Intervention to reduce secondhand smoke exposure among children with cancer: a controlled trial

Advancing the science of integrating multiple interventions by blending and bundling

Cancer prevention and control research has produced a variety of effective interventions over the years, though most are single disease focused. To meet the Cancer Moonshot goal to reduce the cancer death rate by 50% by 2047, it may be necessary to overcome the limitations of siloed interventions that do not meet people's multiple needs and limitations in system capacity to deliver the increasing number of interventions in parallel. In this article, we propose integrating multiple evidence-based interventions as a potential solution. We define 2 types of integrated interventions, blended and bundled, and provide examples to illustrate each. We then offer a schematic and outline considerations for how to assemble blended or bundled interventions including looking at the intervention need or opportunity along the cancer continuum as well as co-occurring behaviors or motivations. We also discuss delivery workflow integration considerations including social-ecological level(s), context or setting, implementer, and intended beneficiary. Finally, in assembling integrated interventions, we encourage consideration of practice-based expertise and community and/or patient input. After assembly, we share thoughts related to implementation and evaluation of blended or bundled interventions. To conclude the article, we present multiple research opportunities in this space. With swift progress on these research directions, cancer prevention and control interventionists and implementation scientists can contribute to achieving the promise of the reignited Cancer Moonshot.

A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review and Synthesis of Secondary Care Interventions to Reduce Secondhand Smoke Exposure Among Children and Young People

INTRODUCTION

Childhood secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe) is linked with increased morbidity and mortality. Hospital or secondary care contact presents a "teachable moment" to support parents to change their home smoking behaviors to reduce children's SHSe.

AIMS AND METHODS

This mixed-methods review explores: (1) if existing interventions in this context are effective, (2) if they are reported in sufficient detail to be replicated, (3) the experiences of health care professionals delivering such interventions, and (4) the experiences of parents receiving such interventions. Five electronic databases and the gray literature were searched for relevant literature published and indexed January 1980 to February 2020. Fourteen papers reporting 12 studies (nine quantitative and five qualitative) were included. Aligned with the Joanna Briggs Institute method, a segregated approach was used involving independent syntheses of the quantitative and qualitative data followed by an overall mixed-methods synthesis.

RESULTS

There was some evidence of effective interventions that resulted in a short-term (<6 months) reduction in children's SHSe when SHSe was subjectively measured. This was not seen in longer-term follow-up (>6 months) or when SHSe was measured objectively. Inconsistencies with reporting make replication challenging. Experiential evidence suggests a mismatch between stakeholder preferences and interventions being offered.

CONCLUSIONS

The pediatric secondary care interventions included in this analysis failed to show statistically significant evidence of longer-term effectiveness to reduce children's SHSe in all but one low-quality study. There was also inadequate reporting of interventions limiting assessment of effectiveness. It offers further insights into areas to target to develop effective interventions.

IMPLICATIONS

This review used rigorous methods to explore the current, global literature on how children's exposure to secondhand smoke is being tackled in secondary care. This review identified only one low-quality intervention study showing a statistically significant reduction in children's SHSe beyond 6 months. Synthesis with qualitative research identifies a mismatch between what parents want in an intervention and what has been delivered to date. Reporting quality needs to be improved to ensure that interventions can be replicated and studies conducted within the National Health Service to ensure suitability to this setting.

Family and carer smoking control programmes for reducing children's exposure to environmental tobacco smoke

BACKGROUND

Children's exposure to other people's tobacco smoke (environmental tobacco smoke, or ETS) is associated with a range of adverse health outcomes for children. Parental smoking is a common source of children's exposure to ETS. Older children in child care or educational settings are also at risk of exposure to ETS. Preventing exposure to ETS during infancy and childhood has significant potential to improve children's health worldwide.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of interventions designed to reduce exposure of children to environmental tobacco smoke, or ETS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register and conducted additional searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Education Resource Information Center (ERIC), and the Social Science Citation Index & Science Citation Index (Web of Knowledge). We conducted the most recent search in February 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included controlled trials, with or without random allocation, that enrolled participants (parents and other family members, child care workers, and teachers) involved in the care and education of infants and young children (from birth to 12 years of age). All mechanisms for reducing children's ETS exposure were eligible, including smoking prevention, cessation, and control programmes. These include health promotion, social-behavioural therapies, technology, education, and clinical interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies and extracted data. Due to heterogeneity of methods and outcome measures, we did not pool results but instead synthesised study findings narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-eight studies met the inclusion criteria, and we assessed all evidence to be of low or very low quality based on GRADE assessment. We judged nine studies to be at low risk of bias, 35 to have unclear overall risk of bias, and 34 to have high risk of bias. Twenty-one interventions targeted populations or community settings, 27 studies were conducted in the well-child healthcare setting and 26 in the ill-child healthcare setting. Two further studies conducted in paediatric clinics did not make clear whether visits were made to well- or ill-children, and another included visits to both well- and ill-children. Forty-five studies were reported from North America, 22 from other high-income countries, and 11 from low- or middle-income countries. Only 26 of the 78 studies reported a beneficial intervention effect for reduction of child ETS exposure, 24 of which were statistically significant. Of these 24 studies, 13 used objective measures of children's ETS exposure. We were unable to pinpoint what made these programmes effective. Studies showing a significant effect used a range of interventions: nine used in-person counselling or motivational interviewing; another study used telephone counselling, and one used a combination of in-person and telephone counselling; three used multi-component counselling-based interventions; two used multi-component education-based interventions; one used a school-based strategy; four used educational interventions, including one that used picture books; one used a smoking cessation intervention; one used a brief intervention; and another did not describe the intervention. Of the 52 studies that did not show a significant reduction in child ETS exposure, 19 used more intensive counselling approaches, including motivational interviewing, education, coaching, and smoking cessation brief advice. Other interventions consisted of brief advice or counselling (10 studies), feedback of a biological measure of children's ETS exposure (six studies), nicotine replacement therapy (two studies), feedback of maternal cotinine (one study), computerised risk assessment (one study), telephone smoking cessation support (two studies), educational home visits (eight studies), group sessions (one study), educational materials (three studies), and school-based policy and health promotion (one study). Some studies employed more than one intervention. 35 of the 78 studies reported a reduction in ETS exposure for children, irrespective of assignment to intervention and comparison groups. One study did not aim to reduce children's tobacco smoke exposure but rather sought to reduce symptoms of asthma, and found a significant reduction in symptoms among the group exposed to motivational interviewing. We found little evidence of difference in effectiveness of interventions between the well infant, child respiratory illness, and other child illness settings as contexts for parental smoking cessation interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A minority of interventions have been shown to reduce children's exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and improve children's health, but the features that differentiate the effective interventions from those without clear evidence of effectiveness remain unclear. The evidence was judged to be of low or very low quality, as many of the trials are at a high risk of bias, are small and inadequately powered, with heterogeneous interventions and populations.

Minimal intervention delivered by 2-1-1 information and referral specialists promotes smoke-free homes among 2-1-1 callers: a Texas generalisation trial

Background

Replication of intervention research is reported infrequently, limiting what we know about external validity and generalisability. The Smoke Free Homes Program, a minimal intervention, increased home smoking bans by United Way 2-1-1 callers in randomised controlled trials in Atlanta, Georgia and North Carolina.

Objective

Test the programme's generalisability-external validity in a different context.

Methods

A randomised controlled trial (n=508) of English-speaking callers from smoking-discordant households (≥1 smoker and ≥1 non-smoker). 2-1-1 Texas/United Way HELPLINE call specialists serving the Texas Gulf Coast recruited callers and delivered three mailings and one coaching call, supported by an online tracking system. Data collectors, blind to study assignment, conducted telephone interviews 3 and 6 months postbaseline.

Results

At 3 months, more intervention households reported a smoke-free home (46.6% vs 25.4%, p<0.0001; growth model intent-to-treat OR=1.48, 95% CI 1.241 to 1.772, p<0.0001). At 6 months, self-reported full bans were 62.9% for intervention participants and 38.4% for controls (OR=2.19). Texas trial participants were predominantly women (83%), single-smoker households (76%) and African-American (65%); half had incomes ≤US$10 000/year (50%). Texas recruitment was <50% of the other sites. Fewer callers reported having a smoker in the household. Almost twice the callers with a household smoker declined interest in the programme/study.

Conclusions

Our findings in a region with lower smoking rates and more diverse callers, including English-speaking Latinos, support programme generalisability and convey evidence of external validity. Our recruitment experience indicates that site-specific adjustments might improve recruitment efficiency and reach.

Trial registration number

NCT02097914, Results.

Motivational interviewing and urine cotinine feedback to stop passive smoke exposure in children predisposed to asthma: a randomised controlled trial

We tested the effectiveness of a program consisting of motivational interviewing (MI) and feedback of urine cotinine to stop passive smoking (PS) in children at risk for asthma. Fifty-eight families with children 0-13 years with a high risk of asthma and PS exposure were randomised in a one-year follow-up study. The intervention group received the intervention program during 6 sessions (1/month) and the control group received measurements (questionnaires, urine cotinine, and lung function) only. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of families stopping PS (parental report verified and unverified with the child's urine cotinine concentration <10 μg/l) in children during the intervention program. The analyses were performed with Mixed Logistic Regression. After 6 months, a significant group difference was observed for the unverified parental report of stopping PS in children: 27% of parents in the intervention group versus 7% in the control group. For the verified parental report, the difference was similar (23% versus 7%) but was not statistically significant. Despite a limited sample size, the results suggest that the intervention program is probably an effective strategy to stop PS in children. A program longer than 6 months might be necessary for a longer lasting intervention effect.

Family-focussed interventions to reduce harm from smoking in primary school-aged children: A systematic review of evaluative studies

Children living in families where adults smoke are exposed to harmful effects of tobacco smoke and risk a predisposition to smoking initiation. Interventions to support families to reduce risk of harm from smoking have been developed and tested. The purpose of this review is to identify effective family-based interventions used to promote smoke-free home environments in families with primary school age children (aged 5-12years). A systematic search of MEDLINE, Cochrane and CINAHL electronic databases was conducted. Narrative synthesis of included articles was completed. Guidelines for reporting behaviour change interventions were used to summarise and compare intervention timing, content, intensity and delivery. Quality of included studies was critiqued using United States Preventative Services Taskforce (USPST) procedures for internal and external validity. Narrative synthesis was based on methods described by Popay and colleagues. Nineteen articles that evaluated 14 intervention studies focussed on child smoking prevention (n=5), parent smoking cessation (n=4) and environmental tobacco smoke reduction (n=6). Interventions and outcomes were heterogeneous, and were rarely informed by theoretical frameworks relating to family, parenting or child development. Family based interventions may be an important strategy to reduce the effects of smoking for children. There is a need for interventions to be informed by theory relevant to children, parenting and families.

National estimates and correlates of secondhand smoke exposure in US cancer survivors

PURPOSE

Cancer survivors comprise a vulnerable population for exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS). This study examined and compared the prevalence, time trends, and predictors of SHS exposure between nonsmoking adult cancer survivors and nonsmoking adults without cancer history (control group).

METHODS

Data were obtained from the 2001-2012 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (survivors: n = 2168; controls: n = 19,436). All adults ≥20 years of age who reported not smoking and had a serum cotinine level of 0.015-10 ng/mL were included in the study. Prevalence and 95% confidence intervals, weighted linear regression of prevalence on year for trend analysis, and logistic regression analysis were performed with adjustments made for the complex survey design.

RESULTS

Survivors were significantly less likely to be exposed to SHS (65.4 vs. 70.6%, respectively). Exposure over time decreased by 16% (from 67.1% in 2001 to 53.3% in 2012) among survivors and by 24% (from 72% in 2001 to 56% in 2012) among controls. Exposed survivors were more likely to be young (OR = 0.98 [95% CI = 0.97-0.99]), non-Hispanic Black (2.51 [1.49-4.26]), with some college education (2.47 [1.56-3.93]), a high school education (2.72 [1.76-4.19]), less than a high school education (2.49 [1.58-3.91]), and poor (1.80 [1.10-2.96]).

