scholarly journals Randomized Trial of Telephone-Delivered Acceptance and Commitment Therapy Versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Smoking Cessation: A Pilot Study

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 1446-1454 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. B. Bricker ◽  
T. Bush ◽  
S. M. Zbikowski ◽  
L. D. Mercer ◽  
J. L. Heffner
Keyword(s):  
Smoking Cessation ◽  
Pilot Study ◽  
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy ◽  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Acceptance And Commitment Therapy ◽  
Behavioral Therapy ◽  
Cognitive Behavioral ◽  
Commitment Therapy ◽  
Acceptance And Commitment

scholarly journals Comparative Effectiveness of Group-Delivered Acceptance and Commitment Therapy versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Smoking Cessation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 354-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer B McClure ◽  
Jonathan Bricker ◽  
Kristin Mull ◽  
Jaimee L Heffner
Keyword(s):  
Smoking Cessation ◽  
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy ◽  
Randomized Trial ◽  
Acceptance And Commitment Therapy ◽  
Behavioral Therapy ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Acceptance And Commitment ◽  
Point Prevalence Abstinence

Abstract Introduction Preliminary trial data suggest group-delivered acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) might be effective for smoking cessation. If so, this could offer a viable alternative to mainstream behavioral therapies, such as those grounded in cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). The goal of the current study was to compare the effectiveness of group-delivered ACT versus group-delivered CBT in a rigorous randomized trial design with long-term follow-up. Methods Participants (n = 450) were recruited from the Kaiser Permanente Washington health care system and randomized to either ACT-based group counseling or an attention-matched CBT-based group program. All were prescribed an 8-week course of nicotine patches. The primary outcome was self-reported 30-day point prevalence abstinence at 12 months post-randomization assessed with missing values imputed as smoking. Sensitivity analyses using multiple imputation and complete cases were examined, as were biochemically confirmed and 6-month outcomes. Results Thirty-day point prevalence abstinence rates at the 12-month follow-up did not differ between study arms in the primary analysis (13.8% ACT vs. 18.1% CBT, adjusted odds ratio = 0.68 [95% CI = 0.35 to 1.27], p = .23) or the sensitivity analyses. Conclusions Group-based ACT and CBT had similar long-term quit rates in this methodologically rigorous randomized trial. Group-based ACT is a reasonable alternative to group-based CBT for smoking cessation. Implications This study compared the effectiveness of group-based ACT with group-based CBT for smoking cessation using a rigorous, large-scale, attention-matched, randomized trial with 1-year follow-up. One-year cessation rates did not differ between group-based ACT and CBT, suggesting ACT-based intervention is a reasonable alternative to CBT-based counseling for smoking cessation. The results add to the nascent but growing literature assessing ACT and other mindfulness-based treatments for smoking cessation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document