Smoking cessation in patients with COPD in daily general practice (SMOCC): six months' results

The role of general practice nurses in supporting people to quit smoking: A qualitative study

PURPOSE

Encounters with General Practitioners (GPs) have previously been identified as opportune for the delivery of smoking cessation care however the role of nurses in general practice settings is unclear. This study aimed to understand how nurses are providing smoking cessation care in general practice.

METHODS

Participants were registered nurses currently working in a general practice setting in Australia, who participated in one-off interviews over Zoom. Interviews were recorded and a thematic analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Fourteen nurses participated of which 13 (93%) were female. Three themes were evident in the data: 1) Nurses' current practices in supporting people to quit smoking, 2) The influence of the general practice setting on smoking cessation discussions and 3) The challenges experienced by nurses in providing optimal smoking cessation care. Theme one describes the strategies currently employed by nurses to deliver smoking cessation care such as identifying appropriate clinical scenarios to have smoking cessation conversations with patients. Theme two explores the impact of diversity in the systems, processes, and structures across Australian general practice settings on the support offered by nurses, such as opportunities for ongoing relationships with patients Theme three focuses on ambiguity in nurses' roles within the practice setting including a lack of clarity for nurses in their roles in delivering smoking cessation care in the general practice setting.

CONCLUSIONS

General practice nurses recognise the importance of their role in providing smoking cessation care and consider that general practice settings are ideally positioned to deliver that care. Smoking cessation care provided by nurses varies according to systems and processes within general practice clinics and relationships with general practitioners. Vaping is an emerging issue and nurses are seeking information on how to address this with patients. There is opportunity to support nurses to provide improved smoking cessation care.

Smoking Cessation Interventions for Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A NARRATIVE REVIEW WITH IMPLICATIONS FOR PULMONARY REHABILITATION

PURPOSE

Reducing disease burden in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) focuses, in part, on helping patients become more functional through programs such as pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). Smoking cessation may be a prerequisite or component of PR, and determining which smoking interventions (eg, behavioral, pharmacotherapy, combination) are most effective can help guide efforts to extend them to patients with COPD. The purpose of this narrative review was to summarize evidence from studies testing smoking cessation interventions in patients with COPD and discuss how these interventions may be integrated into PR programs.

REVIEW METHODS

Searches were conducted in the PubMed and Web of Science databases. Search terms included "(smoking cessation) AND (RCT OR clinical trial OR intervention) AND (pulmonary OR chronic bronchitis OR emphysema OR COPD)." Published original studies were included if they used a prospective, experimental design, tested a smoking cessation intervention, reported smoking cessation rate, and included patients with COPD or a subgroup analysis focused on smokers with COPD.

SUMMARY

Twenty-seven distinct studies were included in the review. Most studies tested multitreatment smoking cessation interventions involving some form of counseling in combination with pharmacotherapy and/or health education. Overall, smoking cessation interventions may help promote higher rates of smoking abstinence in patients with COPD, particularly multifaceted interventions that include intensive counseling (eg, individual, group, and telephone support), smoking cessation medication or nicotine replacement therapy, and health education.

Effects of self-management interventions with behavior-change support on long-term adherence in patients with chronic respiratory diseases: A systematic review

The aim of this systematic review is to determine the effects of self-management interventions with behavior-change support on medication adherence and smoking cessation in patients with chronic respiratory disease. We also describe the theories of health behavior change and behavior change techniques (BCTs) used to design these interventions and their mode of delivery. The PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Pedro databases were systematically searched for relevant articles published up to November 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effect of self-management interventions with behavior change support on medication adherence, correct inhaler use, and smoking cessation were included. Effect sizes (odds ratios) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated and pooled for random-effect meta-analysis. Of 5,223 articles identified, 15 were RCTs that met the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. Five of these RCTs were based on behavior change theory, including social cognitive theory and a transtheoretical model. Between one and eight components of BCTs in Behavior Change Technique (BCT) Taxonomy version1 were included in all interventions. The most frequent BCT components were social support (emotional) (n = 8), instruction on how to perform the behavior (n = 8), and goal setting (behavior) (n = 7). Meta-analysis showed that self-management interventions with behavior change support have positive effects on medication adherence, correct inhaler use, and smoking cessation for more than 6 months after their implementation. This indicates that individually tailored self-management interventions with behavior change support are effective in improving long-term medication adherence and smoking cessation in patients with chronic respiratory disease.

The impact of Thai multidisciplinary smoking cessation program on clinical outcomes: A multicentre prospective observational study

Introduction

Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Since 2010, Thailand has implemented a multidisciplinary smoking cessation clinic, which provides smoking cessation services, but the effectiveness of the clinics was not formally evaluated. This study was conducted to assess the real-world effectiveness of this multidisciplinary smoking cessation program.

Methods

We conducted a prospective, multicentre, observational study on Thai participants aged 13 years and older in 24 smoking cessation clinics across Thailand's 13 health regions. Each clinic offered smoking cessation interventions according to the well-established 5As model for smoking cessation (Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, and Arrange). Outcomes of interest were continuous abstinence rates (CAR) at 3 and 6 months. Biochemical confirmation and self-reporting were used to assess the outcomes. Descriptive statistics (mean, SD, median, IQR, and percentage) were used to analyze the smoking cessation outcomes in both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analysis approaches.

Results

Smokers receiving services from the Thai multidisciplinary smoking cessation clinics had CAR of 17.49 and 8.33% at 3 and 6 months, respectively. For those with cardiovascular disease (CVD) or cerebrovascular disease, CAR was found to be 26.36% at 3 months and 13.81% at 6 months. While participants with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) had CAR ranging from 32.69% at 3 months to 17.31% at 6 months.

Conclusion

The multidisciplinary team smoking cessation clinic was effective in assisting smokers in quitting smoking. The effectiveness of the clinic was more pronounced for smokers with CVD, cerebrovascular disease, or COPD. Findings from this study support a decision to include multidisciplinary smoking cessation clinics in the universal health care benefits package.

Educational interventions for health professionals managing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in primary care

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common, preventable and treatable health condition. COPD is associated with substantial burden on morbidity, mortality and healthcare resources.

OBJECTIVES

To review existing evidence for educational interventions delivered to health professionals managing COPD in the primary care setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register from inception to May 2021. The Register includes records from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED) and PsycINFO. We also searched online trial registries and reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs. Eligible studies tested educational interventions aimed at any health professionals involved in the management of COPD in primary care. Educational interventions were defined as interventions aimed at upskilling, improving or refreshing existing knowledge of health professionals in the diagnosis and management of COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed abstracts and full texts of eligible studies, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. We conducted meta-analyses where possible and used random-effects models to yield summary estimates of effect (mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)). We performed narrative synthesis when meta-analysis was not possible. We assessed the overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Primary outcomes were: 1) proportion of COPD diagnoses confirmed with spirometry; 2) proportion of patients with COPD referred to, participating in or completing pulmonary rehabilitation; and 3) proportion of patients with COPD prescribed respiratory medication consistent with guideline recommendations.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 38 studies(22 cluster-RCTs and 16 RCTs) involving 4936 health professionals (reported in 19/38 studies) and 71,085 patient participants (reported in 25/38 studies). Thirty-six included studies evaluated interventions versus usual care; seven studies also reported a comparison between two or more interventions as part of a three- to five-arm RCT design. A range of simple to complex interventions were used across the studies, with common intervention features including education provided to health professionals via training sessions, workshops or online modules (31 studies), provision of practice support tools, tool kits and/or algorithms (10 studies), provision of guidelines (nine studies) and training on spirometry (five studies). Health professionals targeted by the interventions were most commonly general practitioners alone (20 studies) or in combination with nurses or allied health professionals (eight studies), and the majority of studies were conducted in general practice clinics. We identified performance bias as high risk for 33 studies. We also noted risk of selection, detection, attrition and reporting biases, although to a varying extent across studies. The evidence of efficacy was equivocal for all the three primary endpoints evaluated: 1) proportion of COPD diagnoses confirmed with spirometry (of the four studies that reported this outcome, two supported the intervention); 2) proportion of patients with COPD who are referred to, participate in or complete pulmonary rehabilitation (of the four studies that reported this outcome, two supported the intervention); and 3) proportion of patients with COPD prescribed respiratory medications consistent with guideline recommendations (12 studies reported this outcome, the majority evaluated multiple drug classes and reported a mixed effect). Additionally, the low quality of evidence and potential risk of bias make the interpretation more difficult. Moderate-quality evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias concerns) suggests that educational interventions for health professionals probably improve the proportion of patients with COPD vaccinated against influenza (three studies) and probably have little impact on the proportion of patients vaccinated against pneumococcal infection (two studies). Low-quality evidence suggests that educational interventions for health professionals may have little or no impact on the frequency of COPD exacerbations (10 studies). There was a high degree of heterogeneity in the reporting of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Low-quality evidence suggests that educational interventions for health professionals may have little or no impact on HRQoL overall, and when using the COPD-specific HRQoL instrument, the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (at six months MD 0.87, 95% CI -2.51 to 4.26; 2 studies, 406 participants, and at 12 months MD -0.43, 95% CI -1.52 to 0.67, 4 studies, 1646 participants; reduction in score indicates better health). Moderate-quality evidence suggests that educational interventions for health professionals may improve patient satisfaction with care (one study). We identified no studies that reported adverse outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence of efficacy was equivocal for educational interventions for health professionals in primary care on the proportion of COPD diagnoses confirmed with spirometry, the proportion of patients with COPD who participate in pulmonary rehabilitation, and the proportion of patients prescribed guideline-recommended COPD respiratory medications. Educational interventions for health professionals may improve influenza vaccination rates among patients with COPD and patient satisfaction with care. The quality of evidence for most outcomes was low or very low due to heterogeneity and methodological limitations of the studies included in the review, which means that there is uncertainty about the benefits of any currently published educational interventions for healthcare professionals to improve COPD management in primary care. Further well-designed RCTs are needed to investigate the effects of educational interventions delivered to health professionals managing COPD in the primary care setting.

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.

Systematic review and meta analysis of differential attrition between active and control arms in randomized controlled trials of lifestyle interventions in chronic disease

BACKGROUND

Attrition is a major obstacle for lifestyle interventions sustained for the medium-to-long term and can have significant consequences on the internal validity of a trial. When the degree of attrition differs between active and control arms this is termed differential attrition and is an important consideration during initial stages of trial planning.

OBJECTIVES

The primary research question of this study was: what is the differential attrition between treatment arms in lifestyle interventions for prevalent chronic diseases?

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of 23 studies involving a lifestyle intervention component in cohorts with chronic diseases. The search accessed three databases: Scopus, Medline Ovid and Web of Science. Attrition between treatment arms was analysed using a random-effects model and examined the relationship between the relative attrition and potential moderators, such as time to final follow-up, time to first follow-up, type of disease, type of control, type of intervention and length of treatment.

RESULTS

The pooled risk ratio was 1.00 (95% CI 0.97 - 1.03) and only one study fell outside this range. A univariable association was described between the pooled risk ration and length (years) to final follow-up, which did not remain in the multivariable model.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultimately, we found no evidence of differential attrition in medium-to-long term lifestyle intervention studies for chronic disease, increasing confidence in conducting such studies with minimal potential of attrition bias.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number CRD42018084495 .

Burden of male hardcore smokers and its characteristics among those eligible for lung cancer screening

Background

There are few data available about hardcore smokers and their behavioral characteristics among the lung cancer screening (LCS) population. The study investigated the burden of hardcore smokers within the LCS population, and determine the characteristics of hardcore smokers using nationally representative data in South Korea.

Methods

We used data from 2007 to 2012 from the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. This study enrolled current male smokers aged 55–74 years. Among them, subjects eligible for LCS were defined as these populations with smoking histories of at least 30 PY. Hardcore smoking was defined as smoking >15 cigarettes per day, with no plan to quit, and having made no attempt to quit. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to estimate associations between hardcore smokers and various sociodemographic and other variables.

Results

The proportion of hardcore smokers among those who met LCS eligibility criteria decreased from 2007 to 2012 (from 39.07 to 29.47% of the population) but did not change significantly thereafter (P = 0.2770), and that proportion was consistently 10–15% higher than that of hardcore smokers among all male current smokers. The proportion without any plan to quit smoking decreased significantly from 54.35% in 2007 to 38.31% in 2012. However, the smokers who had made no intentional quit attempt in the prior year accounted for more than half of those eligible for LCS, and the proportion of such smokers did not change significantly during the study period (50.83% in 2007 and 51.03% in 2012). Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that hardcore smokers were older (OR = 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01–1.09) than non-hardcore smokers. Hardcore smokers exhibited higher proportion of depression (OR = 6.55, 95% CI 1.75–24.61) and experienced extreme stress more frequently (OR = 1.93, 95% CI 1.13–3.29). Smokers who did not receive smoking cessation education within the past year were significantly more likely to be hardcore smokers (OR = 4.15, 95% CI 1.30–13.22).

Conclusions

It is important to identify a subset of smokers unwilling or minimally motivated to quit within the context of lung cancer screening. Anti-smoking education should be enhanced to influence hardcore smokers’ behavior.

How To Support Smoking Cessation In Primary Care And The Community: A Systematic Review Of Interventions For The Prevention Of Cardiovascular Diseases

Introduction

Smoking is a major risk factor for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and for many types of cancers. Despite recent policies, 1.1 billion people are active smokers and tobacco is the leading cause of mortality and illness throughout the world. The aim of this work was to identify smoking cessation interventions which could be implemented in primary care and/or at a community level.

Methods

A systematic review of CVDs prevention guidelines was realized using the ADAPTE Process. These were identified on G-I-N and TRIP databases. Additionally, a purposive search for national guidelines was successfully undertaken. Guidelines focusing on non-pharmacological lifestyle interventions, published or updated after 2011, were included. Exclusion criteria were specific populations, management of acute disease and exclusive focus on pharmacological or surgical interventions. After appraisal with the AGREE II tool, high-quality guidelines were included for analysis. High-grade recommendations and the supporting bibliographic references were extracted. References had to be checked in detail where sufficient information was not available in the guidelines.

Results

Nine hundred and ten guidelines were identified, 47 evaluated with AGREE II and 26 included. Guidelines recommended that patients quit smoking and that health care professionals provided advice to smokers but failed to propose precise implementation strategies for such recommendations. Only two guidelines provided specific recommendations. In the guideline bibliographic references, brief advice (BA) and multiple session strategies were identified as effective interventions. These interventions used Prochaska theory, motivational interviewing or cognitive-behavioral therapies. Self-help documentation alone was less effective than face-to-face counseling. Community-based or workplace public interventions alone did not seem effective.

Discussion

Behavioral change strategies were effective in helping patients to give up smoking. BA alone was less effective than multiple session strategies although it required fewer resources. Evidence for community-based interventions effectiveness was weak, mainly due to the lack of robust studies.

Comparative Effectiveness of Proactive Tobacco Treatment among Smokers with and without Chronic Lower Respiratory Disease

RATIONALE

Adults with chronic lower respiratory disease differ in their barriers to smoking cessation but also suffer from tobacco-related health concerns, which may motivate quit attempts. Few studies have examined differences in tobacco treatment response between smokers with and without chronic lower respiratory disease.

OBJECTIVE

We examined the effectiveness of a proactive outreach program for cessation among smokers with and without chronic lower respiratory disease.

METHODS

Subgroup analysis of the Veterans Victory over Tobacco Study, a pragmatic randomized controlled trial that demonstrated the effectiveness of proactive outreach and the choice of tobacco treatments compared with usual care. Smokers identified via the electronic medical record were proactively offered phone-based counseling and care coordination to receive medication from their Veterans Affairs providers or in-person care. We compared the response among those with and without an International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision diagnosis of a chronic lower respiratory disease (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic bronchitis, emphysema, asthma). We used stratification by propensity scores to adjust for imbalanced covariates between groups with and without chronic lower respiratory disease within each treatment arm, using complete case analysis accounting for the stratified sampling by site.

RESULTS

The study participants were predominantly older, white, male smokers. Overall, 19.6% had chronic lower respiratory disease. A total of 3,307 had outcome data with the following assignments to the intervention: proactive care: n = 1,272 without chronic lower respiratory disease, n = 301 with chronic lower respiratory disease; usual care: n = 1,387 without chronic lower respiratory disease, n = 347 with chronic lower respiratory disease. A total of 1,888 had both complete baseline and outcome data and were included in the primary analysis. In unadjusted analyses (n = 3,307), among individuals with chronic lower respiratory disease, 13.1% in the proactive group reported 6-month prolonged abstinence compared with 8.7% of those in the usual care group (odds ratio, 1.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.93-2.65). Among individuals without chronic lower respiratory disease, 13.1% quit in the proactive group compared with 11.0% in the usual care group (odds ratio, 1.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-1.55). In adjusted analyses (n = 1,888), the association between treatment arm and quit rate varied by the presence of chronic lower respiratory disease, with a stronger association between allocation to the proactive group and quit rate among those with chronic lower respiratory disease (odds ratio, 3.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.59-7.47) than those without chronic lower respiratory disease (odds ratio, 1.34; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-1.88; P for interaction with chronic lower respiratory disease = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Smokers with chronic lower respiratory disease may be more likely to respond to a proactive outreach intervention for tobacco cessation treatment than those without chronic lower respiratory disease. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 00608426).

Cigarette Smoking Impairs Adipose Stromal Cell Vasculogenic Activity and Abrogates Potency to Ameliorate Ischemia

Cigarette smoking (CS) adversely affects the physiologic function of endothelial progenitor, hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells. However, the effect of CS on the ability of adipose stem/stromal cells (ASC) to promote vasculogenesis and rescue perfusion in the context of ischemia is unknown. To evaluate this, ASC from nonsmokers (nCS-ASC) and smokers (CS-ASC), and their activity to promote perfusion in hindlimb ischemia models, as well as endothelial cell (EC) survival and vascular morphogenesis in vitro were assessed. While nCS-ASC improved perfusion in ischemic limbs, CS-ASC completely lost this therapeutic effect. In vitro vasculogenesis assays revealed that human CS-ASC and ASC from CS-exposed mice showed compromised support of EC morphogenesis into vascular tubes, and the CS-ASC secretome was less potent in supporting EC survival/proliferation. Comparative secretome analysis revealed that CS-ASC produced lower amounts of hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) and stromal cell-derived growth factor 1 (SDF-1). Conversely, CS-ASC secreted the angiostatic/pro-inflammatory factor Activin A, which was not detected in nCS-ASC conditioned media (CM). Furthermore, higher Activin A levels were measured in EC/CS-ASC cocultures than in EC/nCS-ASC cocultures. CS-ASC also responded to inflammatory cytokines with 5.2-fold increase in Activin A secretion, whereas nCS-ASC showed minimal Activin A induction. Supplementation of EC/CS-ASC cocultures with nCS-ASC CM or with recombinant vascular endothelial growth factor, HGF, or SDF-1 did not rescue vasculogenesis, whereas inhibition of Activin A expression or activity improved network formation up to the level found in EC/nCS-ASC cocultures. In conclusion, ASC of CS individuals manifest compromised in vitro vasculogenic activity as well as in vivo therapeutic activity. Stem Cells 2018;36:856-867.

Nursing interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Healthcare professionals, including nurses, frequently advise people to improve their health by stopping smoking. Such advice may be brief, or part of more intensive interventions.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of nursing-delivered smoking cessation interventions in adults. To establish whether nursing-delivered smoking cessation interventions are more effective than no intervention; are more effective if the intervention is more intensive; differ in effectiveness with health state and setting of the participants; are more effective if they include follow-ups; are more effective if they include aids that demonstrate the pathophysiological effect of smoking.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register and CINAHL in January 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials of smoking cessation interventions delivered by nurses or health visitors with follow-up of at least six months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data independently. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically-validated rates if available. Where statistically and clinically appropriate, we pooled studies using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model and reported the outcome as a risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria, nine of which are new for this update. Pooling 44 studies (over 20,000 participants) comparing a nursing intervention to a control or to usual care, we found the intervention increased the likelihood of quitting (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.38); however, statistical heterogeneity was moderate (I² = 50%) and not explained by subgroup analysis. Because of this, we judged the quality of evidence to be moderate. Despite most studies being at unclear risk of bias in at least one domain, we did not downgrade the quality of evidence further, as restricting the main analysis to only those studies at low risk of bias did not significantly alter the effect estimate. Subgroup analyses found no evidence that high-intensity interventions, interventions with additional follow-up or interventions including aids that demonstrate the pathophysiological effect of smoking are more effective than lower intensity interventions, or interventions without additional follow-up or aids. There was no evidence that the effect of support differed by patient group or across healthcare settings.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate quality evidence that behavioural support to motivate and sustain smoking cessation delivered by nurses can lead to a modest increase in the number of people who achieve prolonged abstinence. There is insufficient evidence to assess whether more intensive interventions, those incorporating additional follow-up, or those incorporating pathophysiological feedback are more effective than one-off support. There was no evidence that the effect of support differed by patient group or across healthcare settings.

Individual behavioural counselling for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Individual counselling from a smoking cessation specialist may help smokers to make a successful attempt to stop smoking.

