Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ttngx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-05T16:06:27.827Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Efficacy of an SMS-Based Smoking Intervention Using Message Self-Authorship: A Pilot Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 December 2016

Krista L. DeStasio Open the ORCID record for Krista L. DeStasio [Opens in a new window] ,
Anne P. Hill  and
Elliot T. Berkman Open the ORCID record for Elliot T. Berkman [Opens in a new window]
Krista L. DeStasio*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR
Anne P. Hill
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, New York University, New York
Elliot T. Berkman
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR
*
Address for correspondence: Krista L. DeStasio, Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403. Email: kdestasi@uoregon.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction: Text-message-based interventions hold great potential for intervention and are increasingly feasible, given advances in information technology.

Aims: This pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) aims to compare the efficacy of self-versus expert-authored content delivered via text-messaging for smoking cessation.

Methods: Sixty-two participants aged 25–66 attended laboratory sessions pre- and post-30 days of text-messaging intervention. Participants were randomised to one of two experimental conditions – self-authorship (SA) only and SA with implementation intentions (SA+ii) – or active control. Participants composed 30–60 brief motivational cessation messages for use during their cessation attempt. SA+ii participants were further instructed to anticipate obstacles and form simple if-then plans to overcome them. Experimental groups received their self-authored texts during the intervention phase, whereas control participants received expert-authored messages.

Results: Overall, smoking decreased as measured by change in exhaled carbon monoxide (CO), F(1,59) = 4.43, p = 0.04. The SA+ii group showed slightly greater CO reduction (M = 3.63, SD = 5.39) than control (M = 0.03, SD = 5.80; t(40) = 2.08, p = 0.04). SA alone (M = 1.97, SD = 9.30) was not more effective than control.

Conclusions: SA does not appear to increase efficacy. However, this pilot supports prior research, indicating that text-based interventions can increase smoking cessation success and may decrease psychological symptoms of withdrawal. Much research is needed to identify ways to bolster intervention efficacy.

Type
Protocol
Information
Journal of Smoking Cessation , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , March 2018 , pp. 55 - 58
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Deicision Processes, 50, 179–211.Google Scholar
Bargh, J. A. (1982). Attention and automaticity in the processing of self-relevant information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43 (3), 425–436. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.43.3.425.Google Scholar
Biener, L., & Abrams, D. B. (1991). The contemplation ladder: Validation of a measure of readiness to consider smoking cessation. Health Psychology, 10 (5), 360–365. http://doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.10.5.360.Google Scholar
Borland, R., Balmford, J., & Benda, P. (2013). Population-level effects of automated smoking cessation help programs: A randomized controlled trial. Addiction, 108 (3), 618–628. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.04091.x.Google Scholar
Campbell, M. K., DeVellis, B. M., Strecher, V. J., Ammerman, A. S., DeVellis, R. F., & Sandler, R. S. (1994). Improving dietary behavior: The effectiveness of tailored messages in primary care settings. American Journal of Public Health, 84 (5), 783–787.Google Scholar
Deci, E. L., Eghrarl, H., Patrick, B. C., & Leone, D. R. (1994). Facilitating internalization: The self-determination theory perspective. Journal of Personality, 62 (1), 119–142.Google Scholar
Falk, E. B., Berkman, E. T., Whalen, D., & Lieberman, M. D. (2011). Neural activity during health messaging predicts reductions in smoking above and beyond self-report. Health Psychology, 30 (2), 177–185. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0022259.Google Scholar
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison Wesliey.Google Scholar
Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (1999). Implementation intentions. American Psychologist, 54 (7), 493–503.Google Scholar
Head, K. J., Noar, S. M., & Iannarino, N. T. (2013). Efficacy of text messaging-based interventions for health promotion: A meta-analysis. Social Science & Medicine, 97, 41–48. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953613004474.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heatherton, T. F., Kozlowski, L. T., Frecker, R. C., & Fagerstrom, K. (1991). The fagerstrom test for nicotine dependence: A revision of the fagerstrom tolerance questionnaire. Addiction, 86 (9), 1119–1127. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.1991.tb01879.x.Google ScholarPubMed
Naughton, F., Jamison, J., Boase, S., Sloan, M., Gilbert, H., Prevost, A. T. et al. (2014). Randomized controlled trial to assess the short-term effectiveness of tailored web- and text-based facilitation of smoking cessation in primary care (iQuit in Practice). Addiction, 109 (7), 1184–1193. http://doi.org/10.1111/add.12556.Google Scholar
Noar, S. M., Benac, C. N., & Harris, M. S. (2007). Does tailoring matter? Meta-analytic review of tailored print health behavior change interventions. Psychological Bulletin, 133 (4), 673–693. http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.673.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petty, R. E., Barden, J., & Wheeler, S. C. (2009). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion: Health promotions that yield sustained behavioral change. In DiClemente, M. C. K. R. J., Crosby, R. A. (Eds.), Emerging theories in health promotion practice and research (2nd ed., pp. 71–99). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, Prochaska.Google Scholar
QuitJuice. (2011). Retrieved March 1, 2016, from http://quitjuice.com/.Google Scholar
Rimer, B. K., & Kreuter, M. W. (2006). Advancing tailored health communication: A persuasion and message effects perspective. Journal of Communication, 56 (Suppl.), S184–S201. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00289.x.Google Scholar
Shiffman, S. M., & Jarvik, M. E. (1976). Smoking withdrawal symptoms in two weeks of abstinence. Psychopharmacology, 50 (1), 35–39. http://doi.org/10.1007/BF00634151.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strecher, V. J., & Rosenstock, I. M. (1997). The health belief model. In Baum, A., Newman, S., Weinman, J., West, R., & McManus, C. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of psychology, health, and medicine (pp. 113–117). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar