Smoking and Diabetes: D H - J, R E. G, T L. T
Smoking and Diabetes: D H - J, R E. G, T L. T
Smoking and Diabetes: D H - J, R E. G, T L. T
T E C H N I C A L R E V I E W
PREVALENCE OF SMOKING
Diabetes Care 22:1887–1898, 1999
— This section presents factors
associated with smoking prevalence in
the general population and its impact on
health. The sociodemographic
characteristics associ- ated with
prevalence are discussed. This is
he purpose of this review is to and medical office in promoting smoking followed by the more limited research
T
sum- marize tobacco control issues cessation and on the cost-effectiveness of on smoking prevalence among
across multiple levels: the patient, smoking cessation. We then review data individuals with diabetes.
the health that suggest the importance of care Cigarette smoking is the leading
care provider, the health care setting, settings in promoting optimal diabetes avoid- able cause of mortality in the U.S.,
and finally, policy implications. We first care as it relates to smoking cessation. account- ing for 434,000 deaths each
estab- lish the health threat Finally, impli- cations for health care year (1). Among cigarette smokers, 52%
associated with tobacco use in general policy and future research are discussed. of deaths for men and 43% of deaths for
and then summarize its heightened women were attributable to cigarette
impact on morbidity and mortality LITERATURE REVIEW AND smoking (2). In general, smoking
among people with diabetes. This ANALYSIS — A review of the prevalence has decreased over the past
includes a review of the patient literature on smoking in general and 10 years because of extensive public
perspec- tives associated with diabetes smoking relative to type 1 and type 2 health efforts (3,3a), including policy
care and management, which often diabetes was con- ducted. The changes and making the population
enhance the continuation of smoking literature was reviewed by establishing aware of the health hazards of active and
(e.g., absence of advice to quit, priority criteria for relevant studies, conducting passive smoking (environmental tobacco
given to other treat- ment objectives, computer searches, reviewing the exposure). Despite these figures,
weight concerns). We next consider the bibliographies of key articles, compiling 26–28% of American adults continue
types of interventions that have proven and reviewing full articles, to smoke (4), with variations reported by
most effective, focusing espe- cially on constructing eth- nic group. For example, Royce et
the role of the health care provider al. (5) reported that African-Americans
typically
From the Department of Community Health (D.H.-J.), Saint Louis University School of Public Health; Community Health, Saint Louis University School
the of Public Health, 3663 Lindell Blvd., St. Louis,
Department of Psychology (T.L.T.), Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri; and the AMC MO 63108. E-mail: joshud@slu.edu.
Cancer This paper was peer-reviewed, modified, and
Research Center (R.E.G.), Denver, Colorado. approved by the Professional Practice
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Debra Haire-Joshu, PhD, Department of Committee, June 1999.
DIABETES CARE, VOLUME 22, NUMBER 11, NOVEMBER 1999 95
Abbreviations: AHCPR, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research; MRFIT, Multiple Risk Factor smoke ,25 cigarettes per day, but are
Inter- vention Trial. more likely to be nicotine dependent.
A table elsewhere in this issue shows conventional and Système International (SI) units and
conversion factors for many substances. Demo- graphic factors associated with
higher smoking prevalence include lower
socioe- conomic status and lower
educational level. Those with less than a
high school educa- tion are more likely to
be current, ever, and heavy smokers and
the least likely to quit. In contrast, years
of education are associ-
Table 1—Meta-analytic results examining smoking outcomes: estimated odds ratios and cessation rates by treatment characteristics
Estimated Estimated
Characteristics Number of arms odds ratio cessation rate
(95% CI) (95% CI)
Type of health care provider (n = 41
studies) No provider (reference group) 38 1.0 8.2
Multiple providers 14 3.8 (2.6–5.6) 25.5 (18.1–32.7)
Nonmedical health care provider (psychologist, social worker, 23 1.8 (1.5–2.2) 14.1 (12.0–16.3)
counselor)
Physician provider 36 1.5 (1.2–1.9) 12.0 (9.6–14.3)
Nonphysician medical health care provider (dentist, nurse, 20 1.4 (1.1–1.8) 11.5 (9.0–14.0)
health counselor)
Format of contact (n = 25 studies)
No intervention (reference 23 1.0 7.6
group)
Self-help 8 1.2 (1.0–1.6)* 9.3 (7.3–11.4)
Individual counseling 26 2.2 (1.9–2.4) 15.1 (13.6–16.5)
Group counseling 15 2.2 (1.6–3.0) 15.3 (11.4–19.2)
Intensity levels of person-to-person contact (n = 56
studies) No contact (reference group) 49 1.0 8.8
Minimal contact (#3 min) 14 1.2 (1.0–1.5)† 10.7 (8.9–12.5)
Brief counseling (.3 to #10 min) 26 1.4 (1.2–1.7) 12.1 (10.0–14.3)
Counseling (.10 min) 60 2.4 (2.1–2.7) 18.7 (16.8–20.6)
Types of content (n = 39
studies) No contact 25 1.0 8.8
(reference group)
Aversive smoking‡ 9 2.1 (1.0–4.2)§ 17.5 (7.6–27.2)
Intratreatment social supporti 21 1.8 (1.4–2.5) 15.2 (11.3–19.1)
General problem solving¶ 57 1.6 (1.2–2.2) 13.7 (10.3–17.1)
Quit day (specific quit date) 30 1.3 (0.9–2.0) 11.5 (7.4–15.7)
Extratreatment social support# 16 1.3 (0.8–2.0) 11.2 (7.0–15.5)
Motivation** 40 1.1 (0.9–1.5) 9.8 (7.5–12.2)
Weight, diet, or nutrition management 17 1.1 (0.8–1.6) 9.8 (6.6–13.0)
Exercise or fitness information or program 8 1.1 (0.6–1.0) 9.6 (4.8–14.3)
Contingency contract†† 13 1.0 (0.7–1.6) 9.1 (5.6–12.7)
Relaxation or breathing techniques 15 0.8 (0.5–1.3) 7.5 (4.3–10.7)
Cigarette fading‡‡ 18 0.7 (0.4–1.1) 6.4 (3.6–13.3)
Duration of treatment sessions (n = 55 studies)
,2 Weeks (reference group) 101 1.0 10.4
2 Weeks to ,4 weeks 14 1.6 (1.3–2.0) 15.6 (12.9–18.3)
4 Weeks to 8 weeks 12 1.6 (1.2–2.1) 16.1 (12.4–19.7)
.8 Weeks 15 2.7 (2.2–3.2) 23.8 (20.6–27.1)
Number of treatment sessions (n = 55 studies)
#1 Session (reference group) 96 1.0 10.4
2–3 Sessions 15 2.0 (1.6–2.4) 18.8 (15.8–21.9)
4–7 Sessions 25 2.5 (2.2–2.9) 22.6 (19.9–25.3)
.7 Sessions 12 1.7 (1.2–2.5) 16.7 (11.4–22.0)
Number of arms refers to the number of treatment groups included in the category. *Actual 95% lower confidence estimate equals 0.97; †actual 95% lower
confidence estimate equals 1.03; ‡techniques that involve smoking in an unpleasant or concentrated manner; §actual 95% lower confidence estimate equals 1.04;
iproviding sup- port, help, or encouragement as part of the treatment; ¶training to identify and cope with events or problems that increase the likelihood of
smoking, including coping skill training, relapse prevention, and stress management; #techniques to help smokers increase social support outside of treatment;
**interventions designed to bolster patients’ resolve to quit; ††providing rewards for cigarette abstinence and incurring costs or unpleasant consequences for
smoking; ‡‡reducing the number of cigarettes smoked. Modified from Wetter et al. (144).
Haire-Joshu, Glasgow, and
this a who are review Tibbs
particularly pregnant, establishin
promising is also g AHCPR
tool to recommen Smoking
assist ded if the Ces- sation
smokers in benefits of Guidelines
cessation quitting is that
(76a,76b). outweigh repeated
Based on the lim- interven-
the low ited risks tions,
risk for (77,78). provided
side effects, by
the use of Smoking multiple
phar- cessation health
macothera delivery care
py to systems professional
promote One of the s and
smoking most reinforced
cessa- tion important over time,
is and are much
recommen consistent more
ded when findings effective
used in from the than single
conjunctio comprehen session rec-
n with sive ommendati
behavioral literature ons or
counseling brief
. Use in counseling
special (59). Such
population an
s, such as approach
those denotes the
importance
Technical Review: Smoking and
diabetes
Haire-Joshu, Glasgow, and
of an absti- cessation services to n burden intervention limited to cigarettes
Tibbs studies, such
integrated nence advice to all patients on s in both people with decreased as those pre-
system of (81). diabetic (85), espe- clinical physician diabetes are in the viously cited,
care in Reinforce patients, cially staff office set- identified. behavior to include
systemat- ment of however because (88). For tings Ardron et therapy issues of
ically the 41% of performan example, (89,90) and al. (94) group particular
reducing decision diabetic ce-based there is mail-based conducted a when pertinence to
smoking to quit patients did quality of substanti intervention randomized compared diabetes care
rates. All and not receive care al s (91,92). study with with the (96–98). The
patients strategies any advice indicators evidence The use of 60 diabetic control limited
should be encouragi to quit (e.g., that multimedia smokers, group. number of
screened ng smoking. Health tailoring kiosks, contrasting However at studies
for use of relapse Barriers Plan or per- Internet brief advice the 6- focusing on
tobacco preventio commonly Employer sonalizin World Wide with month the need for
and have n promote reported Data g Web–based intensive follow-up, smoking
their status long-term by Informatio interventi applica- advice to overall quit cessation
documente abstinenc providers n Set on tions, and stop rates as interventions
d on a e. in [HEDIS], content small smoking. confirmed with diabetic
regular Only delivering National in a handheld The study by cotinine patients are
basis. about half cessation Committe mean- computers included a testing (a primarily
Screening of advice are e on ingful have shown follow-up metabolite descrip- tive
systems in smokers lack of time Quality way promise home visit. of in design
clinical seeing a and Assur- results in (93) but Half of the nicotine) (99) and
settings pri- mary reimburse ance [86], changes have not subjects was 10% report
increase the care ment for AHCPR of been used cited an and did not results on
probability physician smok- ing Smoking various to prevent attempt to differ small
of in the cessation Cessation lifestyle smoking quit significantl numbers of
consistent past year services, Guidelines behaviors initiation or resulting y by group. subjects
assess- reported actual or [59], and , to enhance from the There is (100).
ment and being perceived American enhances quitting intensive also little In
documenta asked lack of Diabetes outcomes success counseling. evidence conclusion,
tion of about knowledge Associatio rel- ative among There was, regarding the minimal
tobacco their and skill in n Provider to usual smokers however, the effec- informa-
use smoking cessation Recognitio care with only one tiveness of tion
(79,80). (79), with counseling, n Program advice to diabetes verified smoking available
Follow-up a smaller and low measures quit, and specifically. quitter at the cessation specifically
assessment number expectation [87]) are has been end of 6 treatment on diabetic
of smoking being s regarding based on shown to Cessation months. characterist smok- ers
status and advised to the population be more systems Sawicki et al. ics or the suggests that
abstinence quit (82). efficacy of s rather effective for (95) impact of they may
should Malarcher such than than smokers conducted a adjunctive fare less
also be et al. (83) counseling individual stan- with prospective pharmacoth well than
con- examined (58,84). care dard diabetes random- erapy nondiabetic
ducted on a data from Additional guidelines. nonperso There is ized specific to smokers and
routine the provider More nalized minimal controlled smokers that inten-
basis at National training is recently, cognitive literature intervention with sive
regular Health needed in technologi - evaluating study with diabetes. strategies,
intervals Interview the AHCPR cal behavior treat- ment 89 diabetic The including
(59). Surveys Smoking advances al characteristi smokers that majority of nicotine
Additional from Cessation via cs or contrasted articles replace-
assessment 1974, Guidelines computer- delivery inten- sive about dia- ment
s within the 1985, emphasizin based systems behavior betes and therapy,
first and 1990 g the methodolo specific to therapy over smoking should be
2 weeks of and noted public gies have diabetes and 10 weeks have considered
quitting positive health provided smoking. To with focused on to optimize
have trends significanc innovative date, only 15 min of reviews of successful
proven to toward e of delivery two unstructured the current cessation. In
be effec- more achieving methods intervention outpatient literature addition,
tive in physi- small that have studies that physi- cian and have
aiding cians changes by reduced address advice. extrapo-
patients to offering delivering the smoking Mean lated from
maintain smoking preventive interventio cessation number of other
Technical Review: Smoking and
studies
diabetesare smokers physician Even more and high-
needed to with counseling encouragin risk
identify diabetes to be as or g is the groups to
and under- and is more cost- fact that it conclude
stand strongly effective often costs that
factors recomme than other less than smoking
associated nded. rou- tine $2,000 per cessation
with health care quality should be
diabetes C practices, adjusted extremel
man- os such as life year y cost-
agement t- treating saved. effective
(e.g., stress ef hypertensi Providing for
posed by fe on, screening diabetic
following cti screening and patients.
the dietary ve for counseling It is
regimen, ne cholesterol for high- more
medication ss , and other risk difficult
manage- of medical groups to
ment, etc.) ce practices. (e.g., those estimate
and how ss Eddy (102) with the cost-
these at identified coronary effectiven
factors io smoking heart dis- ess of
may n cessation ease, who public
influence co as the have health
the ability un “gold major risk measures
to achieve se standard” factors, or such as
successful li against who are no
cessation. ng which hospitalize smoking
In Smoking other d) are even policies
addition, cessation preventive more cost- and
these data is one of behaviors effec- tive tax/price
strongly the few should be and may increases
suggest inter- evaluated. even be , but
that ventions Since these cost these
systems of that can early saving: a actions
care, safely articles, very rare may be
promoting and cost- virtually all finding in even
routine effec- subsequent the more
smoking tively be stud- ies economic cost-
identificati recomme (103–107) literature effective
on and nded for and reviews (107–109). (108)
coun- all (103,108) Although and
seling need patients. have we are not should
to be a Cumming confirmed aware of be
priority of s et al. and even current
routine (101) strengthene data on
dia- betes published d these the cost-
manageme an influ- findings. effectivene
nt. Further ential Most ss of
research early recent smoking
on delivery analysis studies cessation
systems via on the have esti- solely
system- cost- mated that among
wide clinic effective- smoking diabetic
or ness of cessation patients, it
technology counselin counseling is a logical
-based g costs extension
interventio smokers between from exist-
ns, has not to quit $1,000 and ing data
been that $3,000 per on medical
conducted demonstr year of life patients in
specific to ated saved. general
Haire-Joshu, Glasgow, and
Tibbs
Technical Review: Smoking and
diabetes
included as smoking receive the addressed. on general, insulin weight gain o
part of a ranked priority it Survey weight gain treatment would o
societal 7th and deserves Weight (NHANE after and adversely d
tobacco was from either gain S) I cessation cessation affect The
control perceived patients Obesity is Study. may neg- with weight diabetes relationship
program. as less with a risk They atively affect gain. Haire- manageme between
One of the important diabetes or factor for found the desire Joshu et al. nt. smoking and
paradoxes than “not health care type 2 weight to quit (59), (118) However, depression
of the cost- eating providers. diabetes, gain with assessed much or dysphoric
effectivenes many while attributa attempts to beliefs of 64 more evi- mood has
s literature sweets” SPECIAL weight ble to prevent smokers dence is been
on smoking (2nd) or AND manageme smoking weight gain with type 1 needed to reviewed in
cessation is “drinking EMERGI nt is a cessation during ces- diabetes support numerous
that lit- tle or NG critical averaged sation about these population
although no ISSUES focus of 6–10 lb, potentially smoking and interpre- surveys and
intensive alcohol” — Several the with enhancing diabetes as tations. clinical
counseling (5th) factors of diabetes women the risk of part of a Research is studies
has been (110). particular care gaining relapse cross- also (119). Major
shown to In relevance regimen slightly (116). sectional needed on depres- sive
be one of summary, to people (111–113). more However, a descrip- tive ways to disorder is
the most studies of with Cig- weight review by study. help more than
cost- implemen diabetes arettes than Perkins Results providers twice as
effective ta- tion may be affect men. (117) cites suggesting more com- mon
interventio of associated weight Major little direct concerns effectively among
ns ever diabetes with with weight evidence to about weight com- smokers as
studied guideline difficulty in smokers gain suggest that gain after municate among
(103,105,10 s and best achieving weighing (.25 lb) weight gain quitting were the risks of nonsmokers
7), only prac- long- term less than occurred after preva- lent smoking in (6.6 vs.
