Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Bruce A. Christiansen is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Bruce A. Christiansen.


Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology | 1989

Using alcohol expectancies to predict adolescent drinking behavior after one year.

Bruce A. Christiansen; Gregory T. Smith; Patricia V. Roehling; Mark S. Goldman

An accumulating literature has shown the influence of childhood experiences associated with alcohol use on later drinking practices. Recent studies have suggested that alcohol-related expectancy may serve as an intervening variable to connect these early experiences with the later, proximal decision to drink when opportunities for actual alcohol consumption arise. Those studies, however, have collected expectancy and drinking data concurrently, whereas the present study for the first time reports on the power of expectancies measured in early adolescents (seventh and eighth grades) to predict self-reported drinking onset and drinking behavior measured a full year later. Results show that five of seven expectancy scores readily discriminated between nonproblem drinkers and those subsequently beginning problem drinking and accounted for a large portion of the variance in a continuous quantity/frequency index and a problem drinking index. The strength of these timelagged relations strengthens the case for inferring that expectancies have causal power on drinking behavior and suggests prevention strategies.


Annals of Behavioral Medicine | 2011

The Multiphase Optimization Strategy for Engineering Effective Tobacco Use Interventions

Linda M. Collins; Timothy B. Baker; Robin J. Mermelstein; Megan E. Piper; Douglas E. Jorenby; Stevens S. Smith; Bruce A. Christiansen; Tanya R. Schlam; Jessica W. Cook; Michael C. Fiore

The multiphase optimization strategy (MOST) is a new methodological approach for building, optimizing, and evaluating multicomponent interventions. Conceptually rooted in engineering, MOST emphasizes efficiency and careful management of resources to move intervention science forward steadily and incrementally. MOST can be used to guide the evaluation of research evidence, develop an optimal intervention (the best set of intervention components), and enhance the translation of research findings, particularly type II translation. This article uses an ongoing study to illustrate the application of MOST in the evaluation of diverse intervention components derived from the phase-based framework reviewed in the companion article by Baker et al. (Ann Behav Med, in press, 2011). The article also discusses considerations, challenges, and potential benefits associated with using MOST and similar principled approaches to improving intervention efficacy, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness. The applicability of this methodology may extend beyond smoking cessation to the development of behavioral interventions for other chronic health challenges.


Annals of Behavioral Medicine | 2011

New methods for tobacco dependence treatment research

Timothy B. Baker; Robin J. Mermelstein; Linda M. Collins; Megan E. Piper; Douglas E. Jorenby; Stevens S. Smith; Bruce A. Christiansen; Tanya R. Schlam; Jessica W. Cook; Michael C. Fiore

IntroductionDespite advances in tobacco dependence treatment in the past two decades, progress has been inconsistent and slow. This paper reviews pervasive methodological issues that may contribute to the lack of timely progress in tobacco treatment science including the lack of a dynamic model or framework of the cessation process, inefficient study designs, and the use of distal outcome measures that poorly index treatment effects. The authors then present a phase-based cessation framework that partitions the cessation process into four discrete phases based on current theories of cessation and empirical data. These phases include: (1) Motivation, (2) Precessation, (3) Cessation, and (4) Maintenance.DiscussionWithin this framework, it is possible to identify phase-specific challenges that a smoker would encounter while quitting smoking, intervention components that would address these phase-specific challenges, mechanisms via which such interventions would exert their effects, and optimal outcome measures linked to these phase-specific interventions. Investigation of phase-based interventions can be accelerated by using efficient study designs that would permit more timely development of an optimal smoking cessation treatment package.


JAMA Internal Medicine | 2009

Comparative Effectiveness of 5 Smoking Cessation Pharmacotherapies in Primary Care Clinics

Stevens S. Smith; Danielle E. McCarthy; Sandra J. Japuntich; Bruce A. Christiansen; Megan E. Piper; Douglas E. Jorenby; David Fraser; Michael C. Fiore; Timothy B. Baker; Thomas C. Jackson

BACKGROUND Randomized efficacy clinical trials conducted in research settings may not accurately reflect the benefits of tobacco dependence treatments when used in real-world clinical settings. Effectiveness trials (eg, in primary care settings) are needed to estimate the benefits of cessation treatments in real-world use. METHODS A total of 1346 primary care patients attending routine appointments were recruited by medical assistants in 12 primary care clinics. Patients were randomly assigned to 5 active pharmacotherapies: 3 monotherapies (nicotine patch, nicotine lozenge, and bupropion hydrochloride sustained release [SR]) and 2 combination therapies (patch + lozenge and bupropion SR + lozenge). Patients were referred to a telephone quit line for cessation counseling. Primary outcomes included 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 1 week, 8 weeks, and 6 months after quitting and number of days to relapse. RESULTS Among 7128 eligible smokers (> or =10 cigarettes per day) attending routine primary care appointments, 1346 (18.9%) were enrolled in the study. Six-month abstinence rates for the 5 active pharmacotherapies were the following: bupropion SR, 16.8%; lozenge, 19.9%; patch, 17.7%; patch + lozenge, 26.9%; and bupropion SR + lozenge, 29.9%. Bupropion SR + lozenge was superior to all of the monotherapies (odds ratio, 0.46-0.56); patch + lozenge was superior to patch and bupropion monotherapies (odds ratio, 0.56 and 0.54, respectively). CONCLUSIONS One in 5 smokers attending a routine primary care appointment was willing to make a serious quit attempt that included evidence-based counseling and medication. In this comparative effectiveness study of 5 tobacco dependence treatments, combination pharmacotherapy significantly increased abstinence compared with monotherapies. Provision of free cessation medications plus quit line counseling arranged in the primary care setting holds promise for assisting large numbers of smokers to quit. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00296647.


Nicotine & Tobacco Research | 2015

Motivating Low Socioeconomic Status Smokers to Accept Evidence-Based Smoking Cessation Treatment: A Brief Intervention for the Community Agency Setting

Bruce A. Christiansen; Kevin Reeder; Erin TerBeek; Michael C. Fiore; Timothy B. Baker

INTRODUCTION Individuals of low socioeconomic status (SES), smoke at very high rates but make fewer and less successful quit attempts than do other smokers. Low-SES smokers have specific beliefs about smoking and quitting that may serve as barriers to making quit attempts. The purpose of this study was to test the impact of a brief intervention addressing these beliefs on making calls to a telephone quit line. METHODS Of 522 smokers entering the study at 5 Wisconsin Salvation Army (SA) sites, 102 expressed motivation to quit and served as a comparison group. The remaining 420 smokers were not motivated to quit and were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 conditions: an intervention group who received brief counseling focused on cessation goals and beliefs, an attention-control group, and a low contact control group. The primary outcome was the rate at which smokers made a call to the Wisconsin tobacco quit line (WTQL) during their SA visit. Secondary outcome measures included motivational variables, stage of change, changes in beliefs about smoking and quitting, and self-reported abstinence. RESULTS Unmotivated participants in the intervention condition called the WTQL at a significantly higher rate (12.2%) than did those in the 2 control conditions (2.2% and 1.4%) (p < .01) and approached the rate of calling by participants who were initially motivated to quit (15.7%). Intervention condition participants also showed improved motivation to quit and stage of change. CONCLUSIONS A brief, targeted motivational intervention focusing on cessation goals and beliefs increased the initiation of an evidence-based tobacco cessation treatment by low-SES smokers.


Journal of Continuing Education in The Health Professions | 2011

Advancing public health through continuing education of health care professionals

Karen Suchanek Hudmon; Robert L. Addleton; Frank Vitale; Bruce A. Christiansen; George Mejicano

&NA; This article describes how the CS2day (Cease Smoking Today) initiative positioned continuing education (CE) in the intersection between medicine and public health. The authors suggest that most CE activities address the medical challenges that clinicians confront, often to the neglect of the public health issues that are key risk factors for the onset and exacerbation of diseases. The authors further suggest that the educational activities of the CS2day initiative functioned as Type III translational science in that it facilitated the use of research‐derived practice guidelines in clinical practice and in the community. The article concludes by stating that the successful results of the CS2day initiative illustrate what can happen when continuing education efforts develop from a public health problem rather than just a practice gap identified in a clinical practice setting.


