Biomedical subjects

Andrew Hyland

Publications and source records attributed to Andrew Hyland.

44 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

PubMedDate not supplied

Cigarette purchasing behaviors when prices are high.

The objective of this study was to assess the cigarette purchase patterns of smokers in Erie and Niagara Counties following recent increases in the state excise tax for cigarettes. Data were collected with telephone interviews of a sample of 1,548 randomly selected people in Erie and Niagara Counties between October 2002 and March 2003. Purchase patterns were assessed for the 908 smokers in the sample who responded to questions about cigarette purchasing patterns. Thirty-three percent reported that their usual source of cigarettes is from a small store, large store, pharmacy, or vending machine, while 67% reported that their usual source is from an Indian reservation. Only one smoker reported the Internet was a usual source of cigarettes. The average price paid per pack was $4.80 in a small store and $1.91 on an Indian reservation. Price influences smoking behavior; however, the majority of smokers are taking advantage of readily available venues where less expensive, untaxed cigarettes are sold. This may undermine the public health benefit of higher prices and cause lost revenue to state and local governments.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Avoidance of smoky establishments: findings from Erie and Niagara Counties in New York.

The objective of this study was to determine the extent to which people avoid smoky restaurants, bars, bowling alleys, casinos, and bingo halls because of secondhand smoke. Data were collected with telephone interviews of a sample of 1,548 randomly selected adults in Erie and Niagara Counties between October 2002 and March 2003. Most nonsmokers (71%) reported that they are bothered by secondhand smoke. Thirty-four percent of nonsmokers and 10% of smokers responded that they had avoided patronizing a smoky establishment in the past 12 months. The places that were most often avoided were restaurants (17%), bars or taverns (13%), and bingo halls (9%).

Adolescent↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Reach, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of free nicotine medication giveaway programs.

In an effort to increase access to evidence-based smoking cessation therapies, regional tobacco control programs in New York State implemented different interventions to make free nicotine patches and gum available to smokers wishing to quit. In one region, eligible smokers were sent a voucher redeemable at a local pharmacy for a 2-week supply of either nicotine patches or gum. In other regions, smokers received either a 1-week supply or a 2-week supply of nicotine patches sent to their home. In New York City, eligible smokers received a 6-week supply of nicotine patches and a follow-up phone call. All of the programs utilized the state's Smokers' Quitline to screen and register eligible smokers for the free medication. The reach of the different programs was evaluated by computing the proportion of eligible smokers within a given area enrolled in the program and tracking call volume to the Quitline before, during, and after the free giveaway promotions. Efficacy was evaluated by a telephone follow-up survey of program participants conducted 4 months after enrollment to measure use of the medications and smoking behavior. The quit rate of program participants was contrasted with the quit rate computed from an earlier follow-up survey of Quitline callers who were not provided nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Free nicotine patches or gum was sent to 40,090 smokers representing about 2.9 percent of eligible heavy smokers (10+ cigarettes per day) in the state. In each time period and location where free NRT was offered, call volume to the Quitline increased dramatically. Quit rates varied in relationship to the supply of NRT sent to participants, but in all cases was higher than the quit rate observed among smokers not sent NRT (21%-35% vs 12%). The offer of free NRT appears to be a cost-effective method to induce large numbers of smokers to make a quit attempt.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Financial incentives to promote smoking cessation: evidence from 11 quit and win contests.

In an effort footline to motivate smokers across New York State to stop smoking, tobacco control programs across the state held 'Quit and Win' incentive-based stop-smoking contests. These contests encouraged smokers to make a quit attempt by offering a chance to win cash prize (usually 1,000 dollars) for successfully stopping smoking for at least 1 month. Between 2001 and 2004, 11 different Quit and Win Contests involving 5,504 adult smokers were sponsored in different communities across New York State. Follow-up surveys were conducted 4 to 6 months after each contest ended to evaluate participants' success in quitting smoking. Expenditures for promoting contests varied from a high of 91,441 dollars to a low of 4,345 dollars, with a median of 25,928 dollars. An average of 0.55 percent of smokers was recruited to join contests across the 11 communities. Among smokers who enrolled in a contest, 9 out of 10 reported making a quit attempt, and between 53 percent and 72 percent reported quitting for the full month of the contest. At 4 to 6 months follow-up, self-reported quit rates (7-day point prevalence) among contestants ranged from 22 percent to 49 percent, with an average of 31 percent. Based on a statewide population survey, 8 of the 11 programs showed quit rates that were significantly higher (P < .001 by Wilcoxon rank-sum test) than the estimated quit rate of 21 percent seen among smokers making a quit attempt in the past year. This study shows that for a relatively modest investment of resources, thousands of smokers can be recruited to make a serious quit attempt, with many remaining smoke-free months later.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Concurrent quit & win and nicotine replacement therapy voucher giveaway programs: participant characteristics and predictors of smoking abstinence.

