Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-vt8vv Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-08-16T02:08:52.113Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessing Counsellor Effects on Quit Rates and Life Satisfaction Scores at a Tobacco Quitline

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 November 2012

Stephen S. Michael ,
Ryan G.N. Seltzer ,
Scott D. Miller  and
Bruce E. Wampold
Stephen S. Michael*
Affiliation:
Arizona Smokers' Helpline, Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
Ryan G.N. Seltzer
Affiliation:
Arizona Smokers' Helpline, Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA
Scott D. Miller
Affiliation:
Chief Science Officer, International Center for Clinical Excellence, Chicago, Illinois, USA
Bruce E. Wampold
Affiliation:
Counseling Psychology, School of Education, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, USA & Research Institute, Modum Bad Psychiatric Center, Vikersund, Norway
*
Corresponding Author and Requests for Reprints: University of Arizona Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, Arizona Smokers' Helpline, 2302 E. Speedway, Suite 210, Tucson, AZ 85719, tel. (520) 320-6819, fax (520) 318-7222, smichael@email.arizona.edu.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the extent to which a client's successful tobacco quit attempt and subsequent improvement in life satisfaction depend on the quitline counsellor assigned to provide the cessation counselling. Methods: A retrospective review of 2,944 Arizona Smokers’ Helpline client records was conducted on enrolment, follow-up, and programme treatment data. Seven month post-enrolment quit rates were calculated on an intent-to-treat sample for 30-day point prevalence during follow-up surveys. A variance components model was used to estimate counsellor effects, that is, the amount of variability in outcomes explained by individual counsellor differences. Similar analysis was done to detect presence of counsellor effects in clients’ Outcome Rating Scale (ORS) scores (Miller et al., 2003) ‒ a proxy measure of life satisfaction ‒ as they change from intake date to exit date. Results: Statistically significant differences in quit rates (2%) and ORS change scores (2%) were attributable to counsellor effects. Conclusions: The results suggest that counsellor effects have an impact on quitline outcomes that otherwise might have been overlooked if one assumed that only treatment factors and extraneous factors contributed significantly to outcomes. Additional research is required to determine the sources of counsellor effects, as well as whether additional efforts to eliminate these counsellor effects can be justified.

Keywords

quit ratescounsellor effectslife satisfactionquitlinecessation
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Smoking Cessation , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , December 2012 , pp. 96 - 99
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abrams, D. (2003). The tobacco dependence treatment handbook: a guide to best practices. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, T., Ogles, B. M., Patterson, C. L., Lambert, M. J., & Vermeersch, D. A. (2009). Therapist effects: facilitative interpersonal skills as a predictor of therapist success. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 65 (7), 755–768. doi:10.1002/jclp.20583Google Scholar
Barry, K. L. (1999). Brief interventions and brief therapies for substance abuse. Treatment Improvement Protocol (TIP). Rockville, MD: Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.Google Scholar
Donner, A., & Koval, J. J. (1980). The estimation of intraclass correlation in the analysis of family data. Biometrics, 36 (1), 19–25.Google Scholar
Duncan, B. L., Miller, S. D. & Sparks, J. A. (2004). The heroic client: a revolutionary way to improve effectiveness through client-directed outcome-informed therapy. San Francisco, CA: Jossy-Bass.Google Scholar
Fiore, M. C., Jaen, C. R., Baker, T. B., Bailey, W. C., Benowitz, N. L., & et al. (2008). Treating tobacco use and dependence: 2008 update. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service.Google Scholar
Kim, D. M., Wampold, B. E., & Bolt, D. (2006). Therapist effects in psychotherapy: A random-effects modeling of the National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program data. Psychotherapy Research, 16 (2), 161–172. doi:10.1080/10503300500264911Google Scholar
Miller, S. D., Duncan, B. L., Brown, J., Sparks, J. A., & Claud, D. A. (2003). The outcome rating scale: a preliminary study of the reliability, validity and feasibility of a brief visual analog measure. Journal of Brief Therapy, 2 (2), 91–100.Google Scholar
Najavits, L. M. & Weiss, R. D. (1994). Variations in therapist effectiveness in the treatment of patients with substance use disorders: an empirical review. Addiction, 89, 679–688.Google Scholar
Norcross, J. C. (2010). The therapeutic relationship. In Duncan, B. L.Miller, S. D.Wampold, B. E. & Hubble, M. A. (Eds.), The heart & soul of change: delivering what works in therapy (2nd ed., pp. 113–141). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saleebey, D. (1996). The strengths perspective in social work practice: extensions and cautions. Social Work, 41 (3), 296–305.Google ScholarPubMed
Wampold, B. E. (2001). The great psychotherapy debate: models, methods, and findings. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar