A randomized trial to reduce smoking among American Indians in South Dakota: The walking forward study

Expanding our understanding of digital mental health interventions for Indigenous youth: An updated systematic review

Past research has examined available literature on electronic mental health interventions for Indigenous youth with mental health concerns. However, as there have recently been increases in both the number of studies examining electronic mental health interventions and the need for such interventions (i.e. during periods of pandemic isolation), the present systematic review aims to provide an updated summary of the available peer-reviewed and grey literature on electronic mental health interventions applicable to Indigenous youth. The purpose of this review is to better understand the processes used for electronic mental health intervention development. Among the 48 studies discussed, smoking cessation and suicide were the most commonly targeted mental health concerns in interventions. Text message and smartphone application (app) interventions were the most frequently used delivery methods. Qualitative, quantitative, and/or mixed outcomes were presented in several studies, while other studies outlined intervention development processes or study protocols, indicating high activity in future electronic mental health intervention research. Among the findings, common facilitators included the use of community-based participatory research approaches, representation of culture, and various methods of motivating participant engagement. Meanwhile, common barriers included the lack of necessary resources and limits on the amount of support that online interventions can provide. Considerations regarding the standards and criteria for the development of future electronic mental health interventions for Indigenous youth are offered and future research directions are discussed.

Different doses, durations and modes of delivery of nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) aims to replace nicotine from cigarettes. This helps to reduce cravings and withdrawal symptoms, and ease the transition from cigarette smoking to complete abstinence. Although there is high-certainty evidence that NRT is effective for achieving long-term smoking abstinence, it is unclear whether different forms, doses, durations of treatment or timing of use impacts its effects.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of different forms, deliveries, doses, durations and schedules of NRT, for achieving long-term smoking cessation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register for papers mentioning NRT in the title, abstract or keywords, most recently in April 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials in people motivated to quit, comparing one type of NRT use with another. We excluded studies that did not assess cessation as an outcome, with follow-up of fewer than six months, and with additional intervention components not matched between arms. Separate reviews cover studies comparing NRT to control, or to other pharmacotherapies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods. We measured smoking abstinence after at least six months, using the most rigorous definition available. We extracted data on cardiac adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs) and study withdrawals due to treatment.  MAIN RESULTS: We identified 68 completed studies with 43,327 participants, five of which are new to this update. Most completed studies recruited adults either from the community or from healthcare clinics. We judged 28 of the 68 studies to be at high risk of bias. Restricting the analysis only to those studies at low or unclear risk of bias did not significantly alter results for any comparisons apart from the preloading comparison, which tested the effect of using NRT prior to quit day whilst still smoking.  There is high-certainty evidence that combination NRT (fast-acting form plus patch) results in higher long-term quit rates than single form (risk ratio (RR) 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17 to 1.37; I2 = 12%; 16 studies, 12,169 participants). Moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, indicates that 42/44 mg patches are as effective as 21/22 mg (24-hour) patches (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.29; I2 = 38%; 5 studies, 1655 participants), and that 21 mg patches are more effective than 14 mg (24-hour) patches (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.08; 1 study, 537 participants). Moderate-certainty evidence, again limited by imprecision, also suggests a benefit of 25 mg over 15 mg (16-hour) patches, but the lower limit of the CI encompassed no difference (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.41; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 3446 participants). Nine studies tested the effect of using NRT prior to quit day (preloading) in comparison to using it from quit day onward. There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias, of a favourable effect of preloading on abstinence (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.44; I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 4395 participants). High-certainty evidence from eight studies suggests that using either a form of fast-acting NRT or a nicotine patch results in similar long-term quit rates (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.05; I2 = 0%; 8 studies, 3319 participants). We found no clear evidence of an effect of duration of nicotine patch use (low-certainty evidence); duration of combination NRT use (low- and very low-certainty evidence); or fast-acting NRT type (very low-certainty evidence). Cardiac AEs, SAEs and withdrawals due to treatment were all measured variably and infrequently across studies, resulting in low- or very low-certainty evidence for all comparisons. Most comparisons found no clear evidence of an effect on these outcomes, and rates were low overall. More withdrawals due to treatment were reported in people using nasal spray compared to patches in one study (RR 3.47, 95% CI 1.15 to 10.46; 1 study, 922 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and in people using 42/44 mg patches in comparison to 21/22 mg patches across two studies (RR 4.99, 95% CI 1.60 to 15.50; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 544 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-certainty evidence that using combination NRT versus single-form NRT and 4 mg versus 2 mg nicotine gum can result in an increase in the chances of successfully stopping smoking. Due to imprecision, evidence was of moderate certainty for patch dose comparisons. There is some indication that the lower-dose nicotine patches and gum may be less effective than higher-dose products. Using a fast-acting form of NRT, such as gum or lozenge, resulted in similar quit rates to nicotine patches. There is moderate-certainty evidence that using NRT before quitting may improve quit rates versus using it from quit date only; however, further research is needed to ensure the robustness of this finding. Evidence for the comparative safety and tolerability of different types of NRT use is limited. New studies should ensure that AEs, SAEs and withdrawals due to treatment are reported.

Scoping review of telehealth use by Indigenous populations from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States

INTRODUCTION

Telehealth has the potential to address health disparities experienced by Indigenous people, especially in remote areas. This scoping review aims to map and characterize the existing evidence on telehealth use by Indigenous people and explore the key concepts for effective use, cultural safety, and building therapeutic relationships.

METHODS

A search for published and gray literature, written in English, and published between 2000 and 2022 was completed in 17 electronic databases. Two reviewers independently screened retrieved records for eligibility. For included articles, data were extracted, categorized, and analyzed. Synthesis of findings was performed narratively.

RESULTS

A total of 321 studies were included. The most popular type of telehealth used was mHealth (44%), and the most common health focuses of the telehealth interventions were mental health (26%) and diabetes/diabetic retinopathy (13%). Frequently described barriers to effective telehealth use included concerns about privacy/confidentiality and limited internet availability; meanwhile, telehealth-usage facilitators included cultural relevance and community engagement. Although working in collaboration with Indigenous communities was the most frequently reported way to achieve cultural safety, 40% of the studies did not report Indigenous involvement. Finally, difficulty to establish trusting therapeutic relationships was a major concern raised about telehealth, and evidence suggests that having the first visit-in-person is a potential way to address this issue.

CONCLUSION

This comprehensive review identified critical factors to guide the development of culturally-informed telehealth services to meet the needs of Indigenous people and to achieve equitable access and positive health outcomes.

Smoking Cessation Interventions in Indigenous North Americans: A Meta-Narrative Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Indigenous North Americans have the highest cigarette smoking prevalence among all racial and ethnic groups in the United States. We seek to identify effective components of smoking cessation interventions in Indigenous people in the United States associated with favorable cessation outcomes.

METHODS

A review of literature studying smoking cessation interventions in Indigenous North Americans (American Indians and Alaska Natives) from January 2010 through August 2021 was completed. The primary objective of this study was to identify components of interventions associated with positive smoking cessation outcomes in Indigenous people. The studies identified were synthesized in a meta-narrative approach.

RESULTS

Ten studies out of 608 titles were included (6 randomized trials, 2 single-arm studies, 1 cohort study, and 1 prospective observational study). Five categories of smoking cessation interventions were identified; phone or web-based tools, culturally-tailored interventions, the inclusion of Indigenous study personnel, pharmaceutical cessation aids, and behavioral health interventions. Phone and web tools, cultural tailoring, and inclusion of Indigenous personnel conditions inconsistently influenced smoking cessation. Pharmaceutical aids were viewed favorably among participants. Individualized behavioral counseling sessions were effective at promoting smoking cessation, as was input from local communities in the planning and implementation phases of study.

CONCLUSION

A successful smoking cessation intervention in Indigenous North Americans includes Tribal or community input in intervention design and implementation; should provide individualized counseling sessions for participants, and offer access to validated smoking cessation tools including pharmacotherapy.

IMPLICATIONS

This study identifies a paucity of smoking interventions utilizing standard of care interventions in Indigenous North Americans. Standard of care interventions including individualized cessation counseling and pharmacotherapy were effective at promoting cessation. The use of novel culturally tailored cessation interventions was not more effective than existing evidence-based care with the exception of including Tribal and local community input in intervention implementation. Future smoking cessation interventions in Indigenous North Americans should prioritize the use of standard of care cessation interventions.

Indigenous Smoking Behaviors in Olmsted County, Minnesota: A Longitudinal Population-Based Study

OBJECTIVE

To describe smoking behaviors and pharmaceutical cessation aid uptake in a population-based Indigenous cohort compared with an age- and sex-matched non-Indigenous cohort.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Using the health record-linkage system of the Rochester Epidemiology Project (January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2019), smoking data of Indigenous residents of Olmsted County in Minnesota were abstracted to define the smoking prevalence, incidence, cessation, relapse after cessation, and pharmaceutical smoking cessation aid uptake compared with a matched non-Indigenous cohort. Prevalence was analyzed with a modified Poisson regression; cessation and relapse were evaluated with generalized estimating equations. Incidence was evaluated with a Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

Smoking prevalence was higher in the Indigenous cohort (39.0% to 47.0%; n=898) than the matched cohort (25.6% to 30.3%; n=1780). Pharmaceutical uptake was higher among the Indigenous cohort (35.8% of n=584 ever smokers vs 16.3% of n=778 ever smokers; P<.001). Smoking cessation events occurred more frequently in the Indigenous cohort (relative risk, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.13; P<.001). Indigenous former smokers were more likely to resume smoking (relative risk, 3.03; 95% CI, 2.93 to 3.14; P<.001) compared with the matched cohort. These findings were independent of socioeconomic status, age, and sex.

CONCLUSION

Smoking in this Indigenous cohort was more prevalent compared with a sex- and age-matched non-Indigenous cohort despite more smoking cessation events and higher use of smoking cessation aids in the Indigenous cohort. The relapse rate after achieving cessation in the Indigenous cohort was more than three times higher than the non-Indigenous cohort. This finding has not been previously described and represents a potential target for relapse prevention efforts in US Indigenous populations.

Efficacy and Utilization of Smartphone Applications for Smoking Cessation Among American Indians and Alaska Natives: Results From the iCanQuit Trial

INTRODUCTION

There is tremendous need for efficacious and accessible interventions for smoking cessation among American Indians and Alaska Natives. We tested the efficacy of an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT)-based smartphone application (iCanQuit) versus US Clinical Practice Guidelines-based smartphone application (QuitGuide) for smoking cessation among American Indians and Alaska Natives.

AIMS AND METHODS

We compared cessation, changes in ACT-based processes, engagement and satisfaction between American Indian and Alaska Native iCanQuit (n = 89) and QuitGuide (n = 80) participants enrolled in the iCanQuit trial. The primary outcome was self-reported, complete-case, 30-day point-prevalence abstinence. Follow-up timepoints were 12, 6, and 3 months.

RESULTS

Randomized American Indians and Alaska Natives from 31 US states (70% urban, 30% rural, with 25% of participants residing on tribal land). The outcome data retention rates were 93%, 92%, and 90% at the 12-, 6-, and 3-month follow-ups, respectively, with no differential retention between arms. The 30-day point-prevalence abstinence for iCanQuit versus QuitGuide was 30% versus 18% at 12 months (odds ratio [OR] = 1.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90 to 4.26) 25% versus 11% at 6 months (OR = 2.62; 95% CI: 1.06 to 6.45), and 15% versus 6% at 3 months (OR = 2.93; 95% CI: 0.90 to 9.59). Increases in acceptance of internal cues to smoke mediated the effect of treatment on smoking cessation at 12 months. iCanQuit arm participants were also significantly more engaged and satisfied with their assigned application.

CONCLUSIONS

In a nationwide sample with high data retention and participant engagement, this is the first study to show that a digital intervention may be efficacious for helping American Indians and Alaska Natives quit smoking.

IMPLICATIONS

This is the first study to provide evidence of an efficacious, accessible, and engaging treatment for helping American Indians and Alaska Natives quit smoking. Compared to a US Clinical Practice Guidelines-based smartphone application (QuitGuide), an ACT-based smartphone application (iCanQuit) was more efficacious, engaging, and satisfactory among American Indians and Alaska Natives nationwide. Our results will inform the tailoring of the iCanQuit smartphone application for American Indian and Alaska Native tribal communities and organizations with potential for broad dissemination and high impact.

