Varenicline and behavioural interventions may help ST users to quit. Behavioural interventions incorporating telephone counselling or an oral examination are likely to increase abstinence rates.
Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial of An Athletic Trainer-Directed Spit (Smokeless) Tobacco Intervention for Collegiate Baseball Athletes: Results After 1 Year.
Context: Athletes in the United States are at high risk for using spit (smokeless) tobacco (ST) and incurring its associated adverse health effects.Objective: To examine whether an athletic trainer-directed ST intervention could decrease initiation and promote cessation of ST use among male collegiate baseball athletes.Design: Stratified, cluster-randomized controlled trial.Setting: Fifty-two California colleges.Patients or Other Participant(s): A total of 883 subjects in 27 intervention colleges and 702 subjects in 25 control colleges participated, as did 48 certified athletic trainers.Intervention(s): For college athletic trainers and associated dental professionals, a 3-hour video conference, and for collegiate athletes, an oral cancer screening with feedback and brief counseling during the preseason health screenings, athletic trainer support for cessation, and a peer-led educational baseball team meeting.Main Outcome Measure(s): The subjects' ST use over 1 year was assessed by self-report. At the end of the study, the certified athletic trainers were mailed a survey assessing their tobacco use and perceptions and behavior related to tobacco control in the athletic environment. We used multivariable logistic regression models for clustered responses (generalized estimating equations) to test the difference between groups in ST-use initiation and cessation and to identify significant overall predictors of noninitiation and cessation of ST use.Results: Of the 1585 athletes recruited, 1248 (78.7%) were followed up at 12 months. In addition, 48 of the 52 athletic trainers (92%) responded to the 1-year follow-up survey. The ST-use initiation (incidence) was 5.1% in intervention colleges and 8.4% in control colleges (generalized estimating equation odds ratio = 0.58, 95% confidence interval = 0.35-0.99). Predictors of ST noninitiation were low lifetime tobacco and monthly alcohol use (odds ratio = 1.98, 95% confidence interval = 1.40- 2.82) and athletic trainers' report that the baseball coach supported ST-use prevention activities (odds ratio = 1.43, 95% confidence interval = 1.11-1.83). Although at 1 year, cessation of ST use was relatively high in both groups (36%), we noted no significant difference between the groups (odd ratio = 0.94, 95% confidence interval = 0.70-1.27).Conclusions: The intervention was significantly effective in preventing incident ST use but did not significantly increase cessation beyond that seen in the control group. The latter finding is inconsistent with previous studies and may be explained by spillover of the intervention to control colleges, other anti-tobacco activity in control colleges, and/or the small sample of dependent ST users enrolled in the study.