4.4 Article

Randomized, controlled pilot trial of a smartphone app for smoking cessation using acceptance and commitment therapy

期刊

DRUG AND ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE
卷 143, 期 -, 页码 87-94

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.07.006

关键词

Smoking cessation; Nicotine dependence; mHealth; Telephone; Acceptance; Mindfulness

资金

  1. Hartwell Innovation Fund of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
  2. National Cancer Institute [R01CA166646, R01CA151251]
  3. National Institute on Drug Abuse [K23DA026517]
  4. National Institute of Mental Health [T32MH082709]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: There is a dual need for (1) innovative theory-based smartphone applications for smoking cessation and (2) controlled trials to evaluate their efficacy. Accordingly, this study tested the feasibility, acceptability, preliminary efficacy, and mechanism of behavioral change of an innovative smartphone-delivered acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) application for smoking cessation vs. an application following US Clinical Practice Guidelines. Method: Adult participants were recruited nationally into the double-blind randomized controlled pilot trial (n =196) that compared smartphone-delivered ACT for smoking cessation application (SmartQuit) with the National Cancer Institute's application for smoking cessation (QuitGuide). Results: We recruited 196 participants in two months. SmartQuit participants opened their application an average of 37.2 times, as compared to 15.2 times for QuitGuide participants (p < 0001). The overall quit rates were 13% in SmartQuit vs. 8% in QuitGuide (OR = 2.7; 95% CI = 0.8-10.3). Consistent with ACT's theory of change, among those scoring low (below the median) on acceptance of cravings at baseline (n = 88), the quit rates were 15% in SmartQuit vs. 8% in QuitGuide (OR = 2.9; 95% CI= 0.6-20.7). Conclusions: ACT is feasible to deliver by smartphone application and shows higher engagement and promising quit rates compared to an application that follows US Clinical Practice Guidelines. As results were limited by the pilot design (e.g., small sample), a full-scale efficacy trial is now needed. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据