The 5A's vs 3A's plus proactive quitline referral in private practice dental offices: Preliminary results

Judith S Gordon, Judy A. Andrews, Karen M. Crews, Thomas J. Payne, Herbert H. Severson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

53 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aims: The primary aim of our randomised control trial (RCT) was to evaluate the relative efficacy of two dental office based interventions compared to usual care. One intervention consisted of a combination of dental practitioner advice to quit and proactive telephone counselling (3A's), and the other arm consisted of a dental practitioner delivered intervention based on the 5A's of the Clinical Practice Guideline (5A's). Method: 2177 tobacco using patients were enrolled from 68 dental practices in Mississippi. We collected 3-month outcome data from 76% (n = 1652) of participants. Results: Smokers in the two intervention conditions quit at a higher rate than those in usual care; χ2 (1, n = 1381) = 3.10, p<0.05. Although not significant, more patients in the 5A's condition quit than those in the 3A's. Of patients in the 3A's Condition, 50% reported being asked by their dentist or hygienists about fax referral to the quitline, and 35% were referred. Quitline counsellors contacted 143 (70%) referred participants. Conclusion: These results suggest that there are both advantages and disadvantages to the use of quitlines as an adjunct to brief counselling provided by dental practitioners. Patients receiving quitline counselling quit at higher rates than those who did not; however, only a small percentage of patients received counselling from the quitline. Therefore, it appears that dental professionals may be most effective in helping their patients to quit by regularly providing the 5A's plus proactively referring only those patients who are highly motivated to a quitline for more intensive counselling.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)285-288
Number of pages4
JournalTobacco Control
Volume16
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2007
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dental Offices
Private Practice
counseling
Referral and Consultation
Counseling
Tooth
fax
dentist
Telefacsimile
counselor
Mississippi
nicotine
telephone
Dentists
Practice Guidelines
Telephone
Tobacco

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Health Policy
  • Epidemiology

Cite this

The 5A's vs 3A's plus proactive quitline referral in private practice dental offices : Preliminary results. / Gordon, Judith S; Andrews, Judy A.; Crews, Karen M.; Payne, Thomas J.; Severson, Herbert H.

In: Tobacco Control, Vol. 16, No. 4, 08.2007, p. 285-288.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gordon, Judith S ; Andrews, Judy A. ; Crews, Karen M. ; Payne, Thomas J. ; Severson, Herbert H. / The 5A's vs 3A's plus proactive quitline referral in private practice dental offices : Preliminary results. In: Tobacco Control. 2007 ; Vol. 16, No. 4. pp. 285-288.
@article{27a3ad9c10c54367b92e5bcdd72bfef4,
title = "The 5A's vs 3A's plus proactive quitline referral in private practice dental offices: Preliminary results",
abstract = "Aims: The primary aim of our randomised control trial (RCT) was to evaluate the relative efficacy of two dental office based interventions compared to usual care. One intervention consisted of a combination of dental practitioner advice to quit and proactive telephone counselling (3A's), and the other arm consisted of a dental practitioner delivered intervention based on the 5A's of the Clinical Practice Guideline (5A's). Method: 2177 tobacco using patients were enrolled from 68 dental practices in Mississippi. We collected 3-month outcome data from 76{\%} (n = 1652) of participants. Results: Smokers in the two intervention conditions quit at a higher rate than those in usual care; χ2 (1, n = 1381) = 3.10, p<0.05. Although not significant, more patients in the 5A's condition quit than those in the 3A's. Of patients in the 3A's Condition, 50{\%} reported being asked by their dentist or hygienists about fax referral to the quitline, and 35{\%} were referred. Quitline counsellors contacted 143 (70{\%}) referred participants. Conclusion: These results suggest that there are both advantages and disadvantages to the use of quitlines as an adjunct to brief counselling provided by dental practitioners. Patients receiving quitline counselling quit at higher rates than those who did not; however, only a small percentage of patients received counselling from the quitline. Therefore, it appears that dental professionals may be most effective in helping their patients to quit by regularly providing the 5A's plus proactively referring only those patients who are highly motivated to a quitline for more intensive counselling.",
author = "Gordon, {Judith S} and Andrews, {Judy A.} and Crews, {Karen M.} and Payne, {Thomas J.} and Severson, {Herbert H.}",
year = "2007",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1136/tc.2007.020271",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "285--288",
journal = "Tobacco Control",
issn = "0964-4563",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The 5A's vs 3A's plus proactive quitline referral in private practice dental offices

T2 - Preliminary results

AU - Gordon, Judith S

AU - Andrews, Judy A.

AU - Crews, Karen M.

AU - Payne, Thomas J.

AU - Severson, Herbert H.

PY - 2007/8

Y1 - 2007/8

N2 - Aims: The primary aim of our randomised control trial (RCT) was to evaluate the relative efficacy of two dental office based interventions compared to usual care. One intervention consisted of a combination of dental practitioner advice to quit and proactive telephone counselling (3A's), and the other arm consisted of a dental practitioner delivered intervention based on the 5A's of the Clinical Practice Guideline (5A's). Method: 2177 tobacco using patients were enrolled from 68 dental practices in Mississippi. We collected 3-month outcome data from 76% (n = 1652) of participants. Results: Smokers in the two intervention conditions quit at a higher rate than those in usual care; χ2 (1, n = 1381) = 3.10, p<0.05. Although not significant, more patients in the 5A's condition quit than those in the 3A's. Of patients in the 3A's Condition, 50% reported being asked by their dentist or hygienists about fax referral to the quitline, and 35% were referred. Quitline counsellors contacted 143 (70%) referred participants. Conclusion: These results suggest that there are both advantages and disadvantages to the use of quitlines as an adjunct to brief counselling provided by dental practitioners. Patients receiving quitline counselling quit at higher rates than those who did not; however, only a small percentage of patients received counselling from the quitline. Therefore, it appears that dental professionals may be most effective in helping their patients to quit by regularly providing the 5A's plus proactively referring only those patients who are highly motivated to a quitline for more intensive counselling.

AB - Aims: The primary aim of our randomised control trial (RCT) was to evaluate the relative efficacy of two dental office based interventions compared to usual care. One intervention consisted of a combination of dental practitioner advice to quit and proactive telephone counselling (3A's), and the other arm consisted of a dental practitioner delivered intervention based on the 5A's of the Clinical Practice Guideline (5A's). Method: 2177 tobacco using patients were enrolled from 68 dental practices in Mississippi. We collected 3-month outcome data from 76% (n = 1652) of participants. Results: Smokers in the two intervention conditions quit at a higher rate than those in usual care; χ2 (1, n = 1381) = 3.10, p<0.05. Although not significant, more patients in the 5A's condition quit than those in the 3A's. Of patients in the 3A's Condition, 50% reported being asked by their dentist or hygienists about fax referral to the quitline, and 35% were referred. Quitline counsellors contacted 143 (70%) referred participants. Conclusion: These results suggest that there are both advantages and disadvantages to the use of quitlines as an adjunct to brief counselling provided by dental practitioners. Patients receiving quitline counselling quit at higher rates than those who did not; however, only a small percentage of patients received counselling from the quitline. Therefore, it appears that dental professionals may be most effective in helping their patients to quit by regularly providing the 5A's plus proactively referring only those patients who are highly motivated to a quitline for more intensive counselling.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34547637432&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34547637432&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/tc.2007.020271

DO - 10.1136/tc.2007.020271

M3 - Article

C2 - 17652247

AN - SCOPUS:34547637432

VL - 16

SP - 285

EP - 288

JO - Tobacco Control

JF - Tobacco Control

SN - 0964-4563

IS - 4

ER -