Tobacco Quitline Retreatment Interventions Among Adults With Socioeconomic Disadvantage: A Factorial Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE

A single round of standard tobacco quitline treatment may not be sufficient to sustain abstinence, particularly among people experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage. Adaptive retreatment may help more individuals with socioeconomic disadvantage achieve abstinence and reduce disparities in smoking cessation outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate 4 evidence-based strategies for adults with limited education, no insurance, or Medicaid eligibility who continued smoking after quitline treatment.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND

PARTICIPANTS

A factorial randomized clinical trial with 4 factors adapting quitline strategies was conducted for participants enrolled from June 7, 2018, to January 25, 2023, with 6-month follow-up. Adults using the Wisconsin Tobacco Quit Line who were smoking cigarettes 3 to 6 months after prior quitline treatment who were uninsured, Medicaid insured, or had no more than a high school education were included.

INTERVENTIONS: Quitline retreatment strategies were (1) increased counseling intensity (4 calls vs 1 call), (2) increased nicotine replacement therapy intensity (4 weeks of combination nicotine patch plus nicotine lozenge vs 2 weeks of nicotine patch), (3) text-message support (National Cancer Institute SmokefreeTXT program vs none), and (4) financial incentives for engagement in counseling and SmokefreeTXT ($30/call and/or 6-week SmokefreeTXT retention vs no incentives).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcome was 7-day point-prevalence biochemically confirmed abstinence 26 weeks after the target quit day. Intention-to-treat analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Of 6019 people assessed for eligibility, 1316 (21.9%) participants were randomized (mean [SD] age, 53.1 [11.9] years; 760 [57.8%] women), and 919 (69.8%) provided final follow-up. Intention-to-treat analyses showed 162 participants (12.3%) had biochemically confirmed abstinence at 26 weeks (368 [28.0% self-reported abstinence]). There were no significant main effects for the primary outcome: 1 call (11.6% [77 of 662]) vs 4 calls (13.0% [85 of 654]) (odds ratio [OR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.88-1.24), 2-week patch (11.2% [73 of 654]) vs 4-week combination nicotine replacement therapy (13.4% [89 of 662]) (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.94-1.34), no SmokefreeTXT (13.4% [88 of 657]) vs SmokefreeTXT (11.2% [74 of 659]) (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74-1.05), and no financial incentives (12.8% [85 of 662]) vs financial incentives (11.8% [77 of 654]) (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.78-1.11).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this randomized clinical trial evaluating enhancements to tobacco quitlines for adults with socioeconomic disadvantage who were smoking after quitline treatment, none of the adaptive treatment strategies robustly improved long-term abstinence. Strategies are needed to enhance quitline retreatment effectiveness for adults with socioeconomic disadvantage.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03538938.