Smokers with multiple behavioral risk factors: how are they different?

Identifying contexts and mechanisms in multiple behavior change interventions affecting smoking cessation success: a rapid realist review

Background

Smoking continues to be a leading cause of preventable chronic disease-related morbidity and mortality, excess healthcare expenditure, and lost work productivity. Tobacco users are disproportionately more likely to be engaging in other modifiable risk behaviours such as excess alcohol consumption, physical inactivity, and poor diet. While hundreds of interventions addressing the clustering of smoking and other modifiable risk behaviours have been conducted worldwide, there is insufficient information available about the context and mechanisms in these interventions that promote successful smoking cessation. The aim of this rapid realist review was to identify possible contexts and mechanisms used in multiple health behaviour change interventions (targeting tobacco and two or more additional risk behaviours) that are associated with improving smoking cessation outcome.

Methods

This realist review method incorporated the following steps: (1) clarifying the scope, (2) searching for relevant evidence, (3) relevance confirmation, data extraction, and quality assessment, (4) data analysis and synthesis.

Results

Of the 20,423 articles screened, 138 articles were included in this realist review. Following Michie et al.’s behavior change model (the COM-B model), capability, opportunity, and motivation were used to identify the mechanisms of behaviour change. Universally, increasing opportunities (i.e. factors that lie outside the individual that prompt the behaviour or make it possible) for participants to engage in healthy behaviours was associated with smoking cessation success. However, increasing participant’s capability or motivation to make a behaviour change was only successful within certain contexts.

Conclusion

In order to address multiple health behaviours and assist individuals in quitting smoking, public health promotion interventions need to shift away from ‘individualistic epidemiology’ and invest resources into modifying factors that are external from the individual (i.e. creating a supportive environment).

Trial registration

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42017064430

Incentives for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Financial incentives, monetary or vouchers, are widely used in an attempt to precipitate, reinforce and sustain behaviour change, including smoking cessation. They have been used in workplaces, in clinics and hospitals, and within community programmes.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the long-term effect of incentives and contingency management programmes for smoking cessation.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). The most recent searches were conducted in July 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered only randomised controlled trials, allocating individuals, workplaces, groups within workplaces, or communities to smoking cessation incentive schemes or control conditions. We included studies in a mixed-population setting (e.g. community, work-, clinic- or institution-based), and also studies in pregnant smokers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. The primary outcome measure in the mixed-population studies was abstinence from smoking at longest follow-up (at least six months from the start of the intervention). In the trials of pregnant women we used abstinence measured at the longest follow-up, and at least to the end of the pregnancy. Where available, we pooled outcome data using a Mantel-Haenzel random-effects model, with results reported as risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using adjusted estimates for cluster-randomised trials. We analysed studies carried out in mixed populations separately from those carried out in pregnant populations.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-three mixed-population studies met our inclusion criteria, covering more than 21,600 participants; 16 of these are new to this version of the review. Studies were set in varying locations, including community settings, clinics or health centres, workplaces, and outpatient drug clinics. We judged eight studies to be at low risk of bias, and 10 to be at high risk of bias, with the rest at unclear risk. Twenty-four of the trials were run in the USA, two in Thailand and one in the Phillipines. The rest were European. Incentives offered included cash payments or vouchers for goods and groceries, offered directly or collected and redeemable online. The pooled RR for quitting with incentives at longest follow-up (six months or more) compared with controls was 1.49 (95% CI 1.28 to 1.73; 31 RCTs, adjusted N = 20,097; I² = 33%). Results were not sensitive to the exclusion of six studies where an incentive for cessation was offered at long-term follow up (result excluding those studies: RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.69; 25 RCTs; adjusted N = 17,058; I² = 36%), suggesting the impact of incentives continues for at least some time after incentives cease.Although not always clearly reported, the total financial amount of incentives varied considerably between trials, from zero (self-deposits), to a range of between USD 45 and USD 1185. There was no clear direction of effect between trials offering low or high total value of incentives, nor those encouraging redeemable self-deposits.We included 10 studies of 2571 pregnant women. We judged two studies to be at low risk of bias, one at high risk of bias, and seven at unclear risk. When pooled, the nine trials with usable data (eight conducted in the USA and one in the UK), delivered an RR at longest follow-up (up to 24 weeks post-partum) of 2.38 (95% CI 1.54 to 3.69; N = 2273; I² = 41%), in favour of incentives.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall there is high-certainty evidence that incentives improve smoking cessation rates at long-term follow-up in mixed population studies. The effectiveness of incentives appears to be sustained even when the last follow-up occurs after the withdrawal of incentives. There is also moderate-certainty evidence, limited by some concerns about risks of bias, that incentive schemes conducted among pregnant smokers improve smoking cessation rates, both at the end of pregnancy and post-partum. Current and future research might explore more precisely differences between trials offering low or high cash incentives and self-incentives (deposits), within a variety of smoking populations.

The effect of smoking on caries-related microorganisms

INTRODUCTION

Epidemiological studies have shown a close relationship between smoking and dental caries. Bacteria are one of the essential factors of caries formation. The imbalance of cariogenic bacteria and commensal bacteria in dental plaque results in higher production of acid that can corrode dental hard tissue. The aim of our review is to summarize the effect of smoking on caries-related bacteria.

METHODS

English articles available in Pubmed and ScienceDirect databases and published before December 2018 were searched. A variety of evidence was collected including not only the influence of cigarette products on bacteria strains in vitro but also their effect on bacterial composition in saliva and dental plaque in vivo. We particularly emphasize the mechanisms by which nicotine acts on oral bacteria.

RESULTS

The components of cigarettes promote the growth of cariogenic microorganisms. The mechanisms of how nicotine enhances Streptococcus mutans, Lactobacilli, Streptococcus gordonii, Actinomyces and Candida albicans are described separately in detail. The commensal bacteria, Streptococcus sanguinis, show less competitive capability in the presence of nicotine. Smoking influences saliva by lowering the buffer capability, altering its chemical agent and bacterial components, and therefore promotes the formation of a caries-susceptible environment.

CONCLUSIONS

Cigarette smoking and nicotine exposure promote the cariogenic activity of oral microorganisms and the formation of a caries-susceptible environment. This suggests that smokers should quit smoking, amongst other health reasons, also for their oral health.

Competitions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Competitions might encourage people to undertake and/or reinforce behaviour change, including smoking cessation. Competitions involve individuals or groups having the opportunity to win a prize following successful cessation, either through direct competition or by entry into a lottery or raffle.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether competitions lead to higher long-term smoking quit rates. We also aimed to examine the impact on the population, the costs, and the unintended consequences of smoking cessation competitions.

SEARCH METHODS

This review has merged two previous Cochrane reviews. Here we include studies testing competitions from the reviews 'Competitions and incentives for smoking cessation' and 'Quit & Win interventions for smoking cessation'. We updated the evidence by searching the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register in June 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomized controlled trials (RCTs), allocating individuals, workplaces, groups within workplaces, or communities to experimental or control conditions. We also considered controlled studies with baseline and post-intervention measures in which participants were assigned to interventions by the investigators. Participants were smokers, of any age and gender, in any setting. Eligible interventions were contests, competitions, lotteries, and raffles, to reward cessation and continuous abstinence in smoking cessation programmes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For this update, data from new studies were extracted independently by two review authors. The primary outcome measure was abstinence from smoking at least six months from the start of the intervention. We performed meta-analyses to pool study effects where suitable data were available and where the effect of the competition component could be separated from that of other intervention components, and report other findings narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty studies met our inclusion criteria. Five investigated performance-based reward, where groups of smokers competed against each other to win a prize (N = 915). The remaining 15 used performance-based eligibility, where cessation resulted in entry into a prize draw (N = 10,580). Five of these used Quit & Win contests (N = 4282), of which three were population-level interventions. Fourteen studies were RCTs, and the remainder quasi-randomized or controlled trials. Six had suitable abstinence data for a meta-analysis, which did not show evidence of effectiveness of performance-based eligibility interventions (risk ratio (RR) 1.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 1.74, N = 3201, I2 = 57%). No trials that used performance-based rewards found a beneficial effect of the intervention on long-term quit rates.The three population-level Quit & Win studies found higher smoking cessation rates in the intervention group (4% to 16.9%) than the control group at long-term follow-up, but none were RCTs and all had important between-group differences in baseline characteristics. These studies suggested that fewer than one in 500 smokers would quit because of the contest.Reported unintended consequences in all sets of studies generally related to discrepancies between self-reported smoking status and biochemically-verified smoking status. More serious adverse events were not attributed to the competition intervention.Using the GRADE system we rated the overall quality of the evidence for smoking cessation as 'very low', because of the high and unclear risk of bias associated with the included studies, substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity, and the limited population investigated.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At present, it is impossible to draw any firm conclusions about the effectiveness, or a lack of it, of smoking cessation competitions. This is due to a lack of well-designed comparative studies. Smoking cessation competitions have not been shown to enhance long-term cessation rates. The limited evidence suggesting that population-based Quit & Win contests at local and regional level might deliver quit rates above baseline community rates has not been tested adequately using rigorous study designs. It is also unclear whether the value or frequency of possible cash reward schedules influence the success of competitions. Future studies should be designed to compensate for the substantial biases in the current evidence base.