Strategies to improve smoking cessation rates in primary care

BACKGROUND

Primary care is an important setting in which to treat tobacco addiction. However, the rates at which providers address smoking cessation and the success of that support vary. Strategies can be implemented to improve and increase the delivery of smoking cessation support (e.g. through provider training), and to increase the amount and breadth of support given to people who smoke (e.g. through additional counseling or tailored printed materials).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of strategies intended to increase the success of smoking cessation interventions in primary care settings. To assess whether any effect that these interventions have on smoking cessation may be due to increased implementation by healthcare providers.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and trial registries to 10 September 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs (cRCTs) carried out in primary care, including non-pregnant adults. Studies investigated a strategy or strategies to improve the implementation or success of smoking cessation treatment in primary care. These strategies could include interventions designed to increase or enhance the quality of existing support, or smoking cessation interventions offered in addition to standard care (adjunctive interventions). Intervention strategies had to be tested in addition to and in comparison with standard care, or in addition to other active intervention strategies if the effect of an individual strategy could be isolated. Standard care typically incorporates physician-delivered brief behavioral support, and an offer of smoking cessation medication, but differs across studies. Studies had to measure smoking abstinence at six months' follow-up or longer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome - smoking abstinence - was measured using the most rigorous intention-to-treat definition available. We also extracted outcome data for quit attempts, and the following markers of healthcare provider performance: asking about smoking status; advising on cessation; assessment of participant readiness to quit; assisting with cessation; arranging follow-up for smoking participants. Where more than one study investigated the same strategy or set of strategies, and measured the same outcome, we conducted meta-analyses using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects methods to generate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 81 RCTs and cRCTs, involving 112,159 participants. Fourteen were rated at low risk of bias, 44 at high risk, and the remainder at unclear risk. We identified moderate-certainty evidence, limited by inconsistency, that the provision of adjunctive counseling by a health professional other than the physician (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.55; I2 = 44%; 22 studies, 18,150 participants), and provision of cost-free medications (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.76; I2 = 63%; 10 studies,7560 participants) increased smoking quit rates in primary care. There was also moderate-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias, that the addition of tailored print materials to standard smoking cessation treatment increased the number of people who had successfully stopped smoking at six months' follow-up or more (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.59; I2 = 37%; 6 studies, 15,978 participants). There was no clear evidence that providing participants who smoked with biomedical risk feedback increased their likelihood of quitting (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.41; I2 = 40%; 7 studies, 3491 participants), or that provider smoking cessation training (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.41; I2 = 66%; 7 studies, 13,685 participants) or provider incentives (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.34; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 2454 participants) increased smoking abstinence rates. However, in assessing the former two strategies we judged the evidence to be of low certainty and in assessing the latter strategies it was of very low certainty. We downgraded the evidence due to imprecision, inconsistency and risk of bias across these comparisons. There was some indication that provider training increased the delivery of smoking cessation support, along with the provision of adjunctive counseling and cost-free medications. However, our secondary outcomes were not measured consistently, and in many cases analyses were subject to substantial statistical heterogeneity, imprecision, or both, making it difficult to draw conclusions. Thirty-four studies investigated multicomponent interventions to improve smoking cessation rates. There was substantial variation in the combinations of strategies tested, and the resulting individual study effect estimates, precluding meta-analyses in most cases. Meta-analyses provided some evidence that adjunctive counseling combined with either cost-free medications or provider training enhanced quit rates when compared with standard care alone. However, analyses were limited by small numbers of events, high statistical heterogeneity, and studies at high risk of bias. Analyses looking at the effects of combining provider training with flow sheets to aid physician decision-making, and with outreach facilitation, found no clear evidence that these combinations increased quit rates; however, analyses were limited by imprecision, and there was some indication that these approaches did improve some forms of provider implementation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that providing adjunctive counseling by an allied health professional, cost-free smoking cessation medications, and tailored printed materials as part of smoking cessation support in primary care can increase the number of people who achieve smoking cessation. There is no clear evidence that providing participants with biomedical risk feedback, or primary care providers with training or incentives to provide smoking cessation support enhance quit rates. However, we rated this evidence as of low or very low certainty, and so conclusions are likely to change as further evidence becomes available. Most of the studies in this review evaluated smoking cessation interventions that had already been extensively tested in the general population. Further studies should assess strategies designed to optimize the delivery of those interventions already known to be effective within the primary care setting. Such studies should be cluster-randomized to account for the implications of implementation in this particular setting. Due to substantial variation between studies in this review, identifying optimal characteristics of multicomponent interventions to improve the delivery of smoking cessation treatment was challenging. Future research could use component network meta-analysis to investigate this further.

Improving the Clinical Treatment of Vulnerable Populations in Radiation Oncology

The increasing role of radiation oncology in optimal cancer care treatment brings to mind the adage that power is never a gift, but a responsibility. A significant part of the responsibility we in radiation oncology bear is how to ensure optimal access to our services. This article summarizes the discussion initiated at the 2019 American Society for Radiation Oncology Annual Meeting educational panel entitled “Improving the Clinical Treatment of Vulnerable Populations in Radiation Oncology: Latin, African American, Native American, and Gender/Sexual Minority Communities.” By bringing the discussion to the printed page, we hope to continue the conversation with a broader audience to better define the level of responsibility our field bears in optimizing cancer care to the most vulnerable patient populations within the United States.