Beyond intention-to-treat: The effect of brief counseling for tobacco cessation in secondary analyses of a cluster randomized controlled trial in Swedish dental clinics

Process evaluation of a pragmatic feasibility trial on smokeless tobacco cessation intervention delivered in dental hospitals

BACKGROUND

Article 14 of the WHO 'Framework Convention on Tobacco Control' recommends, that all oral healthcare providers provide support for tobacco cessation, to all patients. Despite evidence on the effectiveness of tobacco cessation interventions in dental settings, implementation remains low in most high-burden countries like Pakistan. A pragmatic pilot trial of a dentist-delivered behavioural support intervention for smokeless tobacco (ST) cessation, was conducted in dental hospitals in Pakistan. This paper presents the findings of the process evaluation of the trial.

METHODS

A mixed-method process evaluation of a multi-centre randomised control pilot trial of dentist-delivered behavioural support intervention ST cessation was conducted. The intervention included three sessions namely: pre-quit, quit and post-quit sessions. The process evaluation involved: semi-structured interviews with trial participants (n = 26, of which dental patients were n = 13 and participating dentists were n = 13 conducted from June-August 2022); and fidelity assessment of audio recordings of the intervention sessions (n = 29). The framework approach was used to thematically analyse the interview data.

RESULTS

Overall the trial procedures were well accepted, however, young patients expressed uneasiness over revealing their ST use status. The intervention was received positively by dentists and patients. Dentists identified some challenges in delivering behavioural support to their patients. Of these, some were related to the contents of the intervention whereas, others were related to the logistics of delivering the intervention in a clinical setting (such as workload and space). Acceptability of the intervention resources was overall low amongst young patients as they did not take the intervention resources home due to fear of their family members finding out about their ST use. The intervention was successful in achieving the intended impact (in those who engaged with the intervention), i.e., change in the patients' ST use behaviour. Giving up ST with the aid of behavioural support also had an unintended negative effect i.e., the use of harmful substances (cannabis, cigarettes) to give up ST use. Patients' satisfaction with their dental treatment seemed to influence the intervention outcome.

CONCLUSION

While there are many variables to consider, but for the participants of this study, behavioural support for abstinence delivered through dentists during routine dental care, appears to be an acceptable and practical approach in helping patients give up ST use, in a country like Pakistan, where negligible support is offered to ST users.

Interventions for tobacco cessation delivered by dental professionals

BACKGROUND

Dental professionals are well placed to help their patients stop using tobacco products. Large proportions of the population visit the dentist regularly. In addition, the adverse effects of tobacco use on oral health provide a context that dental professionals can use to motivate a quit attempt.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness, adverse events and oral health effects of tobacco cessation interventions offered by dental professionals.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialised Register up to February 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised clinical trials assessing tobacco cessation interventions conducted by dental professionals in the dental practice or community setting, with at least six months of follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed abstracts for potential inclusion and extracted data from included trials. We resolved disagreements by consensus. The primary outcome was abstinence from all tobacco use (e.g. cigarettes, smokeless tobacco) at the longest follow-up, using the strictest definition of abstinence reported. Individual study effects and pooled effects were summarised as risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models to combine studies where appropriate. We assessed statistical heterogeneity with the I² statistic. We summarised secondary outcomes narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty clinical trials involving 14,897 participants met the criteria for inclusion in this review. Sixteen studies assessed the effectiveness of interventions for tobacco-use cessation in dental clinics and four assessed this in community (school or college) settings. Five studies included only smokeless tobacco users, and the remaining studies included either smoked tobacco users only, or a combination of both smoked and smokeless tobacco users. All studies employed behavioural interventions, with four offering nicotine treatment (nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) or e-cigarettes) as part of the intervention. We judged three studies to be at low risk of bias, one to be at unclear risk of bias, and the remaining 16 studies to be at high risk of bias. Compared with usual care, brief advice, very brief advice, or less active treatment, we found very low-certainty evidence of benefit from behavioural support provided by dental professionals, comprising either one session (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.01 to 3.41; I² = 66%; four studies, n = 6328), or more than one session (RR 1.90, 95% CI 1.17 to 3.11; I² = 61%; seven studies, n = 2639), on abstinence from tobacco use at least six months from baseline. We found moderate-certainty evidence of benefit from behavioural interventions provided by dental professionals combined with the provision of NRT or e-cigarettes, compared with no intervention, usual care, brief, or very brief advice only (RR 2.76, 95% CI 1.58 to 4.82; I² = 0%; four studies, n = 1221). We did not detect a benefit from multiple-session behavioural support provided by dental professionals delivered in a high school or college, instead of a dental setting (RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.65; I² = 83%; three studies, n = 1020; very low-certainty evidence). Only one study reported adverse events or oral health outcomes, making it difficult to draw any conclusions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very low-certainty evidence that quit rates increase when dental professionals offer behavioural support to promote tobacco cessation. There is moderate-certainty evidence that tobacco abstinence rates increase in cigarette smokers if dental professionals offer behavioural support combined with pharmacotherapy. Further evidence is required to be certain of the size of the benefit and whether adding pharmacological interventions is more effective than behavioural support alone. Future studies should use biochemical validation of abstinence so as to preclude the risk of detection bias. There is insufficient evidence on whether these interventions lead to adverse effects, but no reasons to suspect that these effects would be specific to interventions delivered by dental professionals. There was insufficient evidence that interventions affected oral health.

Effectiveness of enhanced cognitive behavior therapy for eating disorders: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Enhanced cognitive behavior therapy (CBT-E) is a transdiagnostic treatment suitable for the full range of eating disorders (EDs). Although the effectiveness of CBT(-E) is clear, it is not being used as widely in clinical practice as guidelines recommend. The aim of the present study was to compare the effectiveness of CBT-E with treatment as usual (TAU), which was largely based on CBT principles.

METHOD

We conducted a randomized controlled trial on a total of 143 adult patients with an ED who received either CBT-E or TAU. The primary outcome was recovery from the ED. Secondary outcome measures were levels of ED psychopathology, anxiety, and depressive symptoms. Self-esteem, perfectionism, and interpersonal problems were repeatedly measured to examine possible moderating effects. We explored differences in duration and intensity between conditions.

RESULTS

After 80 weeks, there were no differences between conditions in decrease in ED psychopathology, or symptoms of anxiety and depression. However, in the first six weeks of treatment there was a larger decrease in ED psychopathology in the CBT-E condition. Moreover, when the internationally most widely used definition of recovery was applied, the recovery rate at 20 weeks of CBT-E was significantly higher (57.7%) than of TAU (36.0%). At 80 weeks, this difference was no longer significant (CBT-E 60.9%; TAU 43.6%). Furthermore, CBT-E was more effective in improving self-esteem and was also the less intensive and shorter treatment.

DISCUSSION

With broader use of CBT-E, the efficiency, accessibility and effectivity (on self-esteem) of treatment for EDs could be improved.