-64 were recruited from seven cities selected randomly from U.S. census tract regions. Participants were invited to complete concept mapping tasks: brainstorming, sorting and rating (n=72). During brainstorming, participants generated statements in response to a focus prompt ("A SPECIFIC WAY I HAVE USED electronic cigarettes to reduce my cigarette smoking or a SPECIFIC WAY electronic cigarettes help me reduce my cigarette smoking is…") and then sorted and rated the statements. Multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analyses were used to generate a cluster map that was interpreted by the research team.Results: Eight thematic clusters were identified: Convenience, Perceived Health Effects, Ease of Use, Versatility and Variety, Advantages of ECIGs over Cigarettes, Cigarette Substitutability, Reducing Harms to Self and Others, and Social Benefits. Participants generated several statements that related to specific behavioral strategies used when using ECIGs for smoking reduction/complete switching behaviors such as making rapid transitions from smoking to ECIG use or using certain ECIG liquids or devices. Former smokers rated the Perceived Health Effects cluster and several behavioral strategy statements higher than current smokers.Conclusions: These results help to identify ECIG use behaviors and characteristics perceived by ECIG users to aid in cigarette smoking cessation or reduction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

E-cigarettes remain controversial because the scientific evidence of short term and long term effects on tolerance and the health value of a switch from tobacco to e-cigarettes is contested and controversial. Nevertheless the quality of e-cigarettes and e-liquids has improved. The main ingredients, propylene glycol, vegetable glycerine and nicotine are pharmaceutical-grade quality in most e-liquids. Flavors are almost all food grade. The high quality of ingredients has decreased the presence of impurities in e-liquids. The emissions of e-cigarettes do not contain solid particles or carbon monoxide. Nitrosamine content is at least one hundred times lower than in tobacco smoke. E-cigarette emissions in normal use do not contain any harmful constituents at significant levels except nicotine. UK public health authorities have stated that e-cigarette use is likely to be at least 95% less toxic than cigarette use. There are benefits from having a well-regulated legal market. In countries where e-liquid containing nicotine is not allowed, “do-it-yourself” liquids are common and have handling risks and may sometimes contain toxic impurities. Though e-cigarettes should never be assumed safe products for non-smokers, for smokers, the e-cigarette is at least 20 times less dangerous than the cigarette. Tobacco cessation specialists in countries where nicotine containing e-cigarettes are available increasingly provide counselling for e-cigarette use to stop smoking or to reduce smoking at the request of patients. Based on current knowledge, for patients with lung or other forms of cancer who would otherwise continue to smoke, e-cigarettes offer an alternative way to quit smoking while they undergo medical treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Homeless populations have high rates of smoking and unique barriers to quitting. General cessation strategies have been unsuccessful in this population. Smoking reduction may be a good intermediate goal. We conducted a secondary analysis to identify predictors of smoking reduction in a cohort of homeless smokers enrolled in a 26-week randomized clinical trial (RCT) targeting smoking cessation.Methods: Data are from an RCT comparing motivational interviewing counseling plus nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) to brief advice to quit (standard care) plus NRT among homeless smokers. Using bivariate analyses and multinomial logistic regression, we compared demographics, health and psychosocial variables, tobacco use, substance use, and NRT adherence among those who reported: quitting; reducing smoking by 50-99%; and not reducing smoking by 50%.Results: Of 324 participants who completed 26-week follow-up, 18.8% and 63.9% self-reported quitting and reducing, respectively. Compared to those who did not reduce smoking, participants reporting reducing indicated higher baseline cigarette use (OR=1.08; CI:1.04-1.12) and menthol use (OR=2.24; CI:1.05-4.77). Compared to participants who reduced, participants reporting quitting were more likely to be male (OR=1.998; CI:1.00-3.98), experience more housing instability (OR=1.97; CI:1.08-3.59), indicate higher importance of quitting (OR=1.27; CI:1.041.55), have higher NRT adherence (OR=1.75; CI:1.00-3.06), and lower odds of reported illicit drug use (OR=0.48; CI:0.24-0.95).Conclusions: Over half of participants reduced smoking by at least 50%, indicating reduction is feasible among homeless smokers. Further research is required to understand the impact of reduction on future cessation attempts in homeless smokers. This study shows that reduction is achievable and may be a valid intermediate goal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Clinical trials have found that the use of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) to reduce cigarette consumption results in significant declines in cigarette consumption and increases smokers' propensity to quit. However, observational “real-world” studies have found much smaller effects. This may be because of low levels of NRT use. This study examined the association between amount and duration of NRT use amongst those attempting to reduce their cigarette consumption with motivation to quit and cigarette consumption. Methods Data came from 2,158 smokers who took part in the Smoking Toolkit Study. A representative survey of smokers in England aged 16 +. Results Only 54.4% of patch users and 32.2% of non-transdermal NRT users reported using NRT with a frequency that would be expected to substantially influence cigarette consumption (4 + units per day for acute NRT forms and at least daily for transdermal patches). Those using the patch at or above this threshold smoked 1.3 cigarettes per day fewer than those using it below the threshold ( p = 0.059), whilst those using non-transdermal NRT at or above this threshold smoked 0.9 cigarettes less per day ( p = 0.022). In both cases, those using NRT more frequently had greater motivation to quit. Less than 1/5th of participants reported using a combination of NRT products. Use of NRT long-term was associated with lower motivation to quit and higher cigarette consumption. Conclusion Smokers attempting to reduce their cigarette intake are underusing NRT and this is associated with cigarette consumption and motivation to quit. These findings may explain why population-based studies have failed to report similar findings to clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background This study tests whether the genetic predictor ( CHRNA5 nicotine receptor gene variants) and an environmental risk factor (partner smoking) interact in the prediction of smoking reduction. Methods Subjects were from a community-based, longitudinal study of women ( n = 1856) who smoked before pregnancy, and a randomized comparative effectiveness smoking cessation trial ( n = 1065). Smoking reduction was defined as the trajectory of self-reported smoking quantities over time in the observational study, and as the trajectory of alveolar CO levels in the cessation trial. Results In the pregnancy study, rs16969968 genotype and partner smoking status interacted such that the smoking reduction was lowest for expectant mothers with high genetic risk and partner smoking, and highest for those with high genetic risk but not partner smoking (interaction of genotype × partner smoking on smoking quantity trajectory slope β = 0.071, 95%CI = 0.013, 0.13, p = 0.017). In the clinical trial, a similar interaction was found (interaction β = 0.20, 95%CI = 0.049, 0.36, p = 0.010). Furthermore, these associations were moderated by pharmacotherapy such that the interactive relation of genetic and environmental factors occurred in the placebo group, but not in the active pharmacotherapy group (interaction of genotype × partner smoking × pharmacotherapy on CO trajectory slope β = −0.25, 95%CI = −0.42, −0.091, p = 0.0023). Conclusions The CHRNA5 genetic risk synergized the effect of partner smoking, producing an especially low likelihood of successful smoking reduction in two complementary studies. This suggests that the genetic vulnerability may be mitigated by altering environmental factors. In addition, cessation pharmacotherapy neutralizes the increase in cessation failure associated with combined genetic and environmental risks, which has possible relevance to treatment algorithms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Smokers who use nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) to aid smoking reduction (SR) are more likely to quit smoking than those who try to reduce without NRT. This could be because NRT enhances the likelihood of quitting or because those who are motivated to quit choose to use NRT (i.e., selection bias). Methods: ‘Propensity score matching’ was used to assess whether the increased likelihood of a quit attempt in those using NRT for SR would remain in a subsample of smokers paired on variables indicative of the likelihood of making a quit attempt and using NRT (i.e., when selection bias is reduced). Measures were obtained on a range of smoking and socio-demographic variables at baseline, then after 3 and 6 months. Fifty-eight smokers who were attempting SR at 3 months were matched on baseline measures to 58 smokers not using NRT for SR. The odds of their going on to make a quit attempt in the following 3 months were then compared. Results: In smokers matched on motivational and other variables for their propensity to use NRT to aid smoking reduction, those using NRT for SR had three times greater odds of reporting a quit attempt than those not using NRT (OR 3.23; CI 1.49–7.01; p <0.01). Conclusion: The increased likelihood of subsequently trying to stop smoking among smokers who use NRT to aid SR versus those who try to reduce without NRT, remains following the matching of participants on motivational and other potentially relevant variables. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Introduction: Tobacco quitlines (QLs) are efficacious and have assisted many smokers in achieving tobacco abstinence. However, most smokers are not able to achieve tobacco abstinence with QL services. QL counseling interventions for smokers who do not quit on their target quit date (TQD) and decline to set a new TQD after missing their TQD have not been systematically evaluated. Methods: A telephone survey of tobacco QLs in the United States (US) was conducted to examine systematic approaches used with smokers who do not quit on their TQD and decline to set a new TQD. Tobacco QLs service providers were identified through the North American Quitline Consortium (NAQC). Results: Fourteen service providers managing QLs of all 50 US states were identified and completed the voluntary survey. All providers recommended setting a new quit TQD if smokers did not achieve smoking cessation by their initial TQD. Six percent of US state QLs used brief motivational interviewing utilizing the “5R's” (relevance, risk, rewards, roadblocks, repetition). However, 90% of QLs had intervention protocols emphasizing smoking rate reduction. Conclusion: Although some US QLs utilized the “5Rs,” the majority provided smoking reduction interventions for smokers not achieving tobacco cessation by their initial TQD and declining to set a new TQD. Research is needed to evaluate the efficacy of smoking rate reduction methods implemented through QLs for increasing smoking abstinence rates. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Background: Limited treatment options exist for smokers who are not ready to make a quit attempt. Smoking reduction may be a viable treatment approach if proven to increase the rates of long-term abstinence from smoking. Method: A systematic review of randomized, controlled trials that tested smoking-reduction interventions (pharmacological, behavioral, or both combined) among smokers who were not ready to make a quit attempt (immediately or in the next month) was conducted to assess the efficacy of these strategies in promoting future smoking abstinence. The primary outcome was the 7-day point-prevalence smoking abstinence at longest follow-up (≥6months). Ten trials were included; six tested pharmacologic interventions, one evaluated a behavioral intervention, and three evaluated combined interventions. Results: Pharmacologic (2732 participants; OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.43 to 3.79) and combined (638 participants; OR 2.14, 95% CI: 1.28 to 3.60) smoking-reduction interventions significantly increased long-term abstinence from smoking. Insufficient evidence was available on the efficacy of behavioral smoking-reduction interventions (320 participants; OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.56 to 3.93). Conclusions: Further research to evaluate the efficacy of smoking reduction should have cessation as an endpoint, focus on clarity and consistency in patient selection, and identify the mechanism through which nicotine replacement therapy assisted smoking reduction in increasing abstinence rates. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Much is known about the outcomes of different smoking reduction and cessation programs. However there is a lack of information about the degree to which such programs can achieve successes after initial failures. This study evaluated the patterns of success and failure during a smoking reduction intervention with a sample of 164 adult smokers (mean age 62; mean baseline smoking rate 21.2 cigarettes per day) who wanted to reduce their smoking but were not ready to attempt cessation. Success was defined by both self-reported number of cigarettes smoked assessed during counseling calls and carbon monoxide levels at 3 and 12month follow-ups. There was a strong relationship between initial success/failure and eventual outcome using both assessment methods, and a moderate relationship between success categorization using the different methods (r=.43). Qualitative contextual data identified that types of travel, work and family environmental barriers experienced differed across success categories. This research confirms the importance of initial success in changing addictive behaviors and suggests directions for future research; including ways to enhance initial success, and the suggestion that more study is needed regarding the generalizability of these findings across settings and behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: It is still unclear how brief counseling for smoking cessation, combined with proactive recruitment of participants, impacts on those smokers not reaching the primary treatment goal of tobacco abstinence. Thus, within a quasi-randomized controlled trial, we examined the effects of (1) practitioner-delivered brief advice and (2) computer-generated tailored letters on cigarettes per day (CPD) among participants not succeeding in quitting. Methods: A total of 34 general practices (participation rate 87%) were randomly selected in a German region. Within these practices, 1499 daily smoking patients aged 18–70 years (participation rate 80%) agreed to participate in a smoking cessation intervention trial. Allocation to study condition was based on time of practice attendance. Latent growth analyses were performed on the subsample of 1334 (89%) smokers who did not reach 6-month prolonged abstinence within the 2-year follow-up period. CPD was assessed at baseline and at 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-month follow-ups. Results: Both interventions led to small but significant reductions in CPD, and they did not differ in efficacy. Treatment effects occurred within the first 6 months and could be sustained by the continuing smokers until the 24-month follow-up. Conclusions: Present results complement earlier findings of increased abstinence rates in the total sample. It can be concluded that, even if applied to unselected samples of smokers, from which only a minority initially intends to change, both brief counseling strategies are able to significantly decrease tobacco consumption. They hence appear to provide a means to reducing tobacco-related disease among general medical practice patients. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Background: Individuals in methadone maintenance treatment are motivated to quit smoking and are interested in smoking cessation treatment. However, few studies have assessed the efficacy of smoking cessation treatment for individuals undergoing methadone maintenance. The purpose of this article is to review interventions for tobacco use cessation among individuals in methadone maintenance with a particular emphasis on the components of such interventions and their effect on smoking cessation/reduction and drug use. Methods: A comprehensive search of six databases in June 2008 retrieved 584 research studies, which addressed smoking cessation interventions among individuals in substance use treatment. Of the retrieved articles, eight studies addressed smoking cessation among individuals undergoing methadone maintenance treatment. These studies were examined for effect of intervention on smoking cessation/reduction, gender differences in treatment outcomes, and the effect of the smoking cessation intervention on substance use behaviors. Results: Few studies demonstrated successful smoking abstinence among individuals in methadone maintenance treatment. Most interventions were associated with significant smoking reduction from baseline. Few studies assessed differences between men and women in smoking cessation treatment outcome. Smoking cessation treatment was not associated with increased substance use. Conclusions: To date, interventions among individuals in methadone treatment have been largely unsuccessful in achieving sustained smoking abstinence. However, smoking cessation treatment does not worsen substance use. Future studies are necessary to determine intervention designs and components that can enhance smoking cessation among individuals in methadone maintenance. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: This secondary analysis examined whether smoking reduction among young adults participating in a Facebook-based smoking cessation intervention study was associated with corresponding reductions in alcohol consumption and depressive symptoms.Methods: Participants were young adults who smoked and engaged in heavy episodic drinking (HED). Alcohol consumption (AUDIT-C, days of HED), depressive symptoms (PHQ-2), and past-month cigarettes per day (CPD) were self-reported at baseline and 12 months (N = 150). Linear regression estimated the relationship between the mean change in CPD and mean changes in alcohol consumption and depressive symptoms.Results: CPD, alcohol consumption, and depressive symptoms decreased significantly between baseline and 12 months. The adjusted mean reduction in CPD was significantly associated with mean reductions in AUDIT-C (Beta [β] = 0.09, 95 % confidence interval [CI] = 0.04-0.14), days of HED (β = 0.17, 95 % CI = 0.04-0.29) and PHQ-2 (β = 0.05, 95 % CI = 0.01-0.08). Smoking abstinence (n = 48) was associated with a significantly larger mean reduction in AUDIT-C compared to a ≥50 % reduction (n = 45) (-2.9 vs -1.7 points, p = 0.03) or <50 % reduction in CPD (n = 57) (-2.9 vs -1.1 points, p < 0.01). The mean reduction in AUDIT-C did not differ between a ≥50 % reduction and <50 % reduction in CPD (-1.7 vs.