Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to test the feasibility and acceptance of an intervention using text messaging (short message service SMS) for continuous individual support of smoking cessation in young adults. Additionally, the optimal feedback intensity was investigated, and short-term efficacy of the intervention was explored. METHODS: In a cafeteria of the University of Greifswald, 575 visitors were screened for smoking status and usage of text messaging. From these, 194 persons who fulfilled the inclusion criteria of daily smoking and weekly usage of SMS were invited for participation in an SMS-based intervention. From these, 174 (90%) consented to participate. The participants were randomly allocated to one of three study groups: (a) control condition without intervention, (b) intervention with one weekly SMS feedback (1SMS), or (c) intervention with three weekly SMS feedbacks (3SMS). In study groups (b) and (c), individualized SMS feedbacks were sent to the participants weekly, based on data from the baseline assessment and a weekly SMS assessment of the stages of change according to the transtheoretical model. Program use and acceptance were compared between the two intervention groups differing in support intensity. An exploration of the short-term efficacy of the program was conducted by comparing the three study groups at the end of the 3-month intervention program on smoking variables. RESULTS: The median number of replies to the weekly SMS assessments was 12.5 in the 1SMS group and 13.0 in the 3SMS group (not significant). The acceptance of the program did not differ between the intervention groups. At postassessment, no significant differences between the three study groups emerged on the examined smoking variables. DISCUSSION: The high participation and retention rates suggest that SMS-based smoking cessation interventions are attractive for young adults. Support intensity did not affect the acceptance of the program. Longer follow-up periods and larger samples are required to obtain conclusive results about the efficacy of this intervention approach.
Haug et al. (Fri,) studied this question.