Table 2

Process outcomes in intervention sites (study sites A and B) comparing smokers hospitalised in the observation phase (August 2009–October 2010) and intervention phase (November 2010–February 2012)

Observation phaseIntervention phaseRisk ratio (95% CI) or coefficient*p Value†
N=233N=225
Received intensive counselling during hospital stay (n, %)52 (22)193 (87)‡3.9 (3.0 to 5.0)<0.001
 Duration of in-hospital counselling per participant in minutes (median, Q1, Q3)45 (45, 48)50 (35, 60)2.6 (−3.7 to 8.7)0.4
 Number of in-hospital counselling sessions (median, min, max)1 (1,2)1 (1, 3)0.15 (−0.15 to 0.45)0.3
Received phone follow-up (n, %)NA175 (78)
 Duration of each phone follow-up in min (median, Q1, Q3)NA11 (8, 17)
 Total duration of phone follow-up in min (median, Q1, Q3)NA42 (30, 61)
 Number of phone follow-ups (median, Q1, Q3)NA4 (3, 4)
Prescribed nicotine replacement therapy at discharge (n, %)42 (18)132 (59)3.3 (2.4 to 4.3)<0.001
  • *Risk ratio and 95% CI calculated for dichotomous outcomes. Coefficients for duration of counselling obtained by linear regression. For number of counselling sessions, coefficient obtained by Poisson logistic regression model.

  • †p Value calculated by χ2 for dichotomous outcomes (eg, proportion receiving counselling) and linear regression for duration of encounters.

  • ‡Of the 13% who did not receive an intervention, 24 (11%) were transferred to another facility or discharged home before the counsellor could approach them, 2% (n=4) completely refused to discuss with counsellor, 1% (n=2) were in a confused state.

  • CHD, coronary heart disease; CR, cardiac rehabilitation; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; min, minutes; n, number of participants; NA, not-applicable; NSTEMI, non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction; Q1, first quartile; Q3, third quartile; STEMI, ST segment elevation myocardial infarction.