Substance Use & Misuse | 2014

Changing Low Income Smokers’ Beliefs About Tobacco Dependence Treatment

Bruce A. Christiansen; Kevin Reeder; Michael C. Fiore; Timothy B. Baker

This field study tested an intervention that challenged beliefs about the effectiveness of various quit methods held by Salvation Army client smokers from two urban locations (N = 245). Data (surveys administered immediately after and one month post-intervention) were collected 2009–2010 and analyzed using primarily χ2 and t-tests. The intervention changed client perceptions about the effectiveness of quitting methods. Compared to no-intervention controls, intervention participants reported significantly greater smoking reduction and greater likelihood of contacting the Wisconsin Tobacco Quit Line. Study implications/limitations are discussed and future research directions noted. This research was supported by grant UL1TR000427 from the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program of the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, NIH.


Substance Use & Misuse | 2018

Helping Smokers with Severe Mental Illness Who Do Not Want to Quit

Bruce A. Christiansen; Julianne Carbin; Erin TerBeek; Michael C. Fiore

ABSTRACT Background: People with a severe and persistent mental illness are far more likely to smoke than others. While a large portion would like to quit, they are less likely to make quit attempts and succeed. Objective: This study used an Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) to test an intervention designed to increase engagement in cessation treatment, quit attempts, and quitting in smokers who did not want to quit in the next 30 days. It also compared these smokers with those who were motivated to quit in the next 30 days. Methods: Participants (N = 222), were smokers with significant mental illness receiving intensive outpatient care from Wisconsin Community Support Programs who were not interested in quitting in the next 30 days. They were randomly assigned to either an intervention group or an attention control group. The intervention, administered during four weekly sessions, included a motivational element, components designed to prepare the smoker for a quit attempt, and pre-quit nicotine patch. Additionally, 48 smokers motivated to quit in the next 30 days served as a comparison group. Results: Compared to control participants, smokers receiving the intervention were more likely to be abstinent at the three month follow-up (biochemically verified, intent to treat, 8.5% vs. 1.0%, respectively, p = .01). They were also more likely to accept four more quitting preparation sessions (intent to treat, 50.8% vs 29.2%, respectively, p < .001) but were not more likely to call a telephone tobacco quit line. Conclusion/Importance: Brief motivational interventions increased engagement in cessation treatment and abstinence among smokers with signification mental illness.


Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved | 2016

Measuring the Integration of Tobacco Policy and Treatment into the Behavioral Health Care Delivery System: How Are We Doing?

Bruce A. Christiansen; David R. Macmaster; Eric L. Heiligenstein; Randal L. Glysch; Donna M. Riemer; Robert Adsit; Kristine A. Hayden; Christopher P. Hollenback; Michael C. Fiore

Abstract:People with a mental illness and/or drug use disorder have a higher rate of smoking than adults in general. To address this challenge, recommendations include integrating tobacco-free policies and tobacco dependency treatment into the behavioral health care delivery system. Currently, little is known regarding levels of such integration. A 65-item Internet survey measuring integration assessed three areas: a) policies addressing the use of tobacco products; b) provision of evidence-based tobacco dependence treatment; and, c) capacity to help employees/volunteers quit tobacco use. The survey was distributed to representatives of all behavioral health programs in Wisconsin. The survey response rate was 27.1%. Programs, on average, were 40% integrated. A significant proportion of programs (20%) were less than 20% integrated. A few programs (4.3%) exceeded 80% integration. Integration of tobacco policies and treatment into the behavioral health care delivery system remains limited and there is a need for technical assistance and training.


Annals of Family Medicine | 2012

What Does It Cost to Change Behavior

Bruce A. Christiansen

Dr Wu, in her essay on rewarding healthy behaviors by paying patients for their performance,[1][1] deserves considerable credit for exploring novel strategies to enhance patients’ health. Her strategy of reinforcing patients’ health-promoting behaviors is sensible in that it focuses on behaviors

Collaboration


Dive into the Bruce A. Christiansen's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Michael C. Fiore

University of Wisconsin-Madison

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Timothy B. Baker

University of Wisconsin-Madison

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Megan E. Piper

University of Wisconsin-Madison

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Douglas E. Jorenby

University of Wisconsin-Madison

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Mark S. Goldman

University of South Florida

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Stevens S. Smith

University of Wisconsin-Madison

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Jessica W. Cook

University of Wisconsin-Madison

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Linda M. Collins

Pennsylvania State University

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Robin J. Mermelstein

University of Illinois at Chicago

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge