Study | Participants | Interventions | Outcome measures | Outcome | Notes |
Albrecht et al, 199834 | 84 pregnant teenagers randomised to usual care (UC), group treatment (TFS) or group plus buddy support (TFSB). | UC: half an hour meetings with the nurse about smoking. TFS: above plus 8 group meetings. TFSB: above plus subject selected buddy to attend all sessions. Buddies were all non-smoking women in same age range. | Abstinence post- intervention. Self reported reductions in smoking and reductions in CO levels. | Abstinence (n), end of treatment: TFSB 3 of 10 people, TFS+UC 5 of 30. Not significant. Difference in consumption between two groups was not reported. | Light smokers (mean CO < 10 ppm at baseline). Combined data of UC and TFS treatment and compared with TFSB. Significant difference in self reports of cutting down. |
Ginsberget al, 199235 | 99 smokers: randomised to groups receiving nicotine gum, nicotine gum plus psychological treatment, or above plus partner support. | All received 2 mg nicotine gum and materials (NG). Additional psychological treatment (NGPT) included relapse prevention, public commitment and cost benefit discussions. Additional partner support (NGPTPS); training for buddy on support strategies, videotape, signed agreements. | Abstinence at weeks 4, 12, 26, and 52, validated by CO. Measures of support (including PIQ) at each follow up. | Abstinence, end of treatment: NG 71%, NGPT 88%, NGPTPS 71%. Not significant. Abstinence 6 months: NG 34%, NGPT 45%, NGPTPS 42%. Not significant. PIQ scores improved in partner support group. | Deposit returned for completion to week 26. Small groups. |
Glasgow et al, 198636 | 29 smokers in work site randomised to standard smoking control programme or standard programme plus social support. | Controlled smoking (CS): replicated Malottet al ('84, below). Social support condition (CSPS): replicated Malott et al('84) but smokers selected buddy from non-work environment to support out of the office. Buddy came to 2 sessions and were phoned twice by therapist. Both receive biweekly support manual. | Self reported smoking behaviour (abstinence). CO and salivary thiocyanate assessment. Post treatment and 6 months later. PIQ to assess support. | Abstinence (n) end of treatment: CS 7 of 13 people, CSPS 5 of 14 people. Not significant. Abstinence 6 months: CS 3 of 12 people, CSPS 3 of 13 people. Not significant. | Smoking cessation was preferred outcome of treatment but controlled smoking was also an aim. Analysis of PIQ was conducted on non-abstinent participants only. Therefore results not reported here. |
Gruder et al, 199337 | 50 sites. 793 smokers. 235 in no contact control group, 271 in social support group and 287 in discussion group. All had non-smoking buddy. | Control group (C) received manual and encouraged to watch stop smoking TV programme. In addition, group conditions all met for 3, 90 minute sessions and received 2 follow up calls. All bought non-smoking buddy to second group to meet separately. Discussion group (DG): buddies have general discussion. Social support condition (SS): instruction and role plays on how to get support and offer it. Relapse prevention in last visit and extra manuals. Quit at or after final visit. | Abstinence post-intervention and at 6, 12, and 24 months. PIQ measured for both group conditions at last group session. | Abstinence, end of programme: C 17.4%, NS 26.8%, DG 33.7%, SS 49. Abstinence, 6 months: C 6.4%, NS 17.4%, DG 13.9%, SS 19.2%. Significant difference between support and discussion groups at each follow up (p < 0.05). Significant ordering of conditions: support, discussion, “no shows” control. Ratio of positive to negative interactions was greater in support condition. No influence of condition on relapse rates. | People who did not attend any groups but were scheduled to, were analysed separately (NS). About a third of each group did not watch TV or read manual once therefore excluded from analysis. |
Malott et al, 198438 | 24 smokers in work site programme randomised to standard smoking control programme or standard program plus social support. | Controlled smoking (CS): 6 weekly group meetings focused on strategies to support nicotine fading, session 4 subjects decide to quit or not. Partner support (CSPS) condition: as above but subjects buddied up with colleague in the group to contact each day, also given manual and checklists of helpful behaviours. | Measures of abstinence and smoking behaviour, CO measurement. PIQ adapted for colleagues. | Abstinence (n), end of treatment: CS 2 from 12, CSPS 2 from 12. Abstinence (n), 6 months: CS 3 from 11, CSPS: 2 from 12. Not significant. | Smoking cessation was preferred outcome of treatment but controlled smoking was also an aim. Analysis of PIQ was conducted on non- abstinent participants only. Therefore results not reported here. |