5% of tices abstinence nonsmoker in ,10% cessation among light of 2.9%), and
patients are document from s. The of men interferes women, informatio smokers
will- ing to that smoking. mechanism and , with obese n related to with a
participate assessmen These fac- s by which 13% of motivation smokers, weight lifetime
in such t of tors smoking women. of smokers and those in gain after history of
multisessio smoking include decreases In to maintain poor cessation clinical
n coun- status and weight body abstinence. metabolic and the depres- sion
seling. So, smoking gain weight Instead, he control importance are half as
even if cessation concerns include suggests (36%). of not likely to
offered, counselin and insulin developing Cigarettes smok- ing succeed in
patients g occurs depression. homeostas treatments were cited for diabetic smok- ing
often do less often Issues is, to enable by smokers patients. cessation as
not than associated lipoprotei ex-smokers as an smokers
perceive many with n lipase to accept appetite D without
cessation other smoking activity, what may suppressant e such a
as a key aspects of and and be (46%), and p history (14
treatment care. special preferences unavoidable many r vs. 28%).
priority. Despite population for food weight gain. smokers e These
For the s with con- Few were s findings
example, in demonstr diabetes, sumption studies have reluctant to s have been
a study of ated including (59,114). assessed the quit because i replicated in
patients’ efficacy adolescent Williamson role of of fear of o numerous
“personal and cost- and et al. (115) smoking weight gain studies
n
model” of effectiven hospitalize addressed and weight (49%). (120,121).
the ess and d patients, this in Diabetic Fant et al.
importance the will be relationshi individuals smok- ers a (122)
of var- ious extensive summarize p using with appear to n reviewed
aspects of data d. Finally, data from diabetes, view d evi- dence
diabetes summariz fac- tors the 1982– but it is of smoking as a and
self- ed above, associated 1984 concern strategy for l explanations
managemen smoking with National because of weight o for nicotine
t, it was cessa- refractory Health and the control and w addic- tion
found that tion does smokers Nutri- tion association expressed and
not not will be Examinati of both concern that concluded
m
Haire-Joshu, Glasgow, and
that women Peopl n and smokers, male raising the may notTibbs
be
have a e with smoking. 70% were adolesce possibility a deterrent
higher diabetes Results regu- lar nts of to
prevalence are at indicated smokers appear underre- initiation
of greater that the before age equally porting of of smoking
depression risk of number of 18. People likely to status. in
and thus depressio cigarettes who smoke Masson et
may be n smoked smoke at (2), with al. (131)
more prone compared was a an early the veri- fied
to smoking with the significant age are highest smoking
relapse. This general predictor more rate status via
is supported adult of the level likely to (28%) urinary
by other populatio of depres- become found cotinine
reviews that n, with a sion nicotine among and found
concluded prevalenc among addicted high 31% of
that negative e esti- people and school diabetic
affect is mated at with develop seniors adolescents
related to 14% in diabetes seri- ous (128). admitted
smoking the (126). comorbid Key smoking,
treatment diabetic Further health predictor while 48%
failure populatio studies conditions s of were
(120,121,12 n (range examining at younger smoking verified as
3). 8.5– the ages than initiation smok- ers.
27.3%) strength of their include In
versus 3– the nonsmokin age, addition,
4% in the relationship g living the
gen- eral of counterpar with a majority of
populatio depression ts. The tobacco smokers
n and younger user, and ini- tiated
(124,125) smoking in one begins alcohol the habit
. diabetes, to smoke, use after their
However, and the the more (129). diagnosis
there is possible likely one Few of
minimal impact of is to be a studies diabetes, a
data depression current have finding
examinin on smoker as addressed also
g smoking an adult the reported
depressio initiation or (2). preva- by Shaw et
n and cessa- tion, Overall, lence of al. (132).
smoking are needed. about one- smoking In
specific third of among addition,
to people A high adolesce Frey et al.
with d school– nts with (133) also
diabetes. o aged diabetes. found that
One l adolescent Often certain
cross- e s in the studies types of
sectional s U.S. rely on risky
survey c smoke or cross- behaviors,
examining e use sec- including
these two n smokeless tional smoking,
factors (chew or self- were
t
was spit) reported prevalent
conducted tobacco. informati among
with 183 s About on adolescent
dia- betic m 16% of without s with
smokers o adolescent biochemi diabetes.
who k s in the cal In
complete e U.S. verificati summary,
d r smoke on of it appears
measures s (127). smoking that a
of Of current Currently, status diagnosis
depressio adult female and (130), of diabetes
Technical Review: Smoking and
diabetes
Haire-Joshu, Glasgow, and
adolescents r cardiac counseling (119) cessation (119) whose Tibbs
smokers effective
. s disease , with the suggests interventio nicotine ran- domly ways
Adolescent In (135,136). remainder that ns has dependence assigned to (including
s with general, Stevens et citing lack those resulted in is asso- more harm
diabetes studies al. (136) of interest who a present ciated with traditional reduction
appear to suggest conducted or ill- ness continue day pool repeated cogni- tive- and other
initiate that a as reasons to smoke of relapse behavioral strategies) to
smoking at smoking randomize for not in the refractory (139). For interventio reach and
a rate cessation d trial of participati present smokers the sizeable ns. While work with
equiva- may be 1,110 ng. This day U.S. percentage not the first the high
lent to more hospitalize study are of smokers treatment percentage
nondiabetic likely d smokers, suggests highly currently not of choice, of patients
adolescents during or compar- that nicotine ready to such who may not
. subseque ing a usual diabetic dependen undertake therapies presently be
Prevalence nt to a care smokers, t, another might be ready to quit
of smoking patient’s treatment at the time overrepre attempt to considered and also
may be hospitaliz to a of - sent quit, it is for people who
higher than ation, bedside hospitaliza people of important to recalcitrant have
the data since counseling tion, may lower develop smok- ers comorbid
suggest there interventio be less socioecon alternative unwilling medical or
because of may be n tailored motivated omic strategies to repeat or psychologica
underreport an to the to status, designed to try other l conditions
ing by increased patient’s participate often decrease more and/or a
ado- sense of readiness in have smoking. established history of
lescents. vulnerabi to quit. smoking other For example, cessation unsuccessful
Systematic lity Overall, ces- sation drug there is methods. attempts to
methods of associate the counseling dependen empirical It is quit.
preventing d with relatively than some cies, and evidence to unclear
smoking the low other have suggest whether CONCLUS
and health intensity med- ical behavior reduced smokers IONS —
promoting risks and bedside population al or smoking, with dia- The
adolescent conseque interven- s. Future affective also referred betes are following
cessa- tion nces of tion research is deficits to as more likely state- ments
through smoking increased needed to amenable controlled to present are drawn
diabetes (134). quitting replicate to smoking as recalci- from the
clinics or Studies odds by this study nicotine (140–142) trant evidence
other of 50% in the and to manage or harm smokers. pre- sented
venues patients treatment determine ment. reduction, as However, above and
need to be with group. We reasons The a therapeutic given the apply to
developed serious were able for its nicotine option for data to individuals
and smoking- to find findings. dependen those suggest with either
evaluated. related only one ce smokers lower type 1 or
disease survey by R scores of unable or cessation type 2
H reported Haire- e America unwilling to rates and diabetes.