Incentives for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Material or financial incentives are widely used in an attempt to precipitate or reinforce behaviour change, including smoking cessation. They operate in workplaces, in clinics and hospitals, and to a lesser extent within community programmes. In this third update of our review we now include trials conducted in pregnant women, to reflect the increasing activity and resources now targeting this high-risk group of smokers.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether incentives and contingency management programmes lead to higher long-term quit rates.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, with additional searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO. The most recent searches were in December 2014, although we also include two trials published in 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials, allocating individuals, workplaces, groups within workplaces, or communities to experimental or control conditions. We also considered controlled studies with baseline and post-intervention measures. We include studies in a mixed-population setting (e.g. community-, work-, institution-based), and also, for this update, trials in pregnant smokers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One author (KC) extracted data and a second (JH-B) checked them. We contacted study authors for additional data where necessary. The main outcome measure in the mixed-population studies was abstinence from smoking at longest follow-up, and at least six months from the start of the intervention. In the trials of pregnant smokers abstinence was measured at the longest follow-up, and at least to the end of the pregnancy.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-one mixed-population studies met our inclusion criteria, covering more than 8400 participants. Ten studies were set in clinics or health centres, one in Thai villages served by community health workers, two in academic institutions, and the rest in worksites. All but six of the trials were run in the USA. The incentives included lottery tickets or prize draws, cash payments, vouchers for goods and groceries, and in six trials the recovery of money deposited by those taking part. The odds ratio (OR) for quitting with incentives at longest follow-up (six months or more) compared with controls was 1.42 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.69; 17 trials, [20 comparisons], 7715 participants). Only three studies demonstrated significantly higher quit rates for the incentives group than for the control group at or beyond the six-month assessment: One five-arm USA trial compared rewards- and deposit-based interventions at individual and group level, with incentives available up to USD 800 per quitter, and demonstrated a quit rate in the rewards groups of 8.1% at 12 months, compared with 4.7% in the deposits groups. A direct comparison between the rewards-based and the deposit-based groups found a benefit for the rewards arms, with an OR at 12 months of 1.76 (95% CI 1.22 to 2.53; 2070 participants). Although more people in this trial accepted the rewards programmes than the deposit programmes, the proportion of quitters in each group favoured the deposit-refund programme. Another USA study rewarded both participation and quitting up to USD 750, and achieved sustained quit rates of 9.4% in the incentives group compared with 3.6% for the controls. A deposit-refund trial in Thailand also achieved significantly higher quit rates in the intervention group (44.2%) compared with the control group (18.8%), but uptake was relatively low, at 10.5%. In the remaining trials, there was no clear evidence that participants who committed their own money to the programme did better than those who did not, or that contingent rewards enhanced success rates over fixed payment schedules. We rated the overall quality of the older studies as low, but with later trials (post-2000) more likely to meet current standards of methodology and reporting.Eight of nine trials with usable data in pregnant smokers (seven conducted in the USA and one in the UK) delivered an adjusted OR at longest follow-up (up to 24 weeks post-partum) of 3.60 (95% CI 2.39 to 5.43; 1295 participants, moderate-quality studies) in favour of incentives. Three of the trials demonstrated a clear benefit for contingent rewards; one delivered monthly vouchers to confirmed quitters and to their designated 'significant other supporter', achieving a quit rate in the intervention group of 21.4% at two months post-partum, compared with 5.9% among the controls. Another trial offered a scaled programme of rewards for the percentage of smoking reduction achieved over the course of the 12-week intervention, and achieved an intervention quit rate of 31% at six weeks post-partum, compared with no quitters in the control group. The largest (UK-based) trial provided intervention quitters with up to GBP 400-worth of vouchers, and achieved a quit rate of 15.4% at longest follow-up, compared to the control quit rate of 4%. Four trials confirmed that payments made to reward a successful quit attempt (i.e. contingent), compared to fixed payments for attending the antenatal appointment (non-contingent), resulted in higher quit rates. Front-loading of rewards to counteract early withdrawal symptoms made little difference to quit rates.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Incentives appear to boost cessation rates while they are in place. The two trials recruiting from work sites that achieved sustained success rates beyond the reward schedule concentrated their resources into substantial cash payments for abstinence. Such an approach may only be feasible where independently-funded smoking cessation programmes are already available, and within a relatively affluent and educated population. Deposit-refund trials can suffer from relatively low rates of uptake, but those who do sign up and contribute their own money may achieve higher quit rates than reward-only participants. Incentive schemes conducted among pregnant smokers improved the cessation rates, both at the end-of-pregnancy and post-partum assessments. Current and future research might continue to explore the scale, loading and longevity of possible cash or voucher reward schedules, within a variety of smoking populations.

