Skip to main content

Table 3 Tobacco Treatment Commitment Scale (TTCS) ratings among SUD peer recovery coaches by coaches smoking status

From: Preliminary feasibility of integrating tobacco treatment into SUD peer recovery coaching: a mixed-methods study of peer recovery coaches

Mean (standard deviation)

 

Past 30d Smoking Statusa

All items scored on a Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly agree to 5 = strongly disagree

All

(N = 23)

Not Smoking

(n = 15/22; 68%)

Smoking (n = 7/22; 32%)

P value

Factor 1. “Tobacco is less harmful than other drugs”

    

 Tobacco is less harmful than other SUDs, M (SD)

3.7 (1.1)

4.2 (0.80)

2.6 (0.98)

< 0.001

 Tobacco causes few problems for my recoverees, M (SD)

3.4 (1.1)

3.7 (0.91)

2.9 (1.2)

0.08

Factor 2. “It’s not our job to treat tobacco”

    

 Treating tobacco dependence should be part of the mission of SUD treatment programs, M (SD)

2.9 (1.1)

2.9 (1.18)

3.0 (1.15)

0.89

 SUD treatment programs should not treat tobacco because it isn’t what clients are in treatment for, M (SD)

3.2 (1.1)

3.2 (1.1)

3.1 (1.1)

0.91

Factor 3. “Tobacco treatment will harm clients”

    

 Treating tobacco dependence will interfere with a recoveree’s other SUD recovery, M (SD)

3.3 (1.1)

3.6 (1.0)

2.7 (1.3)

0.08

 Smoking helps recoverees cope with the stress in their lives, M (SD)

2.4 (0.79)

2.4 (0.84)

2.3 (0.76)

0.85

 It’s unfair to take recoverees tobacco away from them, M (SD)

2.1 (0.99)

2.3 (1.0)

1.9 (1.1)

0.37

  1. Note. Cells depicting mean (standard deviation) excluding those who reported “don’t know.” P values based on t-tests. The TTCS is recommended to be scored on a 1–5 scale ranging from 1”strongly agree” to 5 “strongly disagree.[11, 25]” Our study included additional qualitative anchors of 2 “agree”, 3 ”neither agree or disagree”, 4”disagree.”
  2. a1 participant had unknown past 30d smoking status and was not included