SmokingPhase 3NCT00297700
Implementing Tobacco Control in Dental Practice
A Phase 3 study testing Active referral in people with Smoking, run by National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Our goal is to test a dentist-hygienist team intervention to help dental patients quit smoking and determine if it can be effectively and cost-effectively implemented and sustained. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Smoking
- What is being tested?
- Active referral
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- How many people
- 2,800 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- May 2004to Apr 2007
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Kaiser Permanente (KP)member
- 18 years of age or older
- Receiving routine primary care in KP dental offices
- Tobacco user at time of routine dental visit
Who cannot join
- Non-KP member
- Less than 18 years or age
- Non-tobacco user
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Our goal is to test a dentist-hygienist team intervention to help dental patients quit smoking and determine if it can be effectively and cost-effectively implemented and sustained.
Staff in half of the HMO's 14 large dental facilities will be trained to provide brief cessation advice and assistance and to encourage smokers to talk by phone with a tobacco counselor before they leave the dental office. Phone counselors will provide brief counseling, assess stage, and offer a full list of cessation services. The Active Referral intervention strategy is both practical and innovative, as it takes advantage of available resources; efficiently distributes intervention activities between dentists, hygienists, and counseling specialists; and could be delivered in individual, small, or large dental practices. This intervention is provided as part of routine care to all patients seen for annual dental and periodontal exams.Consented patients will receive a short phone survey shortly after the exam to assess smoking status, satisfaction with delivery of support services,and satisfaction with intervention. Consented patients in treatment and control facilities will be surveyed by phone at one year to re-assess smoking status and satisfaction with services.
Read the detailed description
The purpose of this behavioral effectiveness trial is to test the feasibility, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability of a team approach for delivering smoking cessation assistance to interested smokers seen within a single well-integrated group-model dental HMO. We and others have already demonstrated the efficacy of the 5-A model in medical and hospital clinical settings. The need now is to show that a practical and innovative team approach with a centralized tobacco quitline component 1) can be disseminated throughout dental care offices; 2) can be effectively and consistently delivered by dentists and hygienists; 3)can be maintained over time, and 4) will have a positive and cost-effective impact on patient smoking-cessation rates.
The HMO's 14 dental care offices will be randomly assigned to usual care or a Assisted Referral condition. In the Referral condition, dentists and hygienists will be trained to, as part of routine annual dental exams, assess, advise, and connect interested tobacco users by phone to a professionally staffed centralized tobacco quitline. If patients prefer, dental staff will have quitline staff call the patients back at a more convenient time. Quitline staff will offer brief counseling and assessment and a full menu of cessation services, including multi-session telephone and face-to-face programs and medications. The intervention will be provided as a part of routine care to all adult patients receiving annual general dental or periodontal exams.
Primary and secondary outcome measure. The primary hypothesis is that treatment will increase the probability of 30-day sustained cessation from all forms of tobacco, as reported by randomly selected patients one year after the initial clinic visit. Other secondary follow-up measures will include one-week and 6-month point prevalence at one year, stage of change, quit attempts during the year, and smoking rate among continuing smokers.
CHR research staff will survey a random sample of 2,800 consenting adult cigarette smokers in both Referral and Usual Care facilities shortly after their visits to assess rates of advice and referral, satisfaction, and other process measures. Patients will be sampled throughout a 15-month period to assess sustainability of the staff's efforts. Consenting patients will be resurveyed after one year to assess smoking cessation outcomes. Patients seen by dentists or hygienists who routinely practice in multiple facilities will be excluded to minimize contamination.
The Kaiser Permanente Dental Care Program (KPDCP) is a well-integrated single-group dental HMO with a unified administrative structure. KPDCP and the Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research (CHR) are both divisions within a single institution- Kaiser Permanente Northwest. The dental program has 14 clinical facilities in the Vancouver, Washington; Portland, Oregon; and Salem, Oregon service areas. The dental plan's aim is to implement the tobacco control program as a permanent change in the routine care that is delivered to all patients throughout all facilities. In order to evaluate the change process and the impact of the program, however, they will stagger the rollout of the quality improvement effort with half of the facilities randomly assigned to begin during phase I and the remainder to start later once follow-up is complete.