OBJECTIVES

The review addresses the following hypotheses:1. Individual counselling is more effective than no treatment or brief advice in promoting smoking cessation.2. Individual counselling is more effective than self-help materials in promoting smoking cessation.3. A more intensive counselling intervention is more effective than a less intensive intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register for studies with counsel* in any field in May 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized or quasi-randomized trials with at least one treatment arm consisting of face-to-face individual counselling from a healthcare worker not involved in routine clinical care. The outcome was smoking cessation at follow-up at least six months after the start of counselling.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Both authors extracted data in duplicate. We recorded characteristics of the intervention and the target population, method of randomization and completeness of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each trial, and biochemically-validated rates where available. In analysis, we assumed that participants lost to follow-up continued to smoke. We expressed effects as a risk ratio (RR) for cessation. Where possible, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect (Mantel-Haenszel) model. We assessed the quality of evidence within each study using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool and the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 49 trials with around 19,000 participants. Thirty-three trials compared individual counselling to a minimal behavioural intervention. There was high-quality evidence that individual counselling was more effective than a minimal contact control (brief advice, usual care, or provision of self-help materials) when pharmacotherapy was not offered to any participants (RR 1.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.40 to 1.77; 27 studies, 11,100 participants; I2 = 50%). There was moderate-quality evidence (downgraded due to imprecision) of a benefit of counselling when all participants received pharmacotherapy (nicotine replacement therapy) (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.51; 6 studies, 2662 participants; I2 = 0%). There was moderate-quality evidence (downgraded due to imprecision) for a small benefit of more intensive counselling compared to brief counselling (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.53; 11 studies, 2920 participants; I2 = 48%). None of the five other trials that compared different counselling models of similar intensity detected significant differences.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-quality evidence that individually-delivered smoking cessation counselling can assist smokers to quit. There is moderate-quality evidence of a smaller relative benefit when counselling is used in addition to pharmacotherapy, and of more intensive counselling compared to a brief counselling intervention.

Improving self-management of cancer risk factors, underscreening for cancer and depression among general practice patients: study protocol of a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

General practitioners have a key role in reducing cancer risk factors, screening for cancer and managing depression. Given the time-limited nature of consultations, a new and more time-efficient approach is needed which addresses multiple health needs simultaneously, and encourages patient self-management to address health risks. The aim of this cluster randomised controlled trial is to test the effectiveness of a patient feedback intervention in improving patient self-management of health needs related to smoking, risky alcohol consumption and underscreening for cancers at 1 month follow-up.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Adult general practice patients will be invited to participate in a baseline survey to assess cancer risk factors, screening needs and depression. A total of 360 participants identified by the baseline survey as having at least one health need (a self-reported cancer risk factor, underscreening for cancer, or an elevated depression score) will be randomised to an intervention or control group. Participants in the intervention group will receive tailored printed feedback summarising their identified health needs and recommended self-management actions to address these. All participants will be invited to complete a telephone interview 1 month following recruitment to assess self-management actions taken in relation to health needs identified in the baseline survey. Control group participants will receive tailored printed feedback on their identified health needs after their follow-up interview. A logistic regression model, with group allocation as the main predictor, will be used to assess the impact of the intervention on self-management actions.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS AND DISSEMINATION

Participants identified as being at risk of depression will be advised to speak with their doctor. Results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals. The study has been approved by the University of Newcastle Human Research Ethics Committee.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12616001443482.

Smoking cessation for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Smoking cessation is the most important treatment for smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but little is known about the effectiveness of different smoking cessation interventions for this particular group of smokers.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of behavioural or pharmacological smoking cessation interventions, or both, in smokers with COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched all records in the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of Trials. In addition to this electronic search, we searched clinical trial registries for planned, ongoing, and unpublished trials. We searched all databases from their inception. We checked the reference lists of all included studies and of other systematic reviews in relevant topic areas. We searched for errata or retractions from eligible trials on PubMed. We conducted our most recent search in March 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of any behavioural or pharmacological treatment, or both, in smokers with COPD reporting at least six months of follow-up abstinence rates.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted the data and performed the methodological quality assessment for each study. We resolved any disagreements by consensus.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 studies (involving 13,123 participants) in this systematic review, two of which were of high quality. These two studies showed that nicotine sublingual tablet and varenicline increased the quit rate over placebo (risk ratio (RR) 2.60 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29 to 5.24) and RR 3.34 (95% CI 1.88 to 5.92)). Pooled results of two studies also showed a positive effect of bupropion compared with placebo (RR 2.03 (95% CI 1.26 to 3.28)). When pooling these four studies, we found high-quality evidence for the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy plus high-intensity behavioural treatment compared with placebo plus high-intensity behavioural treatment (RR 2.53 (95% CI 1.83 to 3.50)). Furthermore, we found some evidence that high-intensity behavioural treatment increased abstinence rates when compared with usual care (RR 25.38 (95% CI 8.03 to 80.22)) or low-intensity behavioural treatment (RR 2.18 (95% CI 1.05 to 4.49)). Finally, the results showed effectiveness of various combinations of psychosocial and pharmacological interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found high-quality evidence in a meta-analysis including four (1,540 participants) of the 16 included studies that a combination of behavioural treatment and pharmacotherapy is effective in helping smokers with COPD to quit smoking. Furthermore, we conclude that there is no convincing evidence for preferring any particular form of behavioural or pharmacological treatment.

Smoking cessation in cardiac patients: the influence of action plans, coping plans and self-efficacy on quitting smoking

Smoking cessation is the most effective action for cardiac patients who smoke to improve their prognosis, yet more than one-half of cardiac patients continue to smoke after hospital admission. This study examined the influence of action plans, coping plans and self-efficacy on intention to quit and smoking cessation in cardiac patients. Cardiac patients completed a baseline questionnaire (N = 245) assessing demographic characteristics, smoking behavior, intention, self-efficacy, relapse self-efficacy and action and coping plans. Six months later (N = 184) continued abstinence from smoking was assessed. Self-efficacy predicted intention to quit smoking and was an indirect predictor of continued abstinence, through intention. Intention to quit smoking and making action plans both directly influenced continued abstinence. Future interventions to facilitate smoking cessation in cardiac patients should put strong emphasis on enhancing self-efficacy and on making specific action plans to increase the likelihood of smoking cessation.

Strengthening the delivery of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease care at primary health-care facilities: study design of a cluster randomized controlled trial in Pakistan

BACKGROUND

Respiratory diseases, namely asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), account for one-fourth of the patients at the primary health-care (PHC) facilities in Pakistan. Standard care practices to manage these diseases are necessary to reduce the morbidity and mortality rate associated with non-communicable diseases in developing countries.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and measure the effectiveness of operational guidelines and implementation materials, with sound scientific evidence, for expanding lung health care, especially asthma and COPD through PHC facilities already strengthened for tuberculosis (TB) care in Pakistan.

DESIGN

A cluster randomized controlled trial with two arms (intervention and control), with qualitative and costing study components, is being conducted in 34 clusters; 17 clusters per arm (428 asthma and 306 COPD patients), in three districts in Pakistan from October 2014 to December 2016. The intervention consists of enhanced case management of asthma and COPD patients through strengthening of PHC facilities. The main outcomes to be measured are asthma and COPD control among the registered cases at 6 months. Cluster- and individual-level analyses will be done according to intention to treat. Residual confounding will be addressed by multivariable logistic and linear regression models for asthma and COPD control, respectively. The trial is registered with ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN 17409338).

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, only about 20% of the estimated prevalent asthma and COPD cases are being identified and reported through the respective PHC network. Lung health care and prevention has not been effectively integrated into the core PHC package, although a very well-functioning TB program exists at the PHC level. Inclusion of these diseases in the already existent TB program is expected to increase detection rates and care for asthma and COPD.

Effectiveness of a brief physician counselling session on improving smoking behaviour in the workplace

BACKGROUND

Brief physician counselling has been shown to be effective in improving smokers' behaviour. If the counselling sessions can be given at the workplace, this would benefit a larger number of smokers. This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of a ten-minute physician counseling session at the workplace in improving smoking behaviour.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective randomised control trial was conducted on smokers in a factory. A total of 163 participants were recruited and randomised into control and intervention groups using a table of random numbers. The intervention group received a ten-minute brief physician counselling session to quit smoking. Stages of smoking behaviour were measured in both groups using a translated and validated questionnaire at baseline, one month and three months post intervention.

RESULTS

There was a significant improvement in smoking behaviour at one-month post intervention (p=0.024, intention to treat analysis; OR=2.525; CI=1.109-5.747). This was not significant at three-month post intervention (p=0.946, intention to treat analysis; OR=1.026; 95% CI=0.486-2.168).