Multiple risk-behavior profiles of smokers with serious mental illness and motivation for change

OBJECTIVE

Individuals with serious mental illness (SMI) are dying on average 25 years prematurely. The leading causes are chronic preventable diseases. In the context of a tobacco-treatment trial, this exploratory study examined the behavioral risk profiles of adults with SMI to identify broader interventional needs.

METHOD

Recruited from five acute inpatient psychiatry units, participants were 693 adult smokers (recruitment rate = 76%, 50% male, 45% Caucasian, age M = 39, 49% had income < $10,000) diagnosed with mood disorders (71%), substance-use disorders (63%), posttraumatic stress disorder (39%), psychotic disorders (25%), and attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (25%). The Staging Health Risk Assessment, the primary measure used in this study, screened for risk status and readiness to change 11 health behaviors, referencing the period prior to acute hospitalization.

RESULTS

Participants averaged 5.2 (SD = 2.1) risk behaviors, including smoking (100%), high-fat diet (68%), inadequate fruits/vegetables (67%), poor sleep (53%), physical inactivity (52%), and marijuana use (46%). The percent prepared to change ranged from 23% for tobacco and marijuana to 76% for depression management. Latent class analysis differentiated three risk groups: the global higher risk group included patients elevated on all risk behaviors; the global lower risk group was low on all risks; and a mood and metabolic risk group, characterized by inactivity, unhealthy diet, sleep problems, and poor stress and depression management. The global higher risk group (11% of sample) was younger, largely male, and had the greatest number of risk behaviors and mental health diagnoses; had the most severe psychopathologies, addiction-treatment histories, and nicotine dependence; and the lowest confidence for quitting smoking and commitment to abstinence.

CONCLUSION

Most smokers with SMI engaged in multiple risks. Expanding targets to treat co-occurring risks and personalizing treatment to individuals' multibehavioral profiles may increase intervention relevance, interest, and impact on health.

The association between smoking bans and nicotine dependence: a longitudinal analysis of current smokers in Canada

BACKGROUND

While a substantial body of research has examined the effects of smoking bans on smoking behavior, little is known about the relationship between smoking bans and nicotine dependence. The objective of this study was to examine whether home and workplace smoking bans are associated with reduced nicotine dependence among continuing smokers.

