Background: Lung cancer screening might be a teachable moment for smoking cessation intervention. The objective was to investigate whether a tailored self-help smoking cessation intervention is more effective in inducing smoking cessation compared to a standard brochure in male smokers who participate in the Dutch-Belgian randomised controlled lung cancer screening trial (NELSON trial). Methods: Two random samples of male smokers who had received either a standard brochure (. n=. 642) or a tailoring questionnaire for computer-tailored smoking cessation information (. n=. 642) were sent a questionnaire to measure smoking behaviour two years after randomisation. Results: Twenty-three percent of the male smokers in the tailored information group returned a completed tailoring questionnaire and thus received the tailored advice. The prolonged smoking abstinence was slightly, but not statistically significant, lower amongst those randomised in the tailored information group (12.5%) compared with the brochure group (15.6%) (OR. =. 0.77 (95%-CI: 0.56-1.06). The level of education and intention to quit smoking significantly predicted smoking cessation at follow-up (. p<. 0.05). The majority of the respondents did not recall whether and which smoking cessation intervention they had received at randomisation after 2-years of follow-up. Conclusion: The current study showed no advantage of tailored smoking cessation information over standard self-help information amongst male smokers with a long term smoking history who participate in a lung cancer screening trial after two years of follow-up. However, the low percentage participants who actually received the tailored advice limited the ability to find an advantage.

, , , , ,,
Lung Cancer
Department of Pulmonology

van der Aalst, C., de Koning, H., van den Bergh, K., Willemsen, M. C., & van Klaveren, R. (2012). The effectiveness of a computer-tailored smoking cessation intervention for participants in lung cancer screening: A randomised controlled trial. Lung Cancer, 76(2), 204–210. doi:10.1016/j.lungcan.2011.10.006