Cited by 35Smoking Behavior and CessationSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research

A smoking ban in public places increases the efficacy of bupropion and counseling on cessation outcomes at 1 year

Grassi, M. Caterina, Enea, Domenico, Ferketich, Amy K., Lu, Bo, Nencini, Paolo·2009·Nicotine & Tobacco Research

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Legal restrictions have contributed to the decline in smoking prevalence in several European countries. We investigated the impact of the Italian 2005 indoor smoking ban on the efficacy of counseling alone or in combination with bupropion for smoking cessation. METHODS: Before and after the introduction of the ban (2001-2006), 550 smokers were enrolled in the smoking cessation program in Rome and were asked to choose between a 6-week group counseling therapy (GCT) given alone or in combination with 7 weeks of daily bupropion. Follow-up was completed 12, 26, and 52 weeks after the quit day. Due to the observational nature of the study, we used propensity scores to match 138 and 290 subjects (pre-/postban) in the bupropion- and GCT-only groups, respectively. RESULTS: Covariate balance in the two matched samples was adequate for all variables except "coffee consumption" in the GCT-only group. The regression adjusted odds ratios indicated that the introduction of the ban resulted in 52% reduced odds of continued smoking at 12 months among the GCT + bupropion group and 41% reduced odds in the GCT-only group. We observed that the ban was associated with both increased 12-month abstinence rates and motivation to quit. In a mediation analysis, we determined that the total effect of the smoking ban on the abstinence rate was reduced after controlling for motivation, which confirmed that motivation was a partial mediator. DISCUSSION: The introduction of an indoor smoking ban improved the efficacy of smoking cessation treatments by possibly providing a setting that increased the level of motivation to stop smoking.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/ntr/ntp110

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grassi, M. C., Enea, D., Ferketich, A. K., Lu, B., & Nencini, P.
Affiliations
Policlinico Umberto I (IT)
Venue
Nicotine & Tobacco Research
Published
2009-08-04
Volume
11
Issue
9
Pages
1114-1121
ISSN
  • 1462-2203 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-994X
OpenAlex
W1994093445
Cited by
35
References
54
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 6
FWCI
4.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nicotine & Tobacco Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Keywords
smoking bans, indoor smoking bans, bupropion, smoking cessation, group counseling, motivation to quit, abstinence, Rome, mediation analysis
MeSH terms
Smoking Prevention, Adult, Combined Modality Therapy, Counseling, Delayed-Action Preparations, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Health Education, Humans, Italy, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Middle Aged, Smoking, Tobacco Use Disorder, Smoking Cessation, Bupropion, Treatment Outcome, Dopamine Uptake Inhibitors, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review