CONCLUSION

Considerable numbers of US cancer survivors are exposed to SHS and exposure disparities persist.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

More efforts are needed to develop and test population policies and clinical-based interventions targeting cancer survivors.

A tailored video intervention to reduce smoking and environmental tobacco exposure during and after pregnancy: Rationale, design and methods of Baby's Breath

Low-cost interventions to decrease environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure of pregnant women and their newborns are needed to lower health risks of exposed fetuses and infants. Baby's Breath is a tailored video intervention developed and tested in a randomized controlled trial. The study aimed to test the efficacy of tailored video versus usual care approaches to reduce the ETS exposure of fetuses of low-income women during and after pregnancy; and to assess this intervention separately among non-smoking and smoking women. Participating women, recruited early in pregnancy, who spoke English, were at least 18years old, smoke exposed (current smokers, quit smoking on their own, or were exposed to smoke of others), pregnant with only one baby, and had access to a telephone and video player, were randomized to experimental or control conditions. Intervention participants received newsletters containing content aimed at smoking cessation and avoidance (5 during and 3 after pregnancy), in addition to videos (3 during and 2 after pregnancy) individually tailored on behavioral theory-based survey questions. Comparison participants received newsletters and videos on healthy pregnancy topics. Outcomes included salivary cotinine of both mother and baby (32weeks gestation and 6months postpartum) as well as self-reported ETS exposure and avoidance behaviors. This study may demonstrate the efficacy of a low-cost intervention to decrease ETS exposure, and will fill an important gap in describing the utility of this innovative intervention technology, as well as demonstration of potential benefits to this type of intervention.

A Minimal Intervention to Promote Smoke-Free Homes among 2-1-1 Callers: North Carolina Randomized Effectiveness Trial

This study examined the extent to which delivery of the minimal Smoke-Free Homes intervention by trained 2-1-1 information and referral specialists had an effect on the adoption of home smoking bans in low-income households. A randomized controlled trial was conducted among 2-1-1 callers (n = 500) assigned to control or intervention conditions. 2-1-1 information and referral specialists collected baseline data and delivered the intervention consisting of 3 mailings and 1 coaching call; university-based data collectors conducted follow-up interviews at 3 and 6 months post-baseline. Data were collected from June 2013 through July 2014. Participants were mostly female (87.2%), African American (61.4%), and smokers (76.6%). Participants assigned to the intervention condition were more likely than controls to report a full ban on smoking in the home at both 3- (38.1% vs 19.3%, p = < .001) and 6-month follow-up (43.2% vs 33.2%, p = .02). The longitudinal intent-to-treat analysis showed a significant intervention effect over time (OR = 1.31, p = .001), i.e. OR = 1.72 at 6 months. This study replicates prior findings showing the effectiveness of the minimal intervention to promote smoke-free homes in low-income households, and extends those findings by demonstrating they can be achieved when 2-1-1 information and referral specialists deliver the intervention. Findings offer support for this intervention as a generalizable and scalable model for reducing secondhand smoke exposure in homes.

Motivating parents of kids with asthma to quit smoking: the effect of the teachable moment and increasing intervention intensity using a longitudinal randomized trial design

AIMS

We tested two aims: (1) the teachable moment (TM): whether second-hand smoke exposure (SHSe) feedback motivates cessation in parents of children with asthma versus parents of healthy children (HC); and (2) whether greater intervention intensity [enhanced-precaution adoption model (PAM)] produces greater cessation than a previously tested intervention (PAM).

DESIGN AND INTERVENTIONS

Aim 1: two home visits (asthma education or child wellness), and cessation induction using motivational interviewing and SHSe feedback. Aim 2: post-home-visits, parents with asthmatic children were randomized to PAM (n = 171; six asthma education calls) or enhanced-PAM (n = 170; six asthma education/smoking cessation calls + repeat SHSe feedback).

SETTING

Rhode Island, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Parents of asthmatic (n = 341) or healthy (n = 219) children who did not have to want to quit smoking to enroll.