McIntyre-Kingslover et al, 198639 | 64 smokers in smokers clinic. 31 in standard treatment and 33 receiving additional spouse training. | Control groups (CG): 6 weekly 2 hour long group meetings. Quit at fourth group. Spouse training (ST): above plus spouse attended all sessions and given guidelines. | Abstinence at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, verified by informant and CO. Group differences in PIQ. | Abstinence, end of treatment: CG 48.4%, ST 72.7%. Not significant. Abstinence, 6 months: CG 19.4%, ST 27.3%. Not significant. No differences in PIQ scores between intervention and control, PIQ positively correlated with abstinence. | High CO readings attributed to alcohol or marijuana smoking, subject considered a non-smoker. Payment returned if abstained. |
Mermelstein et al, 198612 | 64 smokers: 15 spouse training, 21 no spouse training, and 28 “singles”. | As above but additional “singles” group with same format as no spouse training group. | Validated abstinence at end of treatment and abstinence 1, 2, 3, and 12 months later, also reductions in smoking at all time points. Corroborated by informants. Support measures at follow up points. General support measured by ISEL support for quitting measured by PIQ also smoking network measures (proportion of smokers in environment). | Abstinence, end of treatment 57.8% overall. Abstinence, 6 months: 31.3% overall. No significant difference between groups (not reported by condition). No significant difference in measures of support. | Couples quitting together put into no training group. Study is follow up to McIntyre-Kingslover39 above. Reports above study again first. |
Nyborg, Nevid, 198640 | 40 smoking couples, 8 in each of 5 conditions, therapist administered v minimal contact crossed with couples v individual training, and “effort only” control group. | 8 week programme, week 5 is quit date, nicotine fading before quit. Visits to clinic for therapy plus manual (TA), v manual and weekly therapist initiated phone calls (minimal contact group (MC). “Couples” groups (CT) given instructions for mutual support. “Individual” group (IT) given no additional instruction, individual effort emphasised. Control group given written materials only (CG). | Self reported abstinence end of treatment 3 and 6 month follow up. | Abstinence, end of treatment: TA-CT 50%, TA-IT 37.5%, MC-CT 0%, MC-IT 0%, CG 0%. Abstinence 6 months: TA-CT 25%, TA-IT 12.5%, MC-CT 0%, MC-IT 0%. No significant differences between couplesv individual conditions. | No validation. Results reported by couples. |
Orleans et al, 199141 | 2021 smokers in community sample recruited to “self help quit smoking programme”. | 4 conditions: 502 received self quitting materials only including advice about nicotine fading, relapse prevention, also general advice how to garner support (M). 501 received above plus specific social support instructions aimed at smokers, ex-smokers, and never smokers, copies to be given to 2 “allies” (MS). 510 above plus 4 follow up phone calls from counsellor and offer of a quit phone line to contact (MST). 508 in usual care group received referral guide and general quit tips pamphlet (C). | Abstinence for a week and a month at 8 and 16 month follow ups. Various other measures of smoking status and desire to quit. Measures of support on Likert scale and using adapted PIQ at 8 months. Cotinine and/or thiocyanate test at 16 months where possible (54% of abstainers). | Abstinence (> 1 week) 8 months: C 16%, M 14.7%, MS 14.2%, MST 23%. Abstinence (> 1 week) 16 months: C 18.2%, M 15.2%, MS 14.2%, MST 23%. No significant difference between M and MS. Significant effect of additional follow up calls (p < 0.01). Perceived support correlated with success. Distribution of support manual to allies associated with success at 16 months. | Community based. Minimal intervention. |
West et al, 199842 | 172 smokers in general practice, 70 in “buddy” pairs and 102 in “solo” group. | Nurse led smokers clinic, 4 visits over 5 weeks, quit at visit 2. “Buddy” condition (B): subjects paired with smoker, all subsequent visits with them. Phone calls and bets made. “Solo” condition (S): subjects seen individually. | Continuous abstinence from quit date to 4 week follow up. Verified by CO. | Abstinence, end of treatment: B 27%, S 12%. Significant difference (p < 0.01). |
PIQ, Partner Interaction Questionnaire.17
ISEL, Interpersonal Support Evaluation List.49
CO, carbon monoxide.