Abstract
Background
People living with HIV smoke at a rate three times that of the general population. This randomized controlled pilot trial tested the feasibility and acceptability of a video-call smoking cessation intervention in women living with HIV and its preliminary efficacy compared with a voice-call smoking cessation intervention. The study focused on women due to a paucity of studies among this population, and women are less likely than men to quit smoking when provided with conventional treatment.
Methods
Participants in both arms received an HIV-tailored smoking cessation intervention comprising eight 30-minute weekly counseling sessions in conjunction with active nicotine patches for 8 weeks. The only difference between the two arms was the delivery mode of the intervention: via either telephone-based video or voice call. Survival analysis and a Cox proportional hazard regression model were performed to identify factors predicting 6-month prolonged abstinence from smoking.
Results
A video-call intervention was almost 30% less feasible than a voice-call intervention because women in their 50s and 60s or poorer women living in some southern states did not have access to video-call equipment. However, those who received the video-call intervention were more likely to complete the study than those who had the voice-call intervention. There was no difference in the acceptability of the two interventions. A survival analysis revealed that those in the video arm were significantly more likely to maintain smoking abstinence over the 6-month follow-up period than those in the voice arm (log rank χ2=4.02, P<0.05).
Conclusion
Although a video-call intervention is less feasible than a voice-call intervention, the former seems to outperform the latter in achieving long-term smoking abstinence for women living with HIV, which may offer an advantage over establishing therapeutic alliance and visually monitoring their adherence to nicotine patches.
Clinical trial registration
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02898597.
Acknowledgments
The study was partially supported by a Joseph P. Healey Research Grant awarded to Drs Kim, Sprague, and DeMarco by the University of Massachusetts (UMass) Boston and the UMass Boston – Dana Farber Harvard Cancer Center U54 Partnership (U54 grant) to Drs Kim and DeMarco. The content of this article is solely the responsibility of the authors and in no way reflects the official policy of the university.
Disclosure
The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.