MEASUREMENTS

Measurements were given at baseline, 2, 4, 6 and 12 months. Abstinence was bioverified. Outcomes were 7-day and 30-day point prevalence abstinence (ppa) and SHSe (primary) and asthma morbidity (secondary).

FINDINGS

Aim 1: the TM was supported: parents of asthmatic children were more than twice as likely to achieve 30-day [odds ratio (OR) = 2.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.22-5.54] and 7-day ppa (OR = 2.26, 95% CI = 1.13-4.51) at 2 months (primary end-point) and have non-detectable levels of SHSe than HCs. Greater treatment intensity yielded stronger TM effects (OR = 3.60; 95% CI = 1.72-7.55). Aim 2: enhanced-PAM was more likely to achieve 30-day ppa at the primary end-point, 4 months (OR = 2.12, 95% CI 1.09-4.12) and improved asthma outcomes versus PAM.

CONCLUSIONS

Smoking cessation intervention (Motivational Interviewing plus biomarker feedback) appear to motivate smoking cessation more strongly among parents of asthmatic children than among parents of healthy children. Increased intervention intensity yields greater smoking cessation among parents of asthmatic children and better asthma outcomes.

Effectiveness of Interventions to Reduce Tobacco Smoke Pollution in Homes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Smoke-free homes can help protect children from tobacco smoke exposure (TSE). The objective of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis to quantify effects of interventions on changes in tobacco smoke pollution in the home, as measured by air nicotine and particulate matter (PM).

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Embase. We included controlled trials of interventions which aimed to help parents protect children from tobacco smoke exposure. Two reviewers identified relevant studies, and three reviewers extracted data.

RESULTS

Seven studies were identified. Interventions improved tobacco smoke air pollution in homes as assessed by nicotine or PM. (6 studies, N = 681, p = 0.02). Analyses of air nicotine and PM separately also showed some benefit (Air nicotine: 4 studies, N = 421, p = 0.08; PM: 3 studies, N = 340, p = 0.02). Despite improvements, tobacco smoke pollution was present in homes in all studies at follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions designed to protect children from tobacco smoke are effective in reducing tobacco smoke pollution (as assessed by air nicotine or PM) in homes, but contamination remains. The persistence of significant pollution levels in homes after individual level intervention may signal the need for other population and regulatory measures to help reduce and eliminate childhood tobacco smoke exposure.

Effects of a Parent-Child Interactive Program for Families on Reducing the Exposure of School-Aged Children to Household Smoking

INTRODUCTION

Parental smoking has been identified as the major source of children's exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS). Therefore, parental involvement is critical in ETS exposure prevention programs. This study examined the effects of a parent-child interactive program on reducing children's exposure to ETS at home and enhancing parents' and children's prevention strategies.

METHODS

A clustered randomized controlled trial was administered to 75 families of school-aged children from six primary schools in New Taipei City, Taiwan. Families in the intervention group received a parent-child interactive intervention, and parents in the control group received written materials on tobacco hazards. Data on children's exposure and the prevention of children's exposure to ETS at home were obtained at baseline, 8-week, and 20-week or 6-month assessments.

RESULTS

The percentage of children with urine cotinine levels greater than or equal to 6 ng/ml was significantly lower in the intervention group than it was in the control group at both the 8-week and 6-month assessments. The intervention significantly reduced parental smoking in the presence of children and increased parents' prevention of children's ETS exposure and children's ETS avoidance behavior from the baseline to the 20-week assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

This is a preliminary study design aimed at creating a program for reducing children's ETS exposure at home. Further research to produce evidence supporting the application of the parent-child interactive program in primary schools is suggested. The theoretical basis of the intervention design can serve as a reference for nursing education and the design of health education programs.

Reduction of Secondhand Smoke Exposure in the Cars of Children With Cancer

This study examined whether an intervention designed to reduce secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe) among children being treated for cancer had effects in the specific setting of a motor vehicle. The parents or guardians (n = 71) of children being treated for cancer were randomized to either a behavioral secondhand smoke (SHS) reduction program or a standard care control group. Parental reports of SHSe were collected over the course of 12 months. Younger children were exposed at baseline more than their older counterparts. The greatest initial declines in car exposure were observed among children ≤5 years old in the intervention group compared with same-aged peers in the control group. After the 3-month time point, the control group showed greater reductions in car exposure in comparison with the intervention group. Interventions that teach parents strategies to manage their smoking while driving in their personal vehicles may produce even greater reductions in child exposure and should be developed. Based on the age-specific results reported here, future studies should account for effects of child age and use setting-specific measures of SHS.

Tobacco and the pediatric chronic kidney disease population

Tobacco use and exposure are preventable causes of morbidity and mortality. Whereas the impact of this public health issue is well described in adults with kidney disease, its role in the pediatric chronic kidney disease (CKD) population is largely unknown. This review discusses the prevalence of tobacco use and exposure in children with CKD, updates the reader on how tobacco affects the kidney, and presents intervention strategies relevant to this patient population.

A minimal intervention to promote smoke-free homes among 2-1-1 callers: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

We tested the efficacy of a minimal intervention to create smoke-free homes in low-income households recruited through the United Way of Greater Atlanta 2-1-1, an information and referral system that connects callers to local social services.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized controlled trial (n=498) from June 2012 through June 2013, with follow-up at 3 and 6 months. The intervention consisted of 3 mailings and 1 coaching call.

RESULTS

Participants were mostly smokers (79.7%), women (82.7%), African American (83.3%), and not employed (76.5%), with an annual household income of $10,000 or less (55.6%). At 6-months postbaseline, significantly more intervention participants reported a full ban on smoking in the home than did control participants (40.0% vs 25.4%; P=.002). The intervention worked for smokers and nonsmokers, as well as those with or without children.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimal intervention was effective in promoting smoke-free homes in low income households and offers a potentially scalable model for protecting children and adult nonsmokers from secondhand smoke exposure in their homes.

Tobacco use and exposure among youth undergoing cancer treatment

INTRODUCTION

Adolescents with cancer are susceptible to the health consequences associated with secondhand smoke exposure (SHSE) and tobacco use. The present study compared tobacco use, exposure, and risk factors between patients and population peers.

METHOD

Self-reported data on tobacco use, SHSE, and tobacco-related risk factors were drawn from a pediatric oncology hospital and the National Youth Tobacco Survey. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios for patients and control subjects.

RESULTS

Patients were as likely to have tried tobacco and report home SHSE as control subjects. Patients were more likely to report car SHSE, less likely to report that SHSE is harmful, and less likely to report home smoking bans.

DISCUSSION

Patients experienced SHSE, tobacco use, and tobacco-related risk factors at rates greater than or equal to control subjects. These results provide support for consideration of intervention targets, health status, and delivery mechanisms, particularly by health care providers, when developing comprehensive tobacco control strategies.

Full and home smoking ban adoption after a randomized controlled trial targeting secondhand smoke exposure reduction

INTRODUCTION

The current study examined home and full (i.e., home plus car) smoking ban adoption as secondary outcomes to a randomized controlled trial targeting reduced secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe) for children under treatment for cancer.

METHODS

Families with at least 1 adult smoker who reported SHSe for their children (n = 119) were randomized to control or intervention conditions and followed for 1 year with 5 assessments. Both groups were advised of the negative health outcomes associated with SHSe; the intervention group provided more in-depth counseling from baseline to 3 months. Parents reported on household and car smoking behavior, demographic, psychosocial, and medical/treatment-related information.

RESULTS

Regardless of group assignment, there was an increase in home (odds ration [OR] = 1.16, p = .074) and full (OR = 1.37, p = .001) smoking ban adoption across time. Families in the intervention group were more likely to adopt a full ban by 3 months, but this difference was nonsignificant by 12 months. Married parents (OR = 2.33, p = .006) and those with higher self-efficacy for controlling children's SHSe (OR = 1.11, p = .023) were more likely to have a home smoking ban; parents who reported smoking fewer cigarettes were more likely to adopt a home (OR = 1.62, p < .0001) or full (OR = 7.32, p = .038) ban.

CONCLUSIONS

Smoking bans are in-line with Healthy People 2020's tobacco objectives and may be more feasible for parents with medically compromised children for immediate SHSe reduction. Furthermore, interventions targeting full smoking bans may be a more effective for comprehensive elimination of SHSe.

Children's exposure to secondhand and thirdhand smoke carcinogens and toxicants in homes of hookah smokers

INTRODUCTION

We examined homes of hookah-only smokers and nonsmokers for levels of indoor air nicotine (a marker of secondhand smoke) and indoor surface nicotine (a marker of thirdhand smoke), child uptake of nicotine, the carcinogen 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK), and the toxicant acrolein by analyzing their corresponding metabolites cotinine, 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL) and NNAL-glucuronides (total NNAL) and 3-hydroxypropylmercapturic acid.

METHODS

Data were collected at 3 home visits during a 7-day study period from a convenience sample of 24 households with a child 5 years or younger. Three child urine samples and 2 air and surface samples from the living room and the child bedroom were taken in homes of nonsmokers (n = 5) and hookah-only smokers (n = 19) comprised of daily hookah smokers (n = 8) and weekly/monthly hookah smokers (n = 11).

RESULTS

Nicotine levels in indoor air and on surfaces in the child bedrooms in homes of daily hookah smokers were significantly higher than in homes of nonsmokers. Uptake of nicotine, NNK, and acrolein in children living in daily hookah smoker homes was significantly higher than in children living in nonsmoker homes. Uptake of nicotine and NNK in children living in weekly/monthly hookah smoker homes was significantly higher than in children living in nonsmoker homes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data provide the first evidence for uptake of nicotine, the tobacco-specific lung carcinogen NNK, and the ciliatoxic and cardiotoxic agent acrolein in children living in homes of hookah smokers. Our findings suggest that daily and occasional hookah use in homes present a serious, emerging threat to children's long-term health.

Meta-analysis of parental protection of children from tobacco smoke exposure

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Worldwide, roughly 40% of children are exposed to the damaging and sometimes deadly effects of tobacco smoke. Interventions aimed at reducing child tobacco smoke exposure (TSE) have shown mixed results. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify effects of interventions aimed at decreasing child TSE.

METHODS

Data sources included Medline, PubMed, Web of Science, PsycNet, and Embase. Controlled trials that included parents of young children were selected. Two reviewers extracted TSE data, as assessed by parentally-reported exposure or protection (PREP) and biomarkers. Risk ratios and differences were calculated by using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model. Exploratory subgroup analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Thirty studies were included. Improvements were observed from baseline to follow-up for parentally-reported and biomarker data in most intervention and control groups. Interventions demonstrated evidence of small benefit to intervention participants at follow-up (PREP: 17 studies, n = 6820, relative risk 1.12, confidence interval [CI] 1.07 to 1.18], P < .0001). Seven percent more children were protected in intervention groups relative to control groups. Intervention parents smoked fewer cigarettes around children at follow-up than did control parents (P = .03). Biomarkers (13 studies, n = 2601) at follow-up suggested lower child exposure among intervention participants (RD -0.05, CI -0.13 to 0.03, P = .20).

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions to prevent child TSE are moderately beneficial at the individual level. Widespread child TSE suggests potential for significant population impact. More research is needed to improve intervention effectiveness and child TSE measurement.

Family and carer smoking control programmes for reducing children's exposure to environmental tobacco smoke

BACKGROUND

Children's exposure to other people's cigarette smoke (environmental tobacco smoke, or ETS) is associated with a range of adverse health outcomes for children. Parental smoking is a common source of children's exposure to ETS. Older children are also at risk of exposure to ETS in child care or educational settings. Preventing exposure to cigarette smoke in infancy and childhood has significant potential to improve children's health worldwide.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of interventions aiming to reduce exposure of children to ETS.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register and conducted additional searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CINAHL, ERIC, and The Social Science Citation Index & Science Citation Index (Web of Knowledge). Date of the most recent search: September 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Controlled trials with or without random allocation. Interventions must have addressed participants (parents and other family members, child care workers and teachers) involved with the care and education of infants and young children (aged 0 to 12 years). All mechanisms for reduction of children's ETS exposure, and smoking prevention, cessation, and control programmes were included. These include health promotion, social-behavioural therapies, technology, education, and clinical interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed studies and extracted data. Due to heterogeneity of methodologies and outcome measures, no summary measures were possible and results were synthesised narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Seven studies were judged to be at low risk of bias, 27 studies were judged to have unclear overall risk of bias and 23 studies were judged to have high risk of bias. Seven interventions were targeted at populations or community settings, 23 studies were conducted in the 'well child' healthcare setting and 24 in the 'ill child' healthcare setting. Two further studies conducted in paediatric clinics did not make clear whether the visits were to well or ill children, and another included both well and ill child visits. Thirty-six studies were from North America, 14 were in other high income countries and seven studies were from low- or middle-income countries. In only 14 of the 57 studies was there a statistically significant intervention effect for child ETS exposure reduction. Of these 14 studies, six used objective measures of children's ETS exposure. Eight of the studies had a high risk of bias, four had unclear risk of bias and two had a low risk of bias. The studies showing a significant effect used a range of interventions: seven used intensive counselling or motivational interviewing; a further study used telephone counselling; one used a school-based strategy; one used picture books; two used educational home visits; one used brief intervention and one study did not describe the intervention. Of the 42 studies that did not show a significant reduction in child ETS exposure, 14 used more intensive counselling or motivational interviewing, nine used brief advice or counselling, six used feedback of a biological measure of children's ETS exposure, one used feedback of maternal cotinine, two used telephone smoking cessation advice or support, eight used educational home visits, one used group sessions, one used an information kit and letter, one used a booklet and no smoking sign, and one used a school-based policy and health promotion. In 32 of the 57 studies, there was reduction of ETS exposure for children in the study irrespective of assignment to intervention and comparison groups. One study did not aim to reduce children's tobacco smoke exposure, but rather aimed to reduce symptoms of asthma, and found a significant reduction in symptoms in the group exposed to motivational interviewing. We found little evidence of difference in effectiveness of interventions between the well infant, child respiratory illness, and other child illness settings as contexts for parental smoking cessation interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

While brief counselling interventions have been identified as successful for adults when delivered by physicians, this cannot be extrapolated to adults as parents in child health settings. Although several interventions, including parental education and counselling programmes, have been used to try to reduce children's tobacco smoke exposure, their effectiveness has not been clearly demonstrated. The review was unable to determine if any one intervention reduced parental smoking and child exposure more effectively than others, although seven studies were identified that reported motivational interviewing or intensive counselling provided in clinical settings was effective.

Accuracy and Concordance in Reporting for Secondhand Smoke Exposure among Adolescents Undergoing Treatment for Cancer and Their Parents

Few studies have examined adolescent reporting accuracy for secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe), and never for youth with cancer. SHSe reporting from adolescents being treated for cancer (M_age=14.92 years, SD=1.67) was examined against parent/guardian reports and urine cotinine among 42 adolescent-parent dyads. Number of days in hospital-based lodgings prior to assessment emerged as the strongest predictor of urine cotinine (β=-0.46, p=0.003) and adolescent SHSe reporting significantly predicted urine cotinine (β=0.37, p=0.011) beyond relevant demographic and contextual variables (overall R²=0.40, F(6, 35)=3.90, p=0.004). Findings support adolescents as accurate reporters of discrete SHSe occurrences.

Smoking restrictions in the homes of children with cancer

OBJECTIVES

To examine smoking restrictions in households of children with cancer and their effect on biological measures of children's secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe).

METHODS

A sample of 135 parents of nonsmoking children with cancer who lived with a smoker completed structured interviews.

RESULTS

Approximately 43% of families prohibited smoking in the home. Children living in homes that prohibited smoking had median cotinine levels that were 71% and 52% lower than did those from homes with no and partial restrictions.

CONCLUSIONS

Parents should be directed to completely ban all smoking from the home and car to best protect their children from SHSe.