-1.1 points, p = 0.18). Mean reductions in days of HED and the PHQ-2 did not differ according to the level of reduction in CPD.Conclusion: Smoking reduction was associated with reductions in alcohol consumption and depressive symptoms. Reductions appeared to be greater for those who achieved abstinence compared to a reduction in smoking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Rationale: Nicotine replacement therapies (NRT) have been evaluated to facilitate cigarette smoking reduction in smokers unwilling or unable to quit. In most of these studies, only conventional doses of NRT have been tested and higher doses may be required to result in significant reductions in smoking and in biomarkers of exposure. Objective: To determine if higher NRT doses in conjunction with smoking are safe and may promote significant reductions in cigarette smoking and biomarkers of exposure. Methods: A dose-ranging, within-subject design was implemented to evaluate the effects of 15, 30 and 45 mg nicotine-patch treatment on measures of safety and the extent of smoking reduction and biomarker exposure per cigarette in smokers (N =20 completers) not immediately interested in quitting. Results: Concurrent smoking and NRT were generally tolerated and resulted in no changes in blood pressure or heart rate. Slightly less than 10% of the study sample was not given the highest dose of NRT due to side effects. Self-reported cigarette smoking decreased with increasing doses of nicotine replacement and significant reductions were observed for total NNAL (a carcinogen biomarker) and carbon monoxide. However, even at the 45 mg dose, increased carbon monoxide and total NNAL per cigarette occurred, even though cotinine levels increased on average, 69.3% from baseline. Conclusions: The present results suggest that the use of high dose NRT is safe, leads to significant reductions in smoking (−49%), significant but less reductions in total NNAL (−24%) and carbon monoxide (−37%) due to compensatory smoking. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Summary: Introduction: Individuals exposed both to cigarette smoke and respiratory pollutants at work incur a greater risk of development of airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) and accelerated decline in forced expiratory volume in 1s (FEV1) than that incurred by subjects undergoing each exposure separately. We examined whether smoking cessation or smoking reduction improves AHR and thereby slows down the decline in FEV1 in occupationally exposed workers. Methods: We examined 165 workers (137 males and 28 females) participating in a smoking cessation programme. Nicotine tablets were used for smoking cessation or smoking reduction. Respiratory symptoms were assessed by questionnaire, FEV1 by spirometry and AHR by methacholine challenge test. At 1 year, subjects were classified into quitters, reducers, or continuing smokers. Results: Sixty-seven subjects completed the study (32 quitters; 17 reducers; 18 continuing smokers). Respiratory symptoms improved markedly in quitters ( for all comparisons) and less so in reducers (P values between 0.163 and 0.027). At 1 year, FEV1 had slightly but significantly improved in quitters ( vs. smokers; vs. reducers) and markedly deteriorated in reducers and continuing smokers. Concurrent, 1-year change in AHR did not differ significantly among the groups. Conclusion: In occupationally exposed workers, stopping smoking markedly improved respiratory symptoms and, in males, slowed the annual decline in FEV1. Smoking reduction resulted in smaller improvements in symptoms but deterioration in FEV1. These findings were independent of AHR. While smoking cessation should remain the ultimate goal in workplace cessation programmes more studies are necessary to better ascertain the benefits of smoking reduction. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Although a substantial body of literature has established a relationship between cue reactivity and theoretically relevant addiction variables, the association with treatment process variables remains largely unexplored. In the current investigation, 62 smokers participated in a smoking cue reactivity study, and subsequently enrolled in a smoking cessation program. Hierarchical regressions revealed mean heart rate during the cue presentation phase of the laboratory-based assessment predicted final session smoking rate and expired CO level. Fagerström Tolerance Questionnaire score also predicted final session smoking rate. To the extent that rate reduction serves as an index of treatment progress, it may be of value in future cue reactivity research. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: There is a need for innovative approaches capable of reaching smokers who would not otherwise participate in efforts to modify their smoking. This paper reports on two studies to determine whether a smoking reduction intervention would appeal to additional or different types of smokers than do cessation interventions. Study 1 attempted to contact 160 HMO smokers scheduled for outpatient surgeries. In Study 2, actual pilot reduction and cessation programs were offered to 531 smokers about to undergo out-patient surgeries or procedures. In Study 1, 39% of those eligible elected smoking reduction; and 38% selected cessation. In Study 2 of those eligible, 22% began participation in the smoking reduction program; 12% preferred a cessation approach; and 65% declined. There were few demographic or smoking history differences among those who elected smoking reduction, cessation, or declined. Among this understudied population, a sizable proportion in both studies agreed to participate in smoking reduction. If replicated, this suggests that comprehensive programs that include a smoking reduction component could substantially increase their reach. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Comparisons were made between cigarette smokers seeking treatment to quit smoking and cigarette smokers seeking treatment to reduce the number of cigarettes they smoke. Potential subjects were recruited from the local metropolitan area by advertisement in the local media. A total of 665 cigarette smokers telephoned our clinic to seek treatment for smoking cessation and 565 cigarette smokers telephoned to seek treatment to gradually reduce the number of cigarettes they smoke but not quit smoking. Potential subjects were instructed to call the clinic to find out additional information about the studies, and while on the telephone they were asked questions pertaining to tobacco use and health status. The results show that the two populations are similar in many respects with the following exceptions: smokers seeking treatment to reduce cigarette use tend to smoke more cigarettes per day, are less motivated to quit, make fewer quit attempts, drink more alcoholic beverages per day, and have more health problems (Ps<.05). These results indicate that cigarette smokers seeking treatment for smoking reduction but not cessation may be more dependent smokers who experience more medical disorders. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

: PurposeTo examine differences in the explanatory power of variables thought to discriminate between students who smoke and students who have reduced (or quit).: MethodThe design is a two-group test of differences on 33 variables identified from previous studies of adolescent smoking and cessation as potential discriminators, which represent a variety of perceptual, behavioral, social, and psychological factors. Data are from a national survey of U.S. high school students administered in 1997 by the Monitoring the Future project.: ResultsThe most effective variables involve smoking-related beliefs and perceptions, particularly in anticipated future smoking status, attempted quitting, number of smoking friends, and perceptions of other smokers. Personality and psychological variables were not effective at discriminating between the two groups. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

This research investigated (1) how the coronavirus pandemic impacted tobacco addiction, (2) which smoker segments were more vulnerable, and (3) how the changes in tobacco consumption were associated with smokers' satisfaction with physical health and psychological well-being. Data from a large-scale cross-sectional study of adults in China were analyzed. Outcome measures were the quantity of cigarettes consumed per day prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the quantity after the nationwide outbreak had been contained, satisfaction with physical health, and emotional well-being. Analyses revealed that, after the nationwide outbreak, more individuals quit (vs. started) smoking. Compared to their pre-COVID-19 consumption levels, smokers significantly reduced the quantity of cigarettes they consumed after the nationwide outbreak had been contained. However, there were substantial disparities across individuals: male (vs. female) smokers were less able to curb their smoking; smokers residing in urban (vs. rural) areas or with a longer smoking history were also less able to reduce their smoking. Importantly, a greater reduction in smoking was associated with higher satisfaction with physical health and better emotional well-being. Furthermore, a follow-up investigation revealed that concerns about increased COVID-19 health risks due to smoking were a primary factor driving smokers' behavior change. Overall, these results suggest that, to help smokers fight tobacco addiction and improve well-being, pandemic health policies need to take account of the differences in vulnerability across individuals and leverage the psychological factors that can facilitate behavior change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]