o esti- Joshu et al. f n quit (143). the addi-
s mates of (137) r smokers Glasgow et tional E
p cessation reporting a substanti al. (142) demands of p
i rates on c ally and Hughes diabetes i
t ranging cessation t exceed (143) found manageme d
from 20 counseling o those of smokers nt, smokers e
a
to 51% among r smokers randomized may be m
l
among hospitalize in other to such an more i
i y
patients d diabetic countries intervention dependent o
z (138).
with patients. In were no less and ben- l
e s Thus, it
pulmonar a study of likely, and efit from o
d m is
y disease 59 possi- bly additional g
and from smokers, o probable even more strategies y
s 22 to only 5 k that the likely, to quit to promote
m 62% agreed to e success smoking in cessation. a
o among participate r of many the long- Additional n
k those in s smok- term than research is d
e with cessation Pomerleau ing comparable needed on
Technical Review: Smoking and
h diabetes increase Smoking provider n should care, a AHCP
e insulin substanti s, using counse guide strategy R
a resist an ally individu ling in the that guidelin
l ce and heighten al or non- decision encoura es
t interfere s the risk group diabeti regardin ges should
h with for counseli c g use of provider assist
insulin neuropat ng, indivi nico- s to in
c action. hy and over duals. tine deliver over-
o Smoking nephrop time, Pharm replace smok- coming
n may athy. and acothe ment ing perceiv
s also be Data includin rapy therapy cessation ed
e associat suggest g appear and advice in barriers
q ed with that problem s to other a to
u develop- smoking -solving limit pharmac systemat cessati
e ment of is related or skills withdr ological ic way. on
n type 2 to the training awal aides Docume counsel
c diabetes, develop com- sympt for ntation ing and
e although ment of ponents oms cessatio of help
s the retinopat with and n. counseli both
evidence hy, social increas • ng and patient
o is although support. e Smokin fol- low- s and
f prelimin the Every abstine g up provid
ary. evidence effort nce. cessatio further ers
s • Smoking is less should To n assures give
m significa conclusi be made date, delivery successf smokin
o ntly ve. to there systems ul cessa- g
k enhances assure is no should tion and cessati
i the risk Smoking that eviden be a is on the
n for cessation diabetic ce of routine critical empha
g cardiova • Smoking smokers the compon to long- sis it
• The scular is a receive impact ent of term deserve
prevalence disease, complex cessatio of dia- success. s.
of contribu change- n advice pharm betes • •
smoking ting to resistant reflect- a- care, in Compute Smoki
among prematur behavior. ing cother accorda r-based ng
indi- e Several these apy nce technolo cessati
viduals morbidit treatmen treatme specifi with gies and on is
with y and t nt c to recom- other cost-
diabetes mortality character characte diabeti mendati methods effectiv
may be . istics ristics to c ons of of e.
equivalent have opti- smoke the personal Stoppi
to those been mize rs. The AHCPR izing ng
without identifie cessatio data Smokin informat smokin
diabetes. d by n rates. sugges g ion and g is
Only AHCPR • ting Cessatio counseli likely
about half meta- Nicotin the n ng one of
of people analyses e extensi Guideli strategie the
with and replace ve nes (59) s are
diabetes guidelin ment bene- for all promisin
are es as therapy fits of patients g
advised to critical enhance quittin . methods
quit to s g Smokin and
smoking achieve cessatio versus g status should
by their cessation n rates the should be
health . These when height be further
care include used as ened assessed explored
providers. cessation an risks for all .
• Smoking counseli adjunct of diabetic • Training
influences ng by to contin individu of health
several multiple smokin uing als as a care
factors health g to part of provider
that may care cessatio smoke routine s in the
Haire-Joshu, Glasgow, and
Tibbs
Technical Review: Smoking and
diabetes
most effective medical actions that diabetic smokers is needed. 1992
can be taken with diabetic patients. Systematic introduction of 4. Centers for Disease Control:
Policies supporting reimbursement for interventions using con- trolled Cigarette smoking among adults:
delivery of smoking cessation within-subject designs are rec- United States
services should be enacted. ommended given the small sample 1994. MMWR 45: 588–590, 1996
5. Royce J, Hymowitz N, Corbett K,
sizes in many clinics.
Special issues and current concerns Hartwell T, Orlandi M: Smoking
• Additional research designed to cessation factors among African
• Nicotine dependence is associated help those with diabetes to Americans and Whites. Am J Public
with relapse. Nicotine dependence understand the importance of Health 83:220–226, 1993
should be evaluated in all smokers smoking cessation as part of diabetes 6. Zhu B, Giovino G, Mowery P, Eriksen
with diabetes, and pharmacological management is needed. M: The relationship between cigarette
supplements to counseling • Clinical trials evaluating the use of smoking and education revisited:
interventions should be planned phar- macotherapy adjuncts to implications for categorizing persons’
accordingly. cessation among diabetic smokers are educational status. Am J Public Health
• Postcessation weight gain may be an needed. 86:1582–1589, 1996
issue for smokers with diabetes who 7. Ford E, Newman J: Smoking and
• Further evaluations of the role of
are focused on weight management. diabetes mellitus: findings from 1988
weight, weight gain concerns, and Behavioral
The weight gain is generally minimal their influence on cessation among Risk Factor Surveillance System.
in con- trast to the risks associated diabetic patients are needed. The Diabetes
with contin- ued smoking. Based on impact of smoking cessation on Care 14:871–874, 1991
the current evidence from the general metabolic control should be 8. Ford E, Malarcher A, Herman W,
population, health care providers addressed. Aubert R: Diabetes mellitus and
should inform the patient as to the • Studies assessing the cost-effectiveness cigarette smoking: findings from the
potential for weight gain but increase of interventions for diabetic smokers 1989 National Health Interview Survey.
the emphasis on smok- ing cessation Diabetes Care 17:688–
are needed.
as the priority for all dia- betic 692, 1994
• Studies denoting how effective 9. Velicer W, Prochaska J, Rossi J, Snow
smokers. change principles can be efficiently M: Assessing outcome in smoking
• Depression is prevalent among applied in diabetes care settings are cessation studies. Psychol Bull 111:23–
individu- als with diabetes. Negative needed. 41, 1992
affect is asso- ciated with increased • Evaluation of the impact of and ways 10. Glasgow R, Mullooly J, Vogt T:
smoking and decreased cessation rates. to facilitate implementation of quality Biochemi- cal validation of smoking
Diabetic smok- ers should be of care performance indicators, all of status in public health settings: pros,
assessed for history of depression or which include smoking identification, cons, and data from four low-intensity
negative affect. Pharma- cotherapy cessa- tion counseling, and follow- intervention trials. Addict Behav 18:511–
and/or psychotherapy for depression 527, 1993
up, are needed.
should be considered as adjunctive 11. US Deptartment of Health and Human
• Systems that inform providers of the Ser-
therapy on an as needed basis. smoking status of their patients and vices: The Health Consequences of
• Adolescents with type 1 diabetes may prompt appropriate personalized Smoking: Nicotine Addiction: A Report of
ini- tiate smoking after diagnosis. coun- seling and follow-up, including the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA, U.S.
Screening for tobacco use and com- puter-based technologies, need Department of Health and Human
counseling regarding to be developed and evaluated. Services, Public Health Service, Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention,
National Center for Chronic Disease
Prevention and Health Promotion,
Office on Smoking and Health, 1988
12. Pomerleau O, Collins A, Shiffman S,
Pomerleau C: Why some people
smoke
smoking prevention and cessation need and others do not: new perspectives.
to be standard diabetes care for on populations with diabetes. References
adoles- 1. US Department of Health and Human
cents with diabetes. • Studies further evaluating the impact Ser- vices: Healthy People 2000:
• Alternative strategies for caring for of smoking on diabetes development Midcourse Review and 1995 Revisions.
refractory smokers should be consid- are needed. The designs of these Washington, DC, U.S. Department of
ered to enhance patient cessation. studies should have adequate sample Health and Human Ser- vices, Public
sizes and representative samples and Health Service, 1995
Recommendations for future 2. US Department of Health and Human
should allow for longitudinal Ser- vices: Preventing Tobacco Use Among
research cohorts. Young People: A Report of the Surgeon
Extensive research has been completed • More intervention research tailored General. Atlanta, GA, U.S. Department
in the general population that examines to of Health and Human Services, Public
fac- tors associated with smoking Health Ser- vice, Centers for Disease
initiation, cessation, and relapse. Control and Pre- vention, National
However, much more research is needed Center for Chronic Disease Prevention
Haire-Joshu, Glasgow, and
and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking J Consult Clin Psychol 61:723–731, 1993 Tibbs
and Health, 1994 13. Fisher E Jr, Lichtenstein E, Haire-Joshu
3a. Lichtenstein E, Glasgow RE: Smoking ces- D: Multiple determinants of tobacco
sation: what have we learned over the past use and cessation. In Nicotine Addiction:
decade? J Consult Clin Psychol 60:518–527, Principles and Management. Orleans C,
1992 Slade J, Eds.
3. Brownson R, Jackson-Thompson J, Wilk- New York, Oxford University Press,
erson J, Davis J, Owens N, Fisher E Jr: 1993, p. 59–87
Demographic and socioeconomic differ- 14. Haire-Joshu D, Morgan G, Fisher EB
ences in beliefs about the health effects of Jr: Determinants of cigarette smoking.
smoking. Am J Public Health 82:99–103, Clin Chest Med 12:711–725, 1991
15. Parrott A: Stress modulation over the
day in cigarette smokers. Addiction
90:233–244,
1995
16. Carmelli D, Swan G, Robinette D,
Fabitz
R: Genetic influence on smoking: a study
of male twins. N Engl J Med 327:829–833,
1992
17. Rimm E, Manson J, Stampfer M:
Cigarette smoking and the risk of
diabetes in
women. Am J Public Health 83:211–214,
1993
18. Rimm E, Chan J, Stampfer M, Colditz
G,
Willett W: Prospective study of
cigarette smoking, alcohol use, and the
risk of dia-
betes non Care 46:35 ted n. 1996 Klei relati
in - 17:1– 1– he Arch 28. n B, on to
men. insu 10, 357, mo Inter Walte Met risk
BMJ lin- 1994 1997 glo n rs D, s factor
310:5 dep 22. 24. Bott - Med Gatlin DD: s and
55– end Lund U, bin 158: g W, Rel abnor
559, ent man Jorge in 617– Houst atio maliti
1995 dia- B, ns V, the 621, on A, n of es in
19. bete Asplu Grus ori 1998 Mulle ocul lipopr
Kawa s nd K, ser gin 27. Wei M, ar otein
kami mel Norbe M, al M, Juliou and comp
N, litu rg A: Bend co Mitc s S, syst ositio
Takats s. J Smoki er R, ho hell Hill emi n in
uka Clin ng Muhl rt B, R: c type
N, End and hause of Haffn Mortal fact II
Shimi ocri metab r I, the er S, ity in ors diabet
zu H, nol olic Berge Fr Stern diabet to ic and
Ishiba Met contro r M: am M: ic sur non-
shi H: ab l in Predi ing Effec subjec viva diabet
Effects 82: patien ctors - ts of ts: an l in ic
of 361 ts of ha cigare eleve dia subje
smoki 9– with gly- m tte n-year bet cts.
ng on 362 insuli caem He smok follow es. Diabet
inci- 4, n- ic art ing, -up of Arc ologia
dence 19 depen contr St diabe a h 36:11
of 97 dent ol in ud tes, comm Int 75–
non- 21. diabet type y. high unity- ern 1184,
insuli Cha es I J chole based Me 1993
n- n J, mellit diabe Cli sterol popul d 32.
depen Ri us. J tic n , and ation. 149 Manson J,
dent mm Intern patie Ep hype Diabet :26 Colditz
diabet E, Med nts ide rtensi Med 6– G,
es Col 227:1 after mi on 11:96 272 Stampfer
mellit ditz 01– partic ol on 8– , M: A
G, 106, ipatio 49: all- 973, 19
us.
Sta 1990 n in 41 cause 1994 89
Diabet
mpf 23. an 1– mort 29. Moy 31.
es
er Chiod inten 41 ality C, Uus
Care
M, era P, sified 7, and Lapor itup
16:10
Wil Volpi treat- 19 cardi te R, a
3–
lett R, ment 96 ovasc Dorm M,
109,
W: Capre and 26. ular an J: Nik
1997
Obe tti L: teach So disea Insuli ane
20.
sity, Abnor ing we se n- n
Targh
fat mal progr rs mor- depen L,
er G,
dist effect amm J: tality dent Siit
Alberi
ribu of e. Di in diabet one
che
tion cigare Diab ab Mexi es n
M,
, tte et ete can mellit O,
Zener
and smoki Med s Ame us Vo
e M,
wei ng on 14:36 me rican mortal util
Bonad
ght pituita 2– llit s: ity: ain
onna
gai ry 371, us the the en
R,
n as hormo 1994 an San risk of E,
Mugge
risk ne 25. Meigs d Anto cigare Pyo
o M,
fact secreti J, car nio tte rala
Bonor
ors ons in Nath dio Hear smoki K:
a E:
for insuli an D, - t ng. Ten
Cig-
clini n- Cupp va Stud Circul yea
arette
cal depen les L, sc y. ation r
smoki
dia- dent Wils ula Am J 82: car-
ng
bete diabet on P, r Epide 37– dio
and
s in es Singe dis miol 43, vas
insuli
me mellit r D: eas 144: 1990 cul
n
n. us. Trac e 1058 30. Klein ar
resista
Dia Clin king in – R, mor
nce in
bete Endoc of wo 1065 Moss talit
patient
s rinol glyca me , S, y in
s with
prospecti UK 9 Diabet from 0 9 amon K,
ve study Prospe 9 Med stroke : 6 g Yamash
of ctive 3 11:740– : 1 44. Ritz E, subjec ita H,
maturity Diabet 37. Meigs J, 747, prosp 2 Keller C, ts Tamura
onset es Singer 1994 ec- 6 Bergis K: with T,
dia- betes Study D, 39. tive 6 Nephrop type Hashim
mellitus (UKP Sullivan Hanefiel study – athy of I oto K:
and risk DS) L, Dukes d M, of the 1 type II Effect
diabet
of VIII: K, Fisher S, middl 2 diabetes of
es.
coronary study D’Agosti Julius U, e- 7 mellitus. smokin
JAMA
heart design, no R, Schulze aged 2 Nephrol g on
265:6
disease progre Nathan J, Finnis , Dial the
14–
and ss, and D, Schwan h Transplan prevale
617,
stroke in perfor Wagner eback U, pop- 1 t 11 nce of
1991
women. mance. E, Kaplan Schmec ulatio 9 (Suppl. albumi
46.
Arch Diabet S, hel H, n. 9 9):38–44, nuria
7 Saw
Intern ologia Greenfiel Ziegelas Stroke 1996 in
icki
Med 3 d S: ch H, 27:21 42. 45. Chase H, Japanes
P,
151:1141 4 Metabolic Lindner 0– Muhlha Garg S, e men
Didj
–1147, : control J: Risk 215, user I: Marshall with
urge
1991 8 and factors 1996 Cigarett G: non-
it U,
33. Stamler J, 7 prevalent for 41. e Cigarette insulin-
smoking Mu
Vaccaro 7 cardiovas myocar Chatu smoking depend
hlha
O, – cular dial rvedi and dia- increases ent
user
Neaton J, 8 disease infarctio N, betes: the risk diabete
I,
Wentwor 9 in non- n and Steve an of s
Ben-
th D: 0 insulin death in ns L, update. albumin mellitu
der
Diabetes, , diabetes newly Fuller Diabet uria s. Dia -
R,
other risk mellitus detected J: Med betes
Hei
factors, 1 (NIDDM NIDDM: Whic 11:336– Res Clin
nem
and 12- 9 ): the the h 343, Pract
1 ann
year 9 NIDDM Diabetes featur 36:57–
9 L,
cardiovas 1 patient Interven es of 61,
9 Berg
cular 36. Yudkin outcomes tion smoki 1997
4 er
mortality J: How can research Study, ng 48.
