Intended for healthcare professionals

  1. Research
  2. Cost effectiveness of...
  3. Cost effectiveness of computer tailored and non-tailored smoking cessation letters in general practice: randomised controlled trial
Primary Care

Cost effectiveness of computer tailored and non-tailored smoking cessation letters in general practice: randomised controlled trial

BMJ 2001; 322 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.322.7299.1396 (Published 09 June 2001) Cite this as: BMJ 2001;322:1396
  1. A Scott Lennox (s.lennox{at}abdn.ac.uk), clinical research fellowa,
  2. Liesl M Osman, senior research fellowb,
  3. Ehud Reiter, lecturerc,
  4. Roma Robertson, research assistantc,
  5. James Friend, professor of respiratory medicineb,
  6. Ian McCann, research assistanta,
  7. Diane Skatun, research fellowd,
  8. Peter T Donnan, medical statisticiane
  1. a Department of General Practice and Primary Care, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB25 2AY
  2. b Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, University of Aberdeen
  3. c Department of Computing Science, University of Aberdeen
  4. d Health Economics Research Unit, University of Aberdeen
  5. e Medicines Monitoring Unit, Department of Clinical Pharmacology, University of Dundee, Dundee DD1 9SY
  1. Correspondence to: A Scott Lennox
  • Accepted 8 March 2001

Abstract

Objectives: To develop and evaluate, in a primary care setting, a computerised system for generating tailored letters about smoking cessation.

Design: Randomised controlled trial.

Setting: Six general practices in Aberdeen, Scotland.

Participants: 2553 smokers aged 17 to 65.

Interventions: All participants received a questionnaire asking about their smoking. Participants subsequently received either a computer tailored or a non-tailored, standard letter on smoking cessation, or no letter.

Main outcome measures: Prevalence of validated abstinence at six months; change in intention to stop smoking in the next six months.

Results: The validated cessation rate at six months was 3.5% (30/857) (95% confidence interval 2.3% to 4.7%) for the tailored letter group, 4.4% (37/846) (3.0% to 5.8%) for the non-tailored letter group, and 2.6% (22/850) (1.5% to 3.7%) for the control (no letter) group. After adjustment for significant covariates, the cessation rate was 66% greater (−4% to 186%; P=0.07) in the non-tailored letter group than that in the no letter group. Among participants who smoked <20 cigarettes per day, the cessation rate in the non-tailored letter group was 87% greater (0% to 246%; P=0.05) than that in the no letter group. Among heavy smokers who did not quit, a 76% higher rate of positive shift in “stage of change” (intention to quit within a particular period of time) was seen compared with those who received no letter (11% to 180%; P=0.02). The increase in cost for each additional quitter in the non-tailored letter group compared with the no letter group was £89.

Conclusions: In a large general practice, a brief non-tailored letter effectively increased cessation rates among smokers. A tailored letter was not effective in increasing cessation rates but promoted shift in movement towards cessation (“stage of change”) in heavy smokers. As a pragmatic tool to encourage cessation of smoking, a mass mailing of non-tailored letters from general practices is more cost effective than computer tailored letters or no letters.

What is already known on this topic

What is already known on this topic Brief opportunistic advice on stopping smoking that is given face to face by health professionals increases rates of cessation by 2-3%

Intensive, expert-led interventions increase cessation rates by up to 20% or more but are expensive and reach only a small proportion of smokers

Written advice tailored to an individual's “stage of change” (intention to stop in a particular period of time) has been claimed to be as effective as intensive interventions, but previous studies of tailored written advice did not biochemically validate cessation

What this paper adds

What this paper adds A simple standard letter sent to patients of general practices that gave brief advice on stopping smoking increased the biochemically validated rate of cessation by 2%

A letter tailored to the individual's “stage of change” was not more effective than the non-tailored standard letter

Although the increase in cessation resulting from the non-tailored standard letter was small, this intervention was highly cost effective

Footnotes

  • Funding The Chief Scientist Office, Scottish Executive Health Department, with additional funding from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council. The Health Economics Research Unit is funded by the Chief Scientist Office. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not those of the funding bodies.

  • Competing interests None declared.

View Full Text
Back to top