Trial reportNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2016
Are Nurses and Auxiliary Healthcare Workers Equally Effective in Delivering Smoking Cessation Support in Primary Care?
Trial report in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- An examination of primary health care nursing service evaluation using the Donabedian model: A systematic review.Research in nursing & health · 2023Pooled it
- Effectiveness of registered nurses on patient outcomes in primary care: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- Effectiveness of registered nurses on system outcomes in primary care: a systematic review.BMC health services research · 2022Pooled it
- Strategies to improve smoking cessation rates in primary care.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Practice of smoking cessation counselling and its associated factors among government primary healthcare workers in Perak: A cross-sectional study.Malaysian family physician : the official journal of the Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia · 2026Article
- Attitudes and Practices of Family Physicians and Nurses in Evaluating Their Patients' Smoking Status: A Cross-sectional Study.Thoracic research and practice · 2025Article
- Characterising support and care assistants in formal hospital settings: a scoping review.Human resources for health · 2023Article
- Stop smoking advice by practice assistants after routine cervical screening in general practice: A qualitative exploration of potential barriers and enablers.The European journal of general practice · 2022Article
- Assessment of the Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Tailored Web- and Text-Based Smoking Cessation Support in Primary Care (iQuit in Practice II): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2020Article
- Mobile phone text messaging and app-based interventions for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSmoking cessation support is increasingly delivered in primary care by auxiliary healthcare workers in place of healthcare professionals. However, it is unknown whether this shift might affect the quality and impact of the support delivered.
methodsData from the iQuit in Practice randomized control trial of cessation support in General Practice was used (N = 602). Analyses assessed whether cessation advisor type (nurse or healthcare assistant [HCA]) was associated with abstinence (primary outcome: self-reported 2-week point prevalence abstinence at 8 weeks follow-up), the advice delivered during the initial consultation, pharmacotherapies prescribed, patient satisfaction, initial consultation length, and the number and type of interim contacts.
resultsThere were no statistically significant differences in abstinence for support delivered by HCAs versus nurses at 8 weeks (HCAs 42.8%, nurses 42.6%; unadjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.73 to 1.40), or at 4 weeks or 6 months follow-up. There were no statistically significant differences in advice delivered, the types of pharmacotherapies prescribed or patient satisfaction. Compared with nurses, HCA consultations were longer on average (HCAs 23.6 minutes, nurses 20.8 minutes; P = .002) and they undertook more interim contacts (HCAs median 2, nurses median 1; P < .001), with contact more likely to be face-to-face than phone call (HCAs 91.2%, nurses 70.9%; OR = 4.23, 95% CI = 2.86 to 6.26).
conclusionsHCAs appear equally effective as nurses in supporting smoking cessation, although they do this with greater patient contact. Using auxiliary practitioners to deliver cessation support could free up nurse time and reduce costs. IMPLICATIONS: This study found that primary care patients receiving smoking cessation support from auxiliary healthcare workers were just as likely to be abstinent up to 6 months later as those patients seen by nurses. While the auxiliary healthcare workers achieved this with slightly increased patient contact time, the advice delivered, pharmacotherapies provided and patient satisfaction were similar to that of nurses. Expanding the auxiliary healthcare worker role to include smoking cessation support could increase role satisfaction and reduce the costs of cessation support delivery in primary care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.