While multiple clinics will offer advice and referral options to smokers, research staff at only one data collection site (i.e., CHR) will carry out all study recruitment, consent, and data collection activities as part of the post-visit and annual follow-up surveys. Because CHR is the only data collection site for study subjects, and the fact that we are all part of a single well-integrated organization operating under a single IRB, we view this as a single-site study.
Projected timeline. The first nine months of the project will be devoted to planning, development and testing the web intervention and final telephone counseling protocol, and piloting all aspects of the identification, recruitment, assessment, and intervention components of the study. Recruitment will begin shortly before year 2.
Target population distribution. The target population is 52% women, 15.9% nonwhite or mixed race, and 7.4% Hispanic.
Data acquisition and entry. Random samples of smoking patients seen for annual general dental or periodontal exams will be called to complete a short "Current Visit Survey" shortly after their visits. We will randomly select up to 4,000 smoking patients (approximately 285 per facility) to contact. We expect to achieve a minimum response rate of 70%, based on a 76% response rate achieved using this same procedure with patients seen for routine medical visits (Hollis, 2000b). A 70% response rate will yield an estimated 2,800 respondents (200 per facility).
Data analysis. Because clinics rather than patients are the unit of randomization, adjustments for the intra clinic correlation will be necessary for all treatment comparisons. The primary outcome analysis is based on the mixed effects logit model: logitY i:k:l = M +Cl +G k:l +e i:k:l (1)
The adjusted mixed effects logit model will also test for differences between the early and sustained effects of program implementation on tobacco quit rates by including a member-level time covariate (T i:k:l) and an interaction term between time and intervention effect (Cl). A significant interaction term indicates that the early and late intervention effects differ.
Delivery of the intervention components (e.g., asking, advising, and referring smokers) will be assessed primarily by analysis of the patient's reports on the post-visit phone survey they will receive shortly after the visit and the one-year follow-up phone survey. Fields in the computerized dental record will provide another somewhat limited source of information on rates of asking, advising, and referring smokers.
- Conditions
- Smoking
- Being tested
- Active referral
- Keywords
- Smoking, Dental, Cessation, Prevention, Control, Quitline, 5A-Model, Cost-effective
- Medical subject headings
- Smoking
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Active referralBehavioural
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Tobacco-cessation rates (30-day point prevalence) at one year.
Secondary outcomes (3)
Process measures (e.g., 5As, and referrals)
Stage of change progression
Program costs
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted28 Feb 2006 (estimated)
- Study startMay 2004
- Study completionApr 2007
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (75)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for SmokingStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Factorial
- Masking
- Single blind
- Enrolment
- 2,800 participants
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
- Sponsor type
- US National Institutes of Health
- Investigators
- Jack F. Hollis, Ph.D., Principal investigator, Kaiser Permanente Foundation Hospitals/ Center for Health Research
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00297700
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 5R01DA017974
- Status last verified
- Jul 2006
- First submitted
- 24 Feb 2006
- Last updated
- 11 Jan 2017
- Results posted
- No
Publications
Albert D, Ward A, Ahluwalia K, Sadowsky D. Addressing tobacco in managed care: a survey of dentists' knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors. Am J Public Health. 2002 Jun;92(6):997-1001. doi: 10.2105/ajph.92.6.997.
PubMed 12036795Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev. 1977 Mar;84(2):191-215. doi: 10.1037//0033-295x.84.2.191. No abstract available.
PubMed 847061Bergstrom J, Eliasson S, Dock J. Exposure to tobacco smoking and periodontal health. J Clin Periodontol. 2000 Jan;27(1):61-8. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-051x.2000.027001061.x.
PubMed 10674963Bracht, N., Kingsbury, L. & Rissel L. A Five stage Community Organization Model for Health Promotion. In Bracht, N (Ed.). Health Promotion at the Community Level. International Educational and Professional Publisher. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications; 1999, pp. 83-104.
Brothwell DJ. Should the use of smoking cessation products be promoted by dental offices? An evidence-based report. J Can Dent Assoc. 2001 Mar;67(3):149-55.
PubMed 11282035Campbell HS, Sletten M, Petty T. Patient perceptions of tobacco cessation services in dental offices. J Am Dent Assoc. 1999 Feb;130(2):219-26. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.1999.0171.
PubMed 10036845Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Annual smoking-attributable mortality, years of potential life lost, and economic costs--United States, 1995-1999. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2002 Apr 12;51(14):300-3.
PubMed 12002168Coffield AB, Maciosek MV, McGinnis JM, Harris JR, Caldwell MB, Teutsch SM, Atkins D, Richland JH, Haddix A. Priorities among recommended clinical preventive services. Am J Prev Med. 2001 Jul;21(1):1-9. doi: 10.1016/s0749-3797(01)00308-7.
PubMed 11418251Cohen SJ, Stookey GK, Katz BP, Drook CA, Christen AG. Helping smokers quit: a randomized controlled trial with private practice dentists. J Am Dent Assoc. 1989 Jan;118(1):41-5. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.1989.0018.
PubMed 2913103Cromwell J, Bartosch WJ, Fiore MC, Hasselblad V, Baker T. Cost-effectiveness of the clinical practice recommendations in the AHCPR guideline for smoking cessation. Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. JAMA. 1997 Dec 3;278(21):1759-66.
PubMed 9388153Cummings SR, Rubin SM, Oster G. The cost-effectiveness of counseling smokers to quit. JAMA. 1989 Jan 6;261(1):75-9.
PubMed 2491762Curry SJ. Organizational interventions to encourage guideline implementation. Chest. 2000 Aug;118(2 Suppl):40S-46S. doi: 10.1378/chest.118.2_suppl.40s.
PubMed 10939998Drummond MF, O'Brien B, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
Eddy DM, David Eddy ranks the tests. Harvard Health Letters 1992; July Supplement:10-11.
Farnham PG, Haddix AC. Study design. In: Haddix AC, Teutsch, Corso PS, eds. Prevention Effectiveness. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003, pp. 11-27.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 11 Jan 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Implementing Tobacco Control in Dental Practice
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00297700
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 5R01DA017974
- Conditions
- Smoking
- Keywords
- Smoking, Dental, Cessation, Prevention, Control, Quitline, 5A-Model, Cost-effective
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 2,800 participants
- Lead sponsor
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)US National Institutes of Health
- Study start
- May 2004
- Study completion
- Apr 2007
- First posted
- 28 Feb 2006 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Our goal is to test a dentist-hygienist team intervention to help dental patients quit smoking and determine if it can be effectively and cost-effectively implemented and sustained.
Staff in half of the HMO's 14 large dental facilities will be trained to provide brief cessation advice and assistance and to encourage smokers to talk by phone with a tobacco counselor before they leave the dental office. Phone counselors will provide brief counseling, assess stage, and offer a full list of cessation services. The Active Referral intervention strategy is both practical and innovative, as it takes advantage of available resources; efficiently distributes intervention activities between dentists, hygienists, and counseling specialists; and could be delivered in individual, small, or large dental practices. This intervention is provided as part of routine care to all patients seen for annual dental and periodontal exams.Consented patients will receive a short phone survey shortly after the exam to assess smoking status, satisfaction with delivery of support services,and satisfaction with intervention. Consented patients in treatment and control facilities will be surveyed by phone at one year to re-assess smoking status and satisfaction with services.
Detailed description
The purpose of this behavioral effectiveness trial is to test the feasibility, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability of a team approach for delivering smoking cessation assistance to interested smokers seen within a single well-integrated group-model dental HMO. We and others have already demonstrated the efficacy of the 5-A model in medical and hospital clinical settings. The need now is to show that a practical and innovative team approach with a centralized tobacco quitline component 1) can be disseminated throughout dental care offices; 2) can be effectively and consistently delivered by dentists and hygienists; 3)can be maintained over time, and 4) will have a positive and cost-effective impact on patient smoking-cessation rates.
