Motivational support intervention to reduce smoking and increase physical activity in smokers not ready to quit: the TARS RCT
Taylor, AH; Thompson, TP; Streeter, A; et al.Chynoweth, J; Snowsill, T; Ingram, W; Ussher, M; Aveyard, P; Murray, RL; Harris, T; Green, C; Horrell, J; Callaghan, L; Greaves, CJ; Price, L; Cartwright, L; Wilks, J; Campbell, S; Preece, D; Creanor, S
Date: 30 March 2023
Article
Journal
Health Technology Assessment
Publisher
NIHR Journals Library
Publisher DOI
Abstract
Background: Physical activity can support smoking cessation for smokers wanting to quit, but there
have been no studies on supporting smokers wanting only to reduce. More broadly, the effect of
motivational support for such smokers is unclear.
Objectives: The objectives were to determine if motivational support to increase physical ...
Background: Physical activity can support smoking cessation for smokers wanting to quit, but there
have been no studies on supporting smokers wanting only to reduce. More broadly, the effect of
motivational support for such smokers is unclear.
Objectives: The objectives were to determine if motivational support to increase physical activity and
reduce smoking for smokers not wanting to immediately quit helps reduce smoking and increase
abstinence and physical activity, and to determine if this intervention is cost-effective.
Design: This was a multicentred, two-arm, parallel-group, randomised (1 : 1) controlled superiority trial
with accompanying trial-based and model-based economic evaluations, and a process evaluation.
Setting and participants: Participants from health and other community settings in four English cities
received either the intervention (n = 457) or usual support (n = 458).
Intervention: The intervention consisted of up to eight face-to-face or telephone behavioural support
sessions to reduce smoking and increase physical activity.
Main outcome measures: The main outcome measures were carbon monoxide-verified 6- and
12-month floating prolonged abstinence (primary outcome), self-reported number of cigarettes smoked per day, number of quit attempts and carbon monoxide-verified abstinence at 3 and 9 months.
Furthermore, self-reported (3 and 9 months) and accelerometer-recorded (3 months) physical activity
data were gathered. Process items, intervention costs and cost-effectiveness were also assessed.
Results: The average age of the sample was 49.8 years, and participants were predominantly from areas
with socioeconomic deprivation and were moderately heavy smokers. The intervention was delivered
with good fidelity. Few participants achieved carbon monoxide-verified 6-month prolonged abstinence
[nine (2.0%) in the intervention group and four (0.9%) in the control group; adjusted odds ratio 2.30
(95% confidence interval 0.70 to 7.56)] or 12-month prolonged abstinence [six (1.3%) in the intervention
group and one (0.2%) in the control group; adjusted odds ratio 6.33 (95% confidence interval 0.76 to
53.10)]. At 3 months, the intervention participants smoked fewer cigarettes than the control participants
(21.1 vs. 26.8 per day). Intervention participants were more likely to reduce cigarettes by ≥ 50% by 3
months [18.9% vs. 10.5%; adjusted odds ratio 1.98 (95% confidence interval 1.35 to 2.90)] and 9
months [14.4% vs. 10.0%; adjusted odds ratio 1.52 (95% confidence interval 1.01 to 2.29)], and
reported more moderate-to-vigorous physical activity at 3 months [adjusted weekly mean difference of
81.61 minutes (95% confidence interval 28.75 to 134.47 minutes)], but not at 9 months. Increased
physical activity did not mediate intervention effects on smoking. The intervention positively influenced
most smoking and physical activity beliefs, with some intervention effects mediating changes in smoking
and physical activity outcomes. The average intervention cost was estimated to be £239.18 per person,
with an overall additional cost of £173.50 (95% confidence interval −£353.82 to £513.77) when
considering intervention and health-care costs. The 1.1% absolute between-group difference in carbon
monoxide-verified 6-month prolonged abstinence provided a small gain in lifetime quality-adjusted life years (0.006), and a minimal saving in lifetime health-care costs (net saving £236).
Conclusions: There was no evidence that behavioural support for smoking reduction and increased
physical activity led to meaningful increases in prolonged abstinence among smokers with no immediate
plans to quit smoking. The intervention is not cost-effective.
Limitations: Prolonged abstinence rates were much lower than expected, meaning that the trial was
underpowered to provide confidence that the intervention doubled prolonged abstinence.
Future work: Further research should explore the effects of the present intervention to support
smokers who want to reduce prior to quitting, and/or extend the support available for prolonged
reduction and abstinence.
Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN47776579
Health and Community Sciences
Faculty of Health and Life Sciences
Item views 0
Full item downloads 0
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © 2023 Taylor et al. This work was produced by Taylor et al. under the terms of a commissioning contract issued by the Secretary of State for Health and Social
Care. This is an Open Access publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0 licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution,
reproduction and adaption in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. For attribution the title, original author(s), the publication source – NIHR Journals Library, and the DOI of the publication must be cited