禁煙を望まない人への治療：支援しようとして害を与えているのか？

Motivation-phase smoking treatment can increase treatment reach and abstinence in persons unmotivated to quit smoking. However, Motivation-phase treatment is modestly and inconsistently effective. This research aims to identify factors that may influence the effectiveness of the two intervention components most commonly used in Motivation-phase treatment: nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and reduction counseling.

An exploratory, secondary analysis of a 4-factor, randomized trial enrolled 577 primary care patients who were willing to reduce, but not quit, smoking. Participants were randomized to the following interventions: smoking reduction counseling, nicotine mini-lozenge, behavioral activation counseling, and 5Rs-motivational counseling. Using a precision medicine approach, machine learning analyses determined whether demographic and smoking variables identified persons more likely to benefit from the interventions with regard to 24-hour quit attempts, entry into cessation treatment, and self-reported 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 1 year.

Quitting self-efficacy predicted the likelihood of making a quit attempt and entering cessation treatment. At high levels of self-efficacy (>3.5 out of 5), there were no significant effects of interventions. At low levels of self-efficacy (≤3.5 out of 5), receiving reduction counseling reduced the odds of making a quit attempt (OR = 0.51, p = 0.002), and receiving mini-lozenge reduced the odds of entering cessation treatment (OR = 0.55, p = 0.02). No significant effects were found for smoking abstinence.

Baseline quitting self-efficacy may identify persons who will not be aided by standard Motivation-phase treatment and thus require a different therapeutic approach. These results raise questions about whom to treat, and how to treat, individuals who decline cessation treatment.