METHODS

We used longitudinal data of 1073 adult daily smokers from the Canadian National Population Health Survey (2004-2010). Generalized estimating equations were used to examine the association between smoking bans and nicotine dependence.

RESULTS

Smokers living in homes where smoking is restricted were less likely to be nicotine dependent (OR=0.40, 95% CI=0.32-0.50) than smokers living in homes with no such smoking restriction. Workplace smoking policies had no significant association with nicotine dependence (complete ban: OR=0.79, 95% CI=0.56-1.11; partial ban: OR=0.82, 95% CI=0.57-1.16). There was some evidence that workplace smoking bans were significantly associated with nicotine dependence when single items of the Fagerstrom test were considered.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper demonstrates that the presence of a home smoking ban was associated with lower nicotine dependence among continuing smokers. The relationship of workplace bans with nicotine dependence was less clear and was contingent on the measure of nicotine dependence employed. These findings further confirm the importance of bans on smoking in the home, workplace, and other public places on reducing tobacco-related harms.

Nicotine dependence matters: examining longitudinal association between smoking and physical activity among Canadian adults

OBJECTIVE

A number of studies point to the inverse relationship between physical activity and smoking; however, none has examined the role of nicotine dependence in physical activity participation among smokers. This study examined whether levels of nicotine dependence modify the association between leisure time physical activity and smoking status.

METHODS

The study used longitudinal data on 6795 adults from the Canadian National Population Health Survey (2004-2010). Generalized estimating equations were used to examine the association between physical activity, smoking, and nicotine dependence.

RESULTS

We found that nicotine dependent smokers were significantly less likely to be physically active compared to non-smokers. Specifically, using the Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence, nicotine dependent smokers (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.55-0.76) were less likely to be physically active while no significant difference was found for non-dependent smokers (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80-1.02) compared to non-smokers.

CONCLUSIONS

Nicotine dependence matters in shaping engagement in physical activity among daily smokers. Efforts directed at promoting smoking cessation through nicotine dependence treatment intervention may provide additional benefits to health and well-being through an increased participation in physical activity.

Association of dental caries and salivary sIgA with tobacco smoking

BACKGROUND

Salivary secretory IgA (sIgA) is said to play an important role in the immune response against dental caries. This study aimed to determine the salivary sIgA levels in healthy smokers and non-smokers, and its correlation with dental caries.

METHODS

A total of 70 healthy subjects were selected and classified into four groups according to dental caries and tobacco smoking habits: smoking with caries (Group 1, n = 15); smoking without caries (Group 2, n = 15); non-smoking with caries (Group 3, n = 15); and non-smoking without caries (Group 4, n = 25). Salivary sIgA was measured using ELISA. The fissure and proximal caries were examined clinically and radiographically. Caries status was determined according to the decay surface index.

RESULTS

Smokers showed a higher number of caries and the lowest concentration of sIgA. The highest levels of sIgA were observed in non-smoking and caries-free subjects compared to caries-active smokers (123.2 ± 19.9 vs. 13.3 ± 4.1 μg/ml respectively, p < 0.001). Also, the mean level of sIgA in Group 4 was significantly higher than Group 3 (p = 0.009). More importantly, higher and significant levels of sIgA were found in Group 3 versus Group 1 (p < 0.0001) and Group 2 (p = 0.0004).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that low concentrations of salivary sIgA are correlated with a higher prevalence of dental caries in smokers.

Health behaviors, readiness to change, and interest in health promotion programs among smokers with lung cancer and their family members: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of lung cancer presents an opportunity to motivate individuals to adopt health-promoting behavior. Little attention has been given to using this opportunity to also motivate relatives to change their health behaviors.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to describe health behaviors and readiness to change lifestyle, identify interest in health promotion programs, and examine concordance of health behaviors among smokers with lung cancer and their family members.

METHODS

Cross-sectional data were collected once from 37 lung cancer patient-family member dyads. Standardized questionnaires were used to collect data. Descriptive statistics and percent agreement were used for analyses.