The HMO's 14 dental care offices will be randomly assigned to usual care or a Assisted Referral condition. In the Referral condition, dentists and hygienists will be trained to, as part of routine annual dental exams, assess, advise, and connect interested tobacco users by phone to a professionally staffed centralized tobacco quitline. If patients prefer, dental staff will have quitline staff call the patients back at a more convenient time. Quitline staff will offer brief counseling and assessment and a full menu of cessation services, including multi-session telephone and face-to-face programs and medications. The intervention will be provided as a part of routine care to all adult patients receiving annual general dental or periodontal exams.
Primary and secondary outcome measure. The primary hypothesis is that treatment will increase the probability of 30-day sustained cessation from all forms of tobacco, as reported by randomly selected patients one year after the initial clinic visit. Other secondary follow-up measures will include one-week and 6-month point prevalence at one year, stage of change, quit attempts during the year, and smoking rate among continuing smokers.
CHR research staff will survey a random sample of 2,800 consenting adult cigarette smokers in both Referral and Usual Care facilities shortly after their visits to assess rates of advice and referral, satisfaction, and other process measures. Patients will be sampled throughout a 15-month period to assess sustainability of the staff's efforts. Consenting patients will be resurveyed after one year to assess smoking cessation outcomes. Patients seen by dentists or hygienists who routinely practice in multiple facilities will be excluded to minimize contamination.
The Kaiser Permanente Dental Care Program (KPDCP) is a well-integrated single-group dental HMO with a unified administrative structure. KPDCP and the Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research (CHR) are both divisions within a single institution- Kaiser Permanente Northwest. The dental program has 14 clinical facilities in the Vancouver, Washington; Portland, Oregon; and Salem, Oregon service areas. The dental plan's aim is to implement the tobacco control program as a permanent change in the routine care that is delivered to all patients throughout all facilities. In order to evaluate the change process and the impact of the program, however, they will stagger the rollout of the quality improvement effort with half of the facilities randomly assigned to begin during phase I and the remainder to start later once follow-up is complete.
While multiple clinics will offer advice and referral options to smokers, research staff at only one data collection site (i.e., CHR) will carry out all study recruitment, consent, and data collection activities as part of the post-visit and annual follow-up surveys. Because CHR is the only data collection site for study subjects, and the fact that we are all part of a single well-integrated organization operating under a single IRB, we view this as a single-site study.
Projected timeline. The first nine months of the project will be devoted to planning, development and testing the web intervention and final telephone counseling protocol, and piloting all aspects of the identification, recruitment, assessment, and intervention components of the study. Recruitment will begin shortly before year 2.
Target population distribution. The target population is 52% women, 15.9% nonwhite or mixed race, and 7.4% Hispanic.
Data acquisition and entry. Random samples of smoking patients seen for annual general dental or periodontal exams will be called to complete a short "Current Visit Survey" shortly after their visits. We will randomly select up to 4,000 smoking patients (approximately 285 per facility) to contact. We expect to achieve a minimum response rate of 70%, based on a 76% response rate achieved using this same procedure with patients seen for routine medical visits (Hollis, 2000b). A 70% response rate will yield an estimated 2,800 respondents (200 per facility).
Data analysis. Because clinics rather than patients are the unit of randomization, adjustments for the intra clinic correlation will be necessary for all treatment comparisons. The primary outcome analysis is based on the mixed effects logit model: logitY i:k:l = M +Cl +G k:l +e i:k:l (1)
The adjusted mixed effects logit model will also test for differences between the early and sustained effects of program implementation on tobacco quit rates by including a member-level time covariate (T i:k:l) and an interaction term between time and intervention effect (Cl). A significant interaction term indicates that the early and late intervention effects differ.
Delivery of the intervention components (e.g., asking, advising, and referring smokers) will be assessed primarily by analysis of the patient's reports on the post-visit phone survey they will receive shortly after the visit and the one-year follow-up phone survey. Fields in the computerized dental record will provide another somewhat limited source of information on rates of asking, advising, and referring smokers.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Factorial
- Masking
- Single blind
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Kaiser Permanente (KP)member
- 18 years of age or older
- Receiving routine primary care in KP dental offices
- Tobacco user at time of routine dental visit
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Non-KP member
- Less than 18 years or age
- Non-tobacco user
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Active referral | Behavioural | – |
Primary outcome
Tobacco-cessation rates (30-day point prevalence) at one year.
