Table 6 Theoretical models informing the interventions
Study | Is theory/model mentioned? | Are the relevant theoretical constructs targeted? | Is theory used to select recipients or tailored interventions? | Are the relevant theoretical constructs measured? | Is family-related theory tested? | Is theory refined? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hjermann et al. [38] | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported |
McBride et al. [34] | Social support and marital theory is referred to. | Yes. Intervention objectives were to (1) encourage couple communication about helpful and unhelpful support behaviors, (2) assist partners in developing alternatives to negative behaviors, (3) prompt couples to make plans for handling high-risk situations, and (4) when appropriate, encourage and assist partner smoking cessation.An “It Takes Two” booklet and companion video were developed to guide couples in discussing support behaviors related to the woman’s smoking. | No | Yes. Partner Interaction Questionnaire to assess positive and negative perceived and provided support for cessation. | Intervention impact on support was measured. Women in all 3 groups consistently reported a decline in positive partner support from baseline to 12-month Postpartum, negative support decreased through pregnancy, but increased postpartum. Partners reported little change in positive and negative smoking-specific support that they gave in the same time frame. | Not reported |
McIntyre-Kingsolver et al. [39] | Social support is cited as the driving theory, referring to a previous study which found that perceived helpfulness from a spouse during treatment was significantly related to smokers achieving and maintaining abstinence. | Yes. Common examples of helpful or unhelpful behaviors were discussed. Guided group discussions and direct instruction were used to try and increase positive or decrease negative spouse behaviors. Spouses were encouraged at all stages to help problem solve difficult situations (e.g., quit day) and to reward subjects for making small steps in changing their habit. It was emphasized that the post-treatment support and assistance that spouses provided was crucial to the success of the subject. Subjects were also encouraged to reward their spouses for participating in the program and for helping them. | Relatives are guided on how to be more/less supportive. | Partner Interaction Questionnaire measured the impact of the spouse-training treatment component. This 61-item tool taps into a variety of smoking-related spousal interactions. | Influence of social support is measured and found to not be related to self-reported smoking status at follow-up. | Not reported |
Nyborg and Nevid [41] | Social support | Yes. Couples received additional written materials which provided instructions in providing mutual support for smoking reduction and cessation) The techniques included mutual modeling of appropriate nonsmoking behavior in smoking-related contexts (e.g., talking on the telephone without smoking), mutual monitoring (systematically counting each other's cigarettes), partner reinforcement for habit change, and couple reinforcement contingent upon achievement of mutual goals in changing smoking habits (e.g., the couple selects a shared reward for mutual abstinence during a predetermined period of time). Couples receiving therapist-administered treatment reviewed their progress in implementing these mutual support strategies and received therapist feedback in their treatment sessions. Weekly telephone contact was maintained with minimal contact couples during which partners reported on each other's progress and received therapist feedback. | No | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported |
Øien et al. [36] | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported |
Patten et al. [40] | No explicit theory provided, but the link between adolescents influencing parental smoking is proposed as promoting health and reducing second-hand smoke exposure. | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported |
de Vries et al. [35] | Theory of behaviour change, based on communication techniques, and the “health communication persuasion matrix”, based on social influence theory and self-efficacy. The authors note that reviews on smoking and pregnant women suggest to include partner smoking in programs since smoking status of the partner is a chief predictor of postpartum relapse | The intervention was focused on pregnant women. A booklet was provided to smoking fathers, encouraging cessation and support to their partner. | The booklet was given to women with smoking partners. | No, but partner smoking was measured. | Not reported | Not reported |
Wood et al. [37] | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported | Not reported |