UCSF

Background

Chinese American men smoke at a high rate, which puts household nonsmokers at risk. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a brief-intensity versus moderate-intensity smoke-free-living educational intervention for household pairs.

Methods

The authors conducted a randomized controlled trial of Cantonese-speaking Chinese American smoker and household nonsmoker pairs in San Francisco, California. Pairs were randomized to moderate-intensity or brief-intensity group sessions with their household partner. The moderate-intensity group received 2 group sessions, a laboratory report of their baseline smoke exposure, as measured by 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL), and 3 follow-up calls over 6 months. The brief-intensity group received 1 group session on tobacco-cessation resources. Primary outcomes were biochemically validated, past-month smoking abstinence and elimination of nonsmoker household exposure at 12 months.

Results

Participant pairs (n = 203) were male smokers, one-half of whom did not intend to quit within 6 months, with mostly female spouses as household nonsmokers. Approximately three-quarters of nonsmokers in both groups already had smoke-free home rules. At 12 months, smokers in both groups had similar biochemically validated 30-day abstinence rates (moderate-intensity group, 0%-20.7%; brief-intensity group, 0%-20.0%; P = .002 over time). More smokers in the moderate-intensity group used subsequent cessation group classes (moderate-intensity group, 50%; brief-intensity group, 24%; P = .004). Household nonsmokers in both groups had similar biochemically validated rates of no home exposure (moderate-intensity group, 24.5%-42.2%; brief-intensity group, 24.8%-33.3%; P = .0001 over time).

Conclusions

A moderate-intensity smoke-free-living educational intervention for Chinese-speaking household pairs was not more effective than a brief-intensity intervention for smoking abstinence and elimination of household nonsmoker exposure. Abstinence rates were similar to those achieved with standard group counseling. Cancer 2018;124:1590-8. © 2018 American Cancer Society.