This study compares the participant characteristics, program costs, and outcomes of a Quit & Win contest and a nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) voucher giveaway promotion. Both programs were conducted simultaneously so that smokers could enroll in either one program alone (n = 849 and 690, respectively) or both programs (Combination group; n = 230). A follow-up telephone survey of a random sample of participants was conducted 4 to 7 months after enrollment to evaluate smoking status. At enrollment, participants in the three groups were comparable on most smoking and demographic variables, although Quit & Win participants were, on average, younger than those who signed up to get the NRT voucher. Compared with the characteristics of smokers in the region, those who enrolled in the intervention programs were heavier smokers and had more years of formal education. At follow-up, the self-reported quit rates were similar across the three intervention groups, ranging between 25 percent and 30 percent. The only evidence for a higher quit rate among those in the Combination group was among younger smokers. On a simple estimated cost per quit basis, the Quit & Win (130 dollars) and NRT (179 dollars) voucher interventions appear roughly comparable. In all groups, abstinence rates were higher among lighter smokers (<21 cigarettes per day), participants who did not live with another smoker, and those who were married. Both the Quit & Win and NRT voucher giveaway programs were effective in recruiting smokers to make a quit attempt, although combining both interventions did not generally increase abstinence rates.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Giving away free nicotine medications and a cigarette substitute (Better Quit) to promote calls to a quitline.

This article presents results from two population-based promotions for free cessation products used to induce smokers to call the New York State Smokers'. The first promotion was a press announcement urging smokers to call the quitline to get a voucher for a free 2-week supply of nicotine patches or gum (nicotine replacement therapy [NRT]). The second promotion involved comparing response to two newspaper advertisements for the quitline, one of which offered a free stop smoking guide and one that offered the guide plus a free stop smoking aide called Better Quit (BQ). Responses to each promotion were monitored by tracking the call volume to the quitline-before, during, and after each of the promotions. The NRT voucher promotion increased median call volume 25-fold compared to prepromotion levels, whereas the BQ newspaper advertisement increased median call volume 2-fold compared to a newspaper advertisement for the quitline, which did not offer BQ. A random sample of 732 smokers who received the free NRT voucher were followed up 4 to 6 months later to determine their use of NRT and smoking behavior. Embedded within this follow-up study was a randomized experiment in which half the smokers were mailed a quit kit with BQ included and the other half received just the quit kit. Seventy percent of follow-up survey respondents said that they had redeemed the NRT voucher and used the medication to try to quit smoking. Twenty-two percent reported they were no longer smoking, compared with the 12 percent among a comparison group of quitline callers who had not received the free NRT voucher (odds ratio = 1.77; 95% confidence interval: 1.17-2.68). There was no difference in quit rates between those that were sent the BQ cigarette substitute and those that did not get the BQ. This study shows that offering a free 2-week voucher for NRT is a cost-effective method to increase calls to a stop smoking quitline and may also increase the odds of quitting for those who get the free NRT.

Female↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Which population-based interventions would motivate smokers to think seriously about stopping smoking?

OBJECTIVE: To describe what smokers say about the impact of different population-based interventions to motivate them to think seriously about stopping smoking. METHODS: A random-digit dialed cross-sectional telephone survey of adult current cigarette smokers was conducted in Erie and Niagara counties, New York, in October through November 2002. A total of 815 smokers were asked which of eight interventions would motivate them to think seriously about stopping smoking in the next 6 months. RESULTS: The offer of free nicotine patches/gum (53%) and cash incentives (49%) were the most frequently mentioned interventions that smokers said would get them to think seriously about stopping smoking. The degree of motivation to stop smoking was the most consistent and strongest predictor of how respondents answered the question about the influence of the various intervention options. CONCLUSION: Communities need to offer a wide array of interventions that are likely to appeal to different subgroups of smokers in order to have a population-wide impact on smoking behavior.

Adolescent↗

PubMedDate not supplied

State and community tobacco-control programs and smoking-cessation rates among adult smokers: what can we learn from the COMMIT intervention cohort?

PURPOSE: To assess the long-term effect of a randomized community-based trial of smoking cessation and to examine the effect of exposure to large state-based tobacco-control programs on smoking cessation. DESIGN: Longitudinal tobacco-use telephone surveys conducted in 1988, 1993, and 2001. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Baseline smokers (6603) from 20 communities in 9 states completed a survey in 2001 (35% of the original sample). INTERVENTION: The Community Intervention Trial for Smoking Cessation (COMMIT) intervention was a randomized community-based smoking-cessation intervention between 1988 and 1993. In addition, cohort data were used to evaluate quasi-experimental differences in the strength of state-level tobacco control programs and policies. MEASURES: Multivariate logistic regression was used to compare quit rates among those who were exposed to community- or state-level tobacco-control programming and those who were not between 1988 and 2001. RESULTS: Quit rates were higher in the COMMIT intervention communities during the period when the trial was funded (Relative Risk [RR] = 1.19) but were no different than comparison communities 8 years later after funding stopped. Quit rates were highest in those communities in states with both strong tobacco-control policies and aggressive tobacco-control programs, such as California and Massachusetts (RR = 1.44) compared with those communities in states that had little tobacco-control activity, such as Iowa, New Mexico, and North Carolina. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that well-funded tobacco-control programming coupled with tobacco-control policies may be associated with increases in cessation rates.

Adult↗