43. M:
for men we best team. 11-year deter Coupe
Muhlha Smo
screened prolong Am J Med follow- mine r J,
user I, king
in the life? 102:38– up. morta Staples
Bender is
Multiple Benefit 47, 1997 Diabetol lity A,
R, Bott asso
Risk s of 38. Dean J, ogia risk Coccio
U, ciate
Factor corona Matthews 39:1577 in lone
Jorgens d
Interventi ry risk S, – forme R,
V, with
on Trial. factor Dolben J, 1 r Nairn
Grusser prog
Diabetes reducti Carolan 5 cigare J,
M, ressi
Care on in G, Luzio 8 tte Badcoc
Wagene on
16:434– non- S, Owens 3 smok k N,
r W, of
444, diabeti D: , ers Henni
Overma diab
1993 c and Cholester with ng P:
nn H, etic
34. diabeti ol rich 1 dia- Relati
Berger neph
Schernth c apo B 9 betes onship
M: ropa
aner G: subject containin 9 ? The of
Cigarette thy.
Cardiova s. BMJ g 6 Worl smoki
smoking Diab
scular 3 lipoprotei 40. d ng and
0 and etes
mortality ns and Tuomile Healt album
6 progres- Car
and smoking hto J, h inuria
: sion of e
morbidity are Rastenyt Organ in
1 retinopa 17:1
in type-2 independ e D, izatio childr
3 thy and 26–
diabetes ently Jousilah n en
1 nephrop 131,
mellitus. associate ti P, Multi with
3 athy in 1994
Diabetes d with Sarti C, nation insulin
– type 1 47.
Res Clin macrovas Vartiaine al -
1 diabetes Iked
Pract 31 - cular n E: Study depen
3 . Diabet a Y,
(Suppl. disease Diabetes Group dent
1 Med Sueh
31):S3– in mellitus . diabet
8 13:536– iro
S13, normoten as a risk Diabet es.
, 543, T,
1996 sive factor es Diabet
1 Taka
35. Group NIDDM for Care Med
1 9 mats
UKPDS: patients. death 2 11:666
u
–669, Prev rt Diabet (S Public
1994 a- from es DI Health
49. lenc the Care S). Ser-
Corrad e of Pittsbu 20: Dia vice,
i L, diab rgh 322– bet Center
Zoppi etic Epide 329, es s for
A, peri miolog 1997 Res Diseas
Tettam pher y of 55. Cli e
anti F, al Diabet Morg n Contro
Malam neur es ando Pra l and
ina G, opat Compl P, ct Pre-
Lazzari hy ication Chen 16: ventio
P, and s H, 151 n,
Fogari its Study. Patel – Nation
R: relat Diabete V, 156 al
Associa ion s Herbe , Center
tion to 38:145 rt L, 199 for
betwee glyc 6– Kohn 2 Chroni
n aemi 1461, er E: 57. US c
smokin c 1989 The Dep Diseas
g and cont 53. acute artm e
micro- rol Mitche effect ent Preven
albumi and ll B, of of tion
nuria pote Hawth smoki Heal and
in ntial orne ng on th Health
hyper- risk V, retinal and Promo
tensive fact Vinik blood Hu tion,
patient ors: A: flow man Office
s with the Ciga- in Ser- on
type 2 EUR rette subjec vices Smoki
diabete ODI smoki ts : ng and
s AB ng and with The Health
melli- IDD neurop and Heal , 1990
tus. J M athy in witho th 58.
Hypert Com diabeti ut Bene Orlea
ens 11 plica c diabet fits ns C:
(Suppl. tions patient es. of Treati
5):S19 Stud s. Ophth Smo ng
0– y. Diabete almol king nicoti
S191, Diab s Care ogy Cess ne
1993 etolo 13:434 101: a- depen
50. Klein gia –447, 1220– tion dence
R, 39:13 1990 1224, :A in
Klein 77– 54. Sands 1994 Rep medic
B, 1384, M, 56. ort al
Moss 1996 Shetter Reicha of settin
S: 52. ly S, rd P: the gs: a
Epide Mas Frankli Risk Sur stepp
miolog er R, n G, factor geo ed-
y of Stee Ham- s for n care
prolifer nkist man progr Gen mode
ative e A, R: ession eral l.
diabete Dor Incide of .
s man nce of micro Atla
retinop J: distal vascul nta,
athy. Epi- symme ar GA,
Diabet dem tric compl U.S.
es Care iolo (sensor icatio Dep
15:187 gical y) ns in artm
5– corr neurop the ent
1891, elate athy in Stock of
1992 s of NIDD - Heal
51. Tesfaye diab M: the holm th
S, etic San Diabet and
Stevens neu- Luis es Hu
L, ropa Diabet Interv man
Stephe thy: es ention Serv
nson J: repo Study. Study ices,
In g L, tobacc Helpi 276 tine therapi arso Arch
Nicotine Brek o ng 0– repla es in n A, Intern
Addictio ke cessati smok 276 ceme smoki Fran Med
n: M, on and ers 5, nt ng zon 154:256
Principl Con preve quit: 199 thera cessa- M, 7–2572,
es and n S, ntion. a 0 py in tion. Wes 1994
Man - Max JAMA rando 67. helpi Lancet tin 74. Anda R,
agement well 271:6 mized Cep ng 343:13 A, Williams
. P, 24– contr eda- peopl 9–142, Wikl on D,
Orleans Brek 626, olled Ben e to 1994 und Escobed
C, ke 1994 trial ito stop 71. O: o L,
Slade J, M: A 62. Hollis with A: smoki Suther Effec Mast E,
Eds. contr J, privat A ng? land t of Giovino
New olled Lichte e met BMJ G, nicot G,
York, trial nstein practi a- 308:2 Staple ine Remingt
Oxford to E, ce anal 1–26, ton J, nasa on P:
Univer integ Vogt dentis ytic 1994 Russel l Depressi
sity rate T, ts. J revi 69. Fiore l M: spra on and
Press, smok Steven Am ew M, Rando y on the
p. ing s V, Dent of Smith mised smo dynamic
145– cess Biglan Assoc the S, control king s of
161, ation A: 118:4 effic Joren led cess smoking:
1993 advic Nurse- 1–45, acy by D, trial of ation a
59. Fiore e assiste 1989 of Baker nasal : a national
M, into d 65. Curry nico T: nico- rand perspecti
Bailey pri- couns S: tine The tine omiz ve.
W, mary eling Self- che effect spray ed, JAMA
Cohen care for help win ivene in plac 264:1541
S: pract smoke interv g ss of smoki ebo- –1545,
Smoking ice: rs in ention gu the ng cont 1990
Ces - doct primar s for m nicoti cessati rolle 75. Glassman
sation. ors y care. smok in ne on. d, A, Helzer
Clinical helpi Ann - ing smo patch Lancet doub J, Covey
Practice ng Intern cessat kin for 340:32 le- L:
Guideli smo Med ion. J g smok 4–329, blin Smoking
ne k- 118:52 Consu treat ing 1992 d ,
Numbe ers, 1–525, lt men cessat 72. stud smoking
r roun 1993 Clin t ion: a Tonne y. cessation
18. d 63. Tomar Psych pro meta- sen P, , and
Rockv III. J S, ol 61: gra analy Norre major
ille, Fam Huste 790– m. J sis. gaard depressi
MD, Pract n G, 803, Con JAM J, on.