RESULTS

Lung cancer patients and their family members had high rates of continued smoking (43% vs 30%), low intake of fruits and vegetables (92% vs 95%), and high rates of physical inactivity (84% vs 84%). Patients and family members indicated readiness to change behaviors within the next 6 months ranging from 63% for physical activity, 73% for diet, and 88% to quit smoking for patients and 81% for physical activity, 58% for diet, and 91% to quit smoking for family members. Interest in participating in a multiple behavioral risk reduction program was high for patients and family members.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of patients and their family members have multiple behavioral risk factors placing them at risk for poor health outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Oncology nurses are in a unique position to provide leadership in assessing health behaviors and implementing evidence-based interventions to enhance outcomes for patient-family member dyads with lung cancer.

Competitions and incentives for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Background Material or financial incentives may be used in an attempt to reinforce behaviour change, including smoking cessation. They have been widely used in workplace smoking cessation programmes, and to a lesser extent within community programmes. Public health initiatives in the UK are currently planning to deploy incentive schemes to change unhealthy behaviours. Quit and Win contests are the subject of a companion review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether competitions and incentives lead to higher long-term quit rates. We also set out to examine the relationship between incentives and participation rates.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register, with additional searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO. Search terms included incentive*, competition*, contest*, reward*, prize*, contingent payment*, deposit contract*. The most recent searches were in November 2010.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomized controlled trials, allocating individuals, workplaces, groups within workplaces, or communities to experimental or control conditions. We also considered controlled studies with baseline and post-intervention measures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by one author (KC) and checked by the second (RP). We contacted study authors for additional data where necessary. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking at least six months from the start of the intervention. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each trial, and biochemically validated rates where available. Where possible we performed meta-analysis using a generic inverse variance model, grouped by timed endpoints, but not pooled across the subgroups.

MAIN RESULTS

Nineteen studies met our inclusion criteria, covering >4500 participants. Only one study, the largest in our review and covering 878 smokers, demonstrated significantly higher quit rates for the incentives group than for the control group beyond the six-month assessment. This trial referred its participants to local smoking cessation services, and offered substantial cash payments (up to US$750) for prolonged abstinence. In the remaining trials, there was no clear evidence that participants who committed their own money to the programme did better than those who did not, or that contingent rewards enhanced success rates over fixed payment schedules. There is some evidence that recruitment rates can be improved by rewarding participation, which may be expected to deliver higher absolute numbers of successful quitters. Cost effectiveness analysis was not appropriate to this review, since the efficacy of most of the interventions was not demonstrated.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

With the exception of one recent trial, incentives and competitions have not been shown to enhance long-term cessation rates. Early success tended to dissipate when the rewards were no longer offered. Rewarding participation and compliance in contests and cessation programmes may have potential to deliver higher absolute numbers of quitters. The one trial that achieved sustained success rates beyond the reward schedule concentrated its resources into substantial cash payments for abstinence rather than into running its own smoking cessation programme. Such an approach may only be feasible where independently-funded smoking cessation programmes are already available. Future research might explore the scale and longevity of possible cash reward schedules, within a variety of smoking populations.

Does the association between depression and smoking vary by body mass index (BMI) category?

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to explore how weight might influence the relationship between depression and smoking.

METHODS

Data were obtained from a cross-sectional survey representative of women age 40-65 enrolled in Group Health Cooperative, a health plan serving members in Washington and northern Idaho (n=4640). We examined the relationships between depression and smoking in normal weight, overweight, and obese women using weighted multiple logistic regression with both minimal and full adjustment.

RESULTS

Current depression was significantly associated with current smoking in obese women (adjusted odds ratio=2.48, 95% confidence interval=1.26-4.88) but not in underweight/normal or overweight women. Among ever smokers, obese women, but not other groups, were significantly less likely to have quit smoking in the past.

CONCLUSIONS

In our preliminary study, the association between smoking and depression in middle-aged women appears to be limited to the obese subset and may stem from a lesser likelihood of obese ever smokers to have quit. This population represents an important target for preventive medicine efforts.

