Support-Person Promotion of a Smoking Quitline A Randomized Controlled Trial Christi A. Patten, PhD, Christina M. Smith, LPN, Tabetha A. Brockman, MA, Paul A. Decker, MS, Christine A. Hughes, BS, Ashley M. Nadeau, BS, Pamela S. Sinicrope, DrPH, Kenneth P. Offord, MS, Edward Lichtenstein, PhD, Shu-Hong Zhu, PhD Background: Quitlines and other evidence-based cessation treatments are greatly underutilized by smokers, limiting their public health impact. Social support is correlated with successful cessation. Thus, efforts targeting the social network of smokers could be a potential avenue to promote quitline utilization. Purpose: This study examined the effıcacy of an intervention for nonsmokers interested in helping a smoker (i.e., support people) to promote smoker utilization of the Minnesota QUITPLAN ® Helpline. Data were collected from 2007 to 2010, and analyses were conducted from 2010 to 2011. Design: Two-group randomized design evaluating the support-person intervention (n=267) com- pared with a control condition (written materials, n=267). Setting/participants: Enrolled were 534 support people (91% female, 93% Caucasian) residing in Minnesota. Intervention: Written materials plus three weekly telephone sessions lasting 10 –30 minutes each. Based on Cohen’s theory of social support, the intervention provided participants with information and skills needed to encourage their smoker to call the QUITPLAN Helpline. Main outcome measures: Participants completed the Support Provided Measure (SPM) by mail at baseline and Week 4 (end-of-treatment). Helpline intake staff documented smoker calls to the Helpline through 6 months of follow-up. Results: The proportion of calls to the Helpline was signifıcantly (p=0.012) greater for smokers linked to support people in the intervention group (16.1%, 43/267) than in the control group (8.6%, 23/267). The treatment effect remained signifıcant after adjusting for support person residing with the smoker (OR=2.04, 95% CI=1.19, 3.49, p=0.010). Among support people randomly assigned to the intervention group, greater number of sessions completed was associated with increased smok- ers’ calls to the Helpline (p=0.004). After adjusting for the baseline score, the MSD SPM score at Week 4 was signifıcantly higher for support people in the intervention group (16.43.3) than for those in the control group (15.33.6), p=0.002. Conclusions: A support-person intervention is effective in increasing smoker utilization of the QUITPLAN Helpline. There is potential for increasing the reach of quitlines by targeting the social network of smokers. Trial registration #: NCT01311830 (Am J Prev Med 2011;41(1):17–23) © 2011 American Journal of Preventive Medicine From the Department of Psychology and Psychiatry (Patten, Sinicrope), Behavioral Health Research (Patten, Smith, Brockman, Hughes, Sini- crope), the Department of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics (Decker, Nadeau, Offord), Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota; the Oregon Research Institute (Lichtenstein), Eugene, Oregon; and the Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of California San Diego (Zhu), San Diego, California Address correspondence to: Christi A. Patten, PhD, Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, the Behavioral Health Research Program, 200 First Street SW, Charlton 6-273, Rochester MN 55905. E-mail: patten.christi@ mayo.edu. 0749-3797/$17.00 doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2011.03.012 © 2011 American Journal of Preventive Medicine • Published by Elsevier Inc. Am J Prev Med 2011;41(1):17–23 17