U.S. 34:7 Manle 1993 sult A Mikke JAMA
Depart 01– y M: 66. Fiore Cli 271:1 lsen 264:154
ment 708, Do M, n 940– K, 6–1549,
of 1992 dentis Novot Psyc 1947, Jorgen 1990
Health 61. ts and ny T, hol 1994 sen S, 76. Hurt R,
and Fior physic Pierce 61: 70. Nilsso Sachs D,
Huma e ians J: 822 Silag n F: A Glover E:
n M, advise Meth – y C, double A
Servic Epps tobacc ods 830, Mant -blind comparis
es, R, o used 199 D, trial of on of
Public Man users to 3 Fowl a sustained
Health ley to quit 68. er G, nicotin -release
Servic M: quit? J smoki Tan Lodg e bupropio
e, Miss Am ng in g J, e M: inhaler n and
Agenc ed Dent the La Meta for placebo
y for oppo Assoc Unite w - smoki for
Health rtuni 127:2 d M, analy ng smoking
Care ty: 59– States Wal sis ces- cessation
Policy teac 265, : do d on sation. . N Engl
and hing 1996 cessat N: effica JAMA J Med
Resear medi 64. Cohen ion Ho cy of 269:12 337:119
ch, cal S, progr w nicoti 68– 5–1202,
1996 stud Stook ams effe ne 1271, 1997
60. Kottke ents ey G, help? ctiv repla 1993 76a. Jorenby
T, abou Katz JAMA e is ceme 73. DE,
Solber t B: 263: nico nt Hjalm Leischow
SJ, Nides analysi smoke. 18:694– Nation 170, DiCle der waste
MA, Ren- s of Mayo 697, al 1997 mente S, of
nard SI, random Clin Proc 1995 Comm 88. C, Sch breath?
Johnston ized 70:209– 84. Orlandi ittee Strec Velice wart Diabet
JA, trials of 213, M: for her V, r W, z M, Med
Hughes prenata 1995 Promoti Qualit Kreute Rossi Fast 5:667
AR, l 81. Kenford ng y r M, J: J: –670,
Smith SS, smokin S, Fiore health Assura Boer Standa Com 1988
Muramot g M, and nce, DD, rdized, - 95.
o ML, cessati Joernby prevent- 1996 Kobri individ puter Sawic
Daughto on D, Smith ing 87. Joyner n S, ualized ized, ki P,
n DM, interve S, Wetter disease L, Hosp , telep Didjur
Doan K, ntions. D, Baker in health McNe ers H, interac hone geit
Fiore Am J T: care eley S, Skinn tive, - U,
MC, Obstet Predictin settings: Kahn er C: and base Muhlh
Baker TB: Gynecol g an R: The person d auser
A 171:13 smoking analy- ADA’s effects alized healt I,
controlle 28– cessation sis of (Ameri of self- h Berger
d trial of 1334, : who barriers. can com- help pro- M:
sustained- 1994 will quit Prev Med Diabet puter progra moti Behavi
release 79. with and 16:119– es tailor ms for on. our
bupropio Robinso without 130, Associ ed smoki I. therap
n, a n M, the 1987 ation) smoki ng Smo y
nicotine Laurent patch. 85. Solberg provid ng cessati king versus
patch, or S, Little JAMA L, Kotte er cessat on. cessa doc-
both for JJ: 271:589– T, recogn ion in Health tion tor’s
smoking Includi 594, Brekke ition famil Psychol prog anti-
cessation ng 1994 M, progra y 12:399 ram. smoki
. N Engl J smokin 82. Centers Calomen m. practi –405, Com ng
Med g for i C, HMO ce 1993 put advice
340:685– status Disease Conn S, Pract settin 92. Rimer Hum in
691, as a Control: Davidso 11:168 gs. J B, Beha diabeti
1999 new Physician n G: – Fam Orlean v c
76b. Hughes vital and other Using Pract s C, 11:1 patient
JR, sign: it health continu 39:26 Fleishe 35– s. J
Goldstein works. care ous 2– r L: 148, Intern
MG, Hurt J Fam professio quality 268, Does 1995 Med
RD, Shiff- Pract nal improve 1994 tai- 94. 234:40
man S: 40:556 counseli ment to 90. loring Ardr 7–409,
Recent –563, ng of increase Skinn matter? on 1993
advances 1995 smokers preventi er C, The M, 96. Haire-
in the 80. Fiore to quit. ve Siegfr impact Mac Joshu
pharma- M, MMWR services ied J, of a Farla D:
cotherap Jorenby 42:854– in Kegle tailore ne I, Smoki
y of D, 857, clinical r M, d Robi ng,
smoking. Schensk 1993 practice: Strech guide nson cessati
JAMA y A, 83. Malarcher going er V: on C, on,
281:72– Smith A, Ford beyond The ratings Hey and
76, S, E, guidelin potent and ning the
1999 Bauer Nelson es. Prev ial of short- en diabet
77. Benowitz R, D: Med comp term C, es
N: Baker Trends 25:259– uters smoki Calv health
Nicotine T: in 266, in ng- erley care
replacem Smokin cigarette 1996 patien related P: team.
ent g status smoking 86. t outco Anti- Diabet
therapy as the and Assuran educa mes smo es
during new physician ce NCQ: tion. for king Educ
pregnanc vital s’ advice Health Patien older advi 17:54–
y. JAMA sign: to quit Plan t smoke ce 67,
22:3174– effect smoking Employ Educ rs. for 1993
3177, on among er Data Couns Health youn 97. Haire-
1991 assess people and 22:27 Educ g Joshu
78. Mullen ment with dia- Informat –34, Res diab D:
P, and betes ion Set 1993 9:69– etic Smoki
Ramirez interve living in 3.0. 91. 84, smo ng
G, Groff ntion in the U.S. Washing Proch 1994 kers: and
J: A patients Diabetes - ton, aska 93. is it diabet
meta- who Care DC, J, Schnei a es
care: DK, Cromw
enhanc Turtl ell J,
ing e JR: Bartos
patient Anti- ch W,
capacit smok Fiore
y for ing M,
cessa- progr Hassel
tion. amm - blad
Diabet e for V,
es diabe Baker
Spectru tic T:
m patie Cost-
10:99– nts: effectiv
104, the eness
1997 agon of the
98. y clinica
MacFarlane and l
I: The the practic
smoker with ecsta e
diabetes: sy. recom
a Diab menda
difficult et tions
challeng Med in the
e. 6:698– AHCP
Postgrad 702, R
Med J 1989 Guidel
67: 101. ines
928–930, Cum for
1991 ming Smoki
99. Stacy s S, ng
R, Rubi Cessa-
Lloyd n S, tion.
B: An Oste JAMA
investig r G: 278:17
ation of The 59–
beliefs cost- 1766,
about effect 1997
smokin ivens 104.
g s of Crogh
among coun an I,
diabete selin Offord
s g K,
patient smok Evans
s: ers R:
inform to Cost-
ation quit. effec-
for JAM tivene
improv A ss of
ing 261: treatin
cessati 75– g
on 79, nicotin
efforts. 1989 e
Patient 102. Eddy depen
Educ D: dence:
Couns David the
15:181 Eddy Mayo
–189, ranks Clinic
1990 the experi
100. Fowler tests. ence.
PM, Har - Mayo
Hoskin vard Clin
s PL, Healt Proc
McGill h Lett 72:917
M, (Supp –924,
Dut- l. 10– 1997
ton 11),
SP, 1992
Yue 103.
