Effectiveness of a school-based smoking cessation program for adolescents in Taiwan - individual intervention versus group intervention

ABSTRACT

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of two methods to intervene in adolescent smoking in Taiwan and evaluate quitting behavior 6 months later.

Methods: A total of 143 adolescent smokers were randomly assigned to individual or group intervention. The participants completed a questionnaire with demographic information items and items based on the theory of planned behavior. Quitting success was measured after 6 months.

Results: In all, 46 participants (32.2%) had successfully quit smoking at the 6-month follow-up. The individual intervention abstinence rate was significantly higher (41.7%) than that of the group intervention (25.3%). A multiple logistic regression analysis revealed intervention was positively related to quitting behavior. Smoking adolescents with low quitting intention had a higher quit rate following individual intervention, although pa high quitting intention was associated with a higher quit rate among group intervention participants.

Conclusions: Both individual and group intervention greatly helped participants quit successfully. However, participants receiving individual intervention exhibited a higher success rate. Adolescent smokers with high quitting intention had remarkably similar success rates in either individual or group intervention. Adolescents with low quitting intention only achieved a high success rate in smoking cessation with individual intervention. Therefore, different interventions can be applied according to level of quitting intention.

KEYWORDS:

• Smoking cessation
• adolescent
• group intervention
• individual intervention

Acknowledgments

We thank Jung-Jung Chang for revising this paper and the students who participated in this study. We dedicate this work to the counselors for hard work and their daily commitment to the health of our children.

Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.