3 secondary outcomes
Process measures (e.g., 5As, and referrals)
Stage of change progression
Program costs
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 11 Jan 2017.
- Background: PubMed 12036795Albert D, Ward A, Ahluwalia K, Sadowsky D. Addressing tobacco in managed care: a survey of dentists' knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors. Am J Public Health. 2002 Jun;92(6):997-1001. doi: 10.2105/ajph.92.6.997.
- Background: PubMed 847061Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev. 1977 Mar;84(2):191-215. doi: 10.1037//0033-295x.84.2.191. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 10674963Bergstrom J, Eliasson S, Dock J. Exposure to tobacco smoking and periodontal health. J Clin Periodontol. 2000 Jan;27(1):61-8. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-051x.2000.027001061.x.
- BackgroundBracht, N., Kingsbury, L. & Rissel L. A Five stage Community Organization Model for Health Promotion. In Bracht, N (Ed.). Health Promotion at the Community Level. International Educational and Professional Publisher. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications; 1999, pp. 83-104.
- Background: PubMed 11282035Brothwell DJ. Should the use of smoking cessation products be promoted by dental offices? An evidence-based report. J Can Dent Assoc. 2001 Mar;67(3):149-55.
- Background: PubMed 10036845Campbell HS, Sletten M, Petty T. Patient perceptions of tobacco cessation services in dental offices. J Am Dent Assoc. 1999 Feb;130(2):219-26. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.1999.0171.
- Background: PubMed 12002168Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Annual smoking-attributable mortality, years of potential life lost, and economic costs--United States, 1995-1999. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2002 Apr 12;51(14):300-3.
- Background: PubMed 11418251Coffield AB, Maciosek MV, McGinnis JM, Harris JR, Caldwell MB, Teutsch SM, Atkins D, Richland JH, Haddix A. Priorities among recommended clinical preventive services. Am J Prev Med. 2001 Jul;21(1):1-9. doi: 10.1016/s0749-3797(01)00308-7.
- Background: PubMed 2913103Cohen SJ, Stookey GK, Katz BP, Drook CA, Christen AG. Helping smokers quit: a randomized controlled trial with private practice dentists. J Am Dent Assoc. 1989 Jan;118(1):41-5. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.1989.0018.
- Background: PubMed 9388153Cromwell J, Bartosch WJ, Fiore MC, Hasselblad V, Baker T. Cost-effectiveness of the clinical practice recommendations in the AHCPR guideline for smoking cessation. Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. JAMA. 1997 Dec 3;278(21):1759-66.
- Background: PubMed 2491762Cummings SR, Rubin SM, Oster G. The cost-effectiveness of counseling smokers to quit. JAMA. 1989 Jan 6;261(1):75-9.
- Background: PubMed 10939998Curry SJ. Organizational interventions to encourage guideline implementation. Chest. 2000 Aug;118(2 Suppl):40S-46S. doi: 10.1378/chest.118.2_suppl.40s.
Related trials for Smoking
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Using Smartwatches to Monitor Smoking in Real-life Situations
Smoking
Not yet recruiting
Comparing the Efficacy of a Conversational Agent (QuitBot) Versus Standard Health Education on Smoking Cessation Among Medical Students in Cairo University
Conversational Agent, Smoking Cessation
RecruitingObservational study
§SMOKE Nicotine and Tobacco Youth Cohort
Tobacco Use Behavior, Nicotine Dependence Tobacco Product
Active, not recruitingEarly Phase 1
Smoking Cessation Intervention During Low Dose CT (LDCT) Screening for Lung Cancer
Smoking Cessation
Not yet recruiting
C-Raven LDCT: Lung Cancer Screening Intervention
Lung Cancer Screening
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Jack F. Hollis, Ph.D. principal investigator
Kaiser Permanente Foundation Hospitals/ Center for Health Research
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing Active referral in people with Smoking, run by National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 11 Jan 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Tobacco-cessation rates (30-day point prevalence) at one year.. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT00297700, which also lists 75 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 11 Jan 2017.