105. Wasley ck E: interve D, R, Med Schecht epide n P,
M, The ntion. Wing Meyer 324:73 man K, miolo Griffith
McNag medic Med R: s A: 9– Fisher gical L,
ny S, al Care The The 745, EB Jr: study Gavard
Phillip care 36:670 effect smok 1991 Beliefs of J, Clouse
s V, syste – of ing 116. Pirie about young R:
Phil D, m and 678, short and P, smokin adults. Depressi
Ahluwa preve 1998 period body McBrid g and Am J on in
lia J: ntion: 110. s of weig e C, diabete Psychi adults
The the Glasgo caloric ht Hellers s care. atry with
cost- need w R, restrict relati tedt Diabete 149:46 diabetes.
effectiv for a Hamps ion on onshi W: s Educ 4–469, Dia -
eness new on S, weight p: Smoki 20:410– 1992 betes
of the paradi Stryck loss impli ng 415, 122. Fant Care
nicotin gm. er L, and ca- cessati 1994 R, 15:1631
e HMO Rug- glyce tions on in 119. Everso –1639,
transde Pract giero L: mic for women Pomerl n D, 1992
rmal 12:5– Persona control interv concer eau C: Dayto 125. Gavard J,
patch 13, l-model in entio ned Co- n G, Lustman
for 1998 beliefs type II n and about factors Pickw P, Clouse
smoki 108. and diabet postc weight. for orth R:
ng Elixh social- es. essati Am J smokin W, Prevalen
cessati auser environ Diabet on Public g and Hennin ce of
on. A: mental es weig Health evolutio gfield depressi
Prev The barrier Care ht 82:123 nary J: on in
Med costs s 21:2– contr 8– psycho Nicoti adults
26:264 of related 8, ol. 1243, biology ne with
–270, smoki to 1998 Ann 1992 . depen diabetes.
1997 ng diabete 113. Beha 117. Addictio dence Dia -
106. Mudde and s self- Bloom v Perkin n in betes
A, the manag garden Med s K: 92:397– wome Care
Vries cost ement. Z: 11:14 Issues 408, n. J 16:1167
HD, effecti Diabete Ameri 4– in the 1997 Am –1178,
Strech venes s Care can 156, preven 120. Hall S, Med 1993
er V: s of 20:556 Diabet 1989 tion of Munoz Wom 126. Haire-
Cost- smoki – es 115. weight R, Reus Assoc Joshu
effectiv ng- 561, Asso- Willi gain V, Sees 51:19– D,
eness cessat 1997 ciation amso after K: 24, Heady
of ion 111. Wing Annual n D, smoki Nicotin 1996 S,
smoki pro- R, Meetin Mada ng e, 123. Hall S, Thomas
ng grams Anglin g ns J, cessati negativ Munoz L,
cessati . J K: 1996: Anda on. e affect, R, Reus Schecht
on Public Effecti the R, Ann and V: man K,
modal- Health veness etiolo Klein Behav depress Cogniti Fisher
ities: Policy of a gy of - man Med ion. J ve- EB Jr:
compa 11:21 behavi type II J, 16:46– Consult behav- Depress
ring 8– oral diabet Giovi 52, Clin ioral ive
apples 237, weight es, no G, 1994 Psychol interve symtom
with 1990 control obesit Byers 118. Haire- 61:761 ntion atology
orange 109. progra y, and T: Joshu D, –767, increas and
s? Meena m for the Smo Heady S, 1993 es smokin
Prev n R, blacks treat- king Thomas L, 121. Breslau abstine g
Med Steven and ment ces- N, nce among
25:708 s V, whites of satio Kilbey rates per-
–716, Horn with type n M, for sons
1996 brook NIDD II and Andresk depressi with
107. Vogt M: M. diabet sever i P: ve- diabetes
T, Cost- Diabete es. ity of Nicotin history . Res
Hollis effecti s Care Diabet weig e smoker Nurs
J, venes 19:409 es ht withdra s. J Con Health
Lichte s of a –413, Care gain wal - sult 17:
nstein hospi 1996 19:13 in a sympto Clin 273–
E, tal- 112. 11– natio ms and Psychol 282,
Steven based Willia 1315, nal psychiat 62:141 1994
s V, smok ms K, 1996 cohor ric dis- –146, 127. Moss A,
Glasgo ing- Mullen 114. Gritz t. N orders: 1994 Allen K,
w R, cessat M, E, Engl findings 124. Giovino
Whitlo ion Kelley Klesges J from an Lustma G, Mills
S: Health C: Diabet s C, S, will smoki 1995
Recent 50:340 Smokin Med Rotbe Housto relapse ng 144. Wetter
Trends in –346, g in 10:275– rg H, n C: ? progr DW,
Adolesce 1996 diabetic 277, Quad The Symp- am: a Fiore
nt 130. Gold tennage 1993 e D, fea- toms two MC,
Smoking, M, rs. 133. Frey Lees sibility of and a Gritz
Smok - Gladst M, P: A of nicotin half ER,
ing ein J: Buthri hospi recruiti e year Lando
Uptake Substan e B, tal ng depend follow HA,
Correlat ce use Lovela quit- hospita ence -up. Stitzer
es, and among nd- smok lized predict Behav ML,
Expecta adoles Cherr ing patient long- Ther Hassel
tions cents y C, cons s with term 16:30 blad
About the with Park ult diabete relapse 3– V,
Future. diabete P, servi s for a after 307, Baker
Hyattsvill s Foster ce: smoki smoki 1985 TB:
e, MD, mellitu C: clinic ng ng 142. The
National s: Risky al cessati cessati Glasg Agenc
Center prelim behavi repor on on. J ow R, y for
for - inary or and t and pro- Consult Morr Health
Health finding risk in inter gram. Clin ay K, Care
Statistics s. J adoles venti Diabet Psychol Licht Policy
, 1992 Adoles cents on es 60:797 enstei and
128. French c with guide Educ –801, n E: Researc
S, Perry Health IDDM. lines. 21:214 1992 Contr h
C: 14:80– J Prev –218, 140. Fox R, olled Smokin
Smokin 84, Adoles Med 1995 Brown smoki g
g 1993 c 19:19 138. R: ng Cessati
among 131. Healt 8– Fagerst Nicoti vs. on
ado- Masso h 212, rom K, ne abstin Clinical
lescent n E, 20:38– 1990 Kunze fading ence Prac-
girls: MacFa 45, 136. M, and as a tice
prevale rlane I, 1997 Steve Schobe self- treat Guideli
nce and Priestl 134. Taylor ns V, rberger monito ment ne:
etiology ey C, C, Glas R: ring goal: finding
. J Am Wal- Miller gow Nicoti for the s and
Med lymah NH, R, ne cigaret hopes implica
Wom med Killen Holli depend te and tions
Assoc M, J, s J, ence abstine fears for
51:25– Flavell DeBus Licht vs. nce or may psychol
28, H: k R: en- smokin control be ogists.
1996 Failure Smoki stein g led unfou Am
129. Hovell to ng E, preva- smoki nded. Psychol
M, preven cessati Vogt lence: ng. J Beha 53:657
Slymen t on T: A compa Appl v –669,
D, nicotin after smok risons Behav Ther 1998
Keating e acute ing- among Anal 20:77
K: addicti myoca cessat countri 12:111– –91,
Tobacco on in rdial ion es and 125, 1989
use young infarcti inter- categor 1979 143.
prevalen people on: venti ies of 141. Hugh
ce and with effects on smoker Glasgo es J:
correlate diabete of a for s. Tob w R, Appl
s among s. Arch nurse- hospi Contro Klesges ying
ado- Dis manag tal l 5:52– R, harm
lescents Child ed patie 56, Klesges reduc
in a 67:100 inter- nts. 1996 L, tion
clinician –102, ventio Med 139. Killen Vasey to
initiated 1992 n. Care J, M, smok
tobacco 132. Shaw Ann 31:65– Fortma Gunna ing.
preventi N, Intern 72, nn S, rson Tob
on trial McClu Med 1993 Kraem D: Contr
in re R, 113:11 137. er H, Long- ol 4
Californi Kerr 8– Haire Varad term (Supp
a, USA. S, 123, - y A, effects l.
J Epi - Lawto 1990 Joshu Newm of a 2):S3
demiol n K, 135. D, an B: con- 3–
Comm Smith Orlean Ziff Who trolled S38,