Review of strategies to recruit smokers for smoking cessation: a population impact perspective

This paper reviews published articles describing several instruments used currently to "capture" the attention of smokers for quit-smoking interventions and emphasizes the distinction between the strategies used to reach eligible individuals and those used to recruit them for the proposed smoking cessation intervention. The search for articles was conducted using MEDLINE, PsychARTICLE, and LILACS. Key words for the search included recruitment, enrollment, reach, smoking cessation, quitline, and helpline mentioned in the abstracts and titles of the articles. Articles published in English, Portuguese, and Spanish through November 2006 that emphasized capture instruments related to different populations and specific interventions were included in this review. Twenty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies that used active and mixed strategies reached, on average, a smaller and less diverse possible number of eligible individuals and had greater participation proportions than those that used reactive strategies. Future studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of new associations between current interventions and reactive capture strategies, in view of the potential for increasing the population impact related to reactive capture.

Competitions and incentives for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Material or financial incentives may be used in an attempt to reinforce behaviour change, including smoking cessation. They have been widely used in workplace smoking cessation programmes, and to a lesser extent within community programmes. Quit and Win contests are the subject of a companion review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether competitions and incentives lead to higher long-term quit rates. We also set out to examine the relationship between incentives and participation rates.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register, with additional searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO. Search terms included incentive*, competition*, contest*, reward*, prize*, contingent payment*, deposit contract*. The most recent searches were in December 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomized controlled trials, allocating individuals, workplaces, groups within workplaces, or communities to experimental or control conditions. We also considered controlled studies with baseline and post-intervention measures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by one author and checked by the second. We contacted study authors for additional data where necessary. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking at least six months from the start of the intervention. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each trial, and biochemically validated rates where available. Where possible we performed meta-analysis using a generic inverse variance model, grouped by timed endpoints, but not pooled across the subgroups.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventeen studies met our inclusion criteria. None of the studies demonstrated significantly higher quit rates for the incentives group than for the control group beyond the six-month assessment. There was no clear evidence that participants who committed their own money to the programme did better than those who did not, or that different types of incentives were more or less effective. There is some evidence that although cessation rates have not been shown to differ significantly, recruitment rates can be improved by rewarding participation, which may be expected to deliver higher absolute numbers of successful quitters. Cost effectiveness analysis is not appropriate to this review, since the efficacy of the intervention has not been demonstrated.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Incentives and competitions have not been shown to enhance long-term cessation rates, with early success tending to dissipate when the rewards are no longer offered. Rewarding participation and compliance in contests and cessation programmes may have more potential to deliver higher absolute numbers of quitters.

Multiple health risk behaviors in German first year university students

Multiple health risk behaviors have been identified as a problem in young adults which includes university students. The goals of this study included assessing the prevalence of major health risk behaviors in a cohort of German first year university students, analyzing the clustering of these behaviors and assessing readiness to change across multiple behaviors. A total of 1262 students from the schools of law, teaching and medicine at a German university participated in a voluntary and anonymous survey in 2005. The study assessed indicators and readiness for change regarding fruit and vegetable consumption, exercise, smoking and binge drinking as well as sociodemographic variables. Confirming the hypotheses, prevalences for risk behaviors were high; over 95% ate less than five servings of fruits and vegetables, 60% did not exercise sufficiently, 31% were current smokers and 62% reported binge drinking. Only 2% had none, 10.5% had one, 34.5% had two, 34.8% had three, and 18.2% showed all four risk behaviors. Readiness for behavior change was very low across multiple risk behavior combinations, especially for reducing binge drinking and increasing fruit and vegetable consumption. Medical students showed slightly more positive patterns than other students. The results indicate the need for addressing health behaviors in the student population of this university. If these findings can be replicated in other universities, programs that promote individual behavior change as well as changes in environmental conditions in the university environment are necessary to address this urgent problem.

Cardiovascular risk behavior among sedentary female smokers and smoking cessation outcomes

Background

We examined female sedentary smokers' additional cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk behaviors and their associations to smoking cessation.

Methods

This study was part of a randomized controlled trial testing the effectiveness of exercise and nicotine gum in smoking cessation. Included in the analyses were 148 participants. Dietary habits and alcohol consumption were measured as additional CVD risk behaviors. High-fat diet and heavy alcohol use were considered those risk behaviors. Nicotine dependence, length of the longest quit attempt, depressive symptoms, self-efficacy, and education were examined as other baseline variables. Abstinence from tobacco was recorded through 12 months.

Results

Diet was related to depressive symptoms at baseline. Alcohol use was related to nicotine dependence and education level. Heavy alcohol use alone and accumulation of two added risk behaviors predicted poorer smoking cessation outcome. Although diet alone was not associated with cessation outcome the high-fat diet interacted with depressive symptoms, such that the depressed women with high-fat diet were significantly more likely to relapse in their quit attempt compared to other subgroups.

Conclusion

Non-moderate alcohol use alone and accumulation of multiple CVD risk behaviors seem to be associated with lower success in smoking cessation.

Competitions and incentives for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Material or financial incentives may be used in an attempt to reinforce behaviour change, including smoking cessation. They have been widely used in workplace smoking cessation programmes, and to a lesser extent within community programmes. Quit and Win contests are the subject of a companion review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether competitions and incentives lead to higher long-term quit rates. We also set out to examine the relationship between incentives and participation rates.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register, with additional searches of MEDLINE (January 1966 to September 2004), EMBASE (1980 to 2004/8), CINAHL (1982 to 2004/8) and PsycINFO (1872 to 2004/6). Search terms included incentive*, competition*, contest*, reward*, prize*, contingent payment*, deposit contract*.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomized controlled trials, allocating individuals, workplaces, groups within workplaces, or communities to experimental or control conditions. We also considered controlled studies with baseline and post-intervention measures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted by one author and checked by the second. We contacted study authors for additional data where necessary. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking for at least six months from the start of the intervention. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each trial, and biochemically validated rates where available. Where possible we performed meta-analysis using a generic inverse variance model, grouped by timed endpoints, but not pooled across the subgroups.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen studies met our inclusion criteria. None of the studies demonstrated significantly higher quit rates for the incentives group than for the control group beyond the six-month assessment. There was no clear evidence that participants who committed their own money to the programme did better than those who did not, or that different types of incentives were more or less effective. There is some evidence that although cessation rates have not been shown to differ significantly, recruitment rates can be improved by rewarding participation, which may be expected to deliver higher absolute numbers of successful quitters. Cost effectiveness analysis is not appropriate to this review, since the efficacy of the intervention has not been demonstrated.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Incentives and competitions do not appear to enhance long-term cessation rates, with early success tending to dissipate when the rewards are no longer offered. Rewarding participation and compliance in contests and cessation programmes may have more potential to deliver higher absolute numbers of quitters.

Cooccurrence of lifestyle risk factors and the explanation of education inequalities in mortality: results from the GLOBE study

BACKGROUND

To investigate whether the cooccurrence of two lifestyle risk factors (smoking, excessive alcohol consumption, physical inactivity in leisure time) has an additional contribution to the explanation of education inequalities in mortality, over and above the contribution of single risk factors.

METHODS

Prospective cohort study, 1991-1998, in the South East of the Netherlands. Participants were 16,980 men and women aged 15-74 years at baseline.

RESULTS

Education differences in the cooccurrence of risk factors were of a similar magnitude as education inequalities seen for single risk factors. A significant (P = 0.04) interaction effect on mortality was found between smoking and physical inactivity. Adjustment for both smoking and inactivity reduced the mortality hazard ratio of the lowest level of education by 30% (from 1.66 to 1.46). Further adjustment for the interaction between the two risk factors did not change the hazard ratio significantly.

CONCLUSION

The cooccurrence of lifestyle risk factors did not provide any additional contribution to the explanation of education inequalities in mortality, over and above that of single risk factors. However, because risk factors tend to cooccur and have a higher prevalence among lower-educated people, it is still useful to focus interventions on more than one risk factor.