CONCLUSIONS

A session of brief physician counselling was effective in improving smokers' behaviour at workplace, but the effect was not sustained.

Smoking-cessation advice to patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the critical roles of health insurance and source of care

INTRODUCTION

Smoking cessation is the most effective therapeutic intervention for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. However, the proportion of smokers with COPD who have received physician advice to quit smoking is unknown. The purpose of this study is to assess the prevalence of receipt of smoking-cessation advice among adults with COPD and explore factors predicting advice receipt.

METHODS

This study employed nationally representative data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), collected in 2008-2011 on adults aged ≥20 years. Logistic regression models were conducted to estimate the likelihood of receiving provider advice. Data were analyzed in 2014.

RESULTS

Four percent (95% CI=3.8%, 4.2%) of adults reported being diagnosed with COPD. Among them, 38.5% (95% CI=36.1%, 40.8%) were current smokers. Among those who had seen a physician in the past year, 85.6% (95% CI=83.1%, 88.0%) were advised to quit smoking. Logistic regression revealed negative associations between receipt of smoking-cessation advice and having fewer healthcare visits (AOR=0.41, 95% CI=0.23, 0.72); being uninsured (AOR=0.43, 95% CI=0.22, 0.83); having no usual source of care (AOR=0.39, 95% CI=0.19, 0.80); and having no comorbid chronic diseases (AOR=0.50, 95% CI=0.29, 0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

Having no usual source of care and no health insurance are major barriers to receiving smoking-cessation advice among patients with COPD. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act has the potential to increase advice receipt in this high-risk population by expanding health insurance coverage and increasing the number of people with a usual source of care.

[Smoking cessation in smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease]

One out of two smokers who smoke throughout their lifetime will die from a disease related to smoking. Tobacco smoking therefore represents a major global public health issue. Smoking is the leading cause of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Projections for 2020 indicate that by then, COPD will have become the third cause of death and the fifth cause of disability worldwide. Stopping smoking reduces the risk of developing COPD and is an essential treatment for this inflammatory disease. Smoking cessation decreases the prevalence of respiratory symptoms, number of hospitalizations, and decline in FEV1, as well as exacerbation frequency and overall mortality. Among the patients, 38-77% with COPD are smokers. Their daily cigarette consumption and level of nicotine dependence are often high. The combination of high intensity behavioral interventions and medication treatments (nicotine replacement therapy, varenicline, bupropion) is the most effective strategy for smokers with COPD. In contrast, behavioral interventions without medication are not more effective than simple advice to stop. Two factors seem to predict the success of the attempt to quit in smokers with COPD: a strong motivation to quit and the use of smoking cessation medications.

Hardcore smokers: what do we know?

AIMS

The existence of smokers who are resistant to smoking cessation treatment has long been noted in the literature. There has been ongoing debate as to whether the proportion of these smokers is increasing as smoking prevalence rates stagnate. Studies define hardcore smokers inconsistently and within the context of specific illnesses, addiction, population, and/or theoretical paradigms. This review examines the existing literature related to hardcore smokers to develop a better understanding of what is known and not known about this group to guide smoking cessation treatment.

METHODS

PubMed MESH search and review of research publications from 1998 to 2012 (N=61).

RESULTS

Inconsistent definitions of hardcore smoking make it difficult to estimate prevalence rates and to identify specific characteristics of persistent smokers. Generally, persistent smokers have higher levels of nicotine dependence, are disproportionately from lower socioeconomic groups, start smoking at an earlier age, and are more likely to have a psychological co-morbidity.

DISCUSSION

Defining some smokers as hardcore is limiting. Targeted and tailored interventions for smoking cessation for persistent smoking have demonstrated effectiveness in a small number of studies. Treatment access barriers need to be addressed to improve the reach and effectiveness of cessation with persistent smokers. Efforts to limit early age initiation of tobacco use are a critical element in averting persistent smoking.

Nursing interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Healthcare professionals, including nurses, frequently advise people to improve their health by stopping smoking. Such advice may be brief, or part of more intensive interventions.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of nursing-delivered smoking cessation interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group specialized Register and CINAHL in June 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials of smoking cessation interventions delivered by nurses or health visitors with follow-up of at least six months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted data independently. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Where statistically and clinically appropriate, we pooled studies using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model and reported the outcome as a risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Pooling 35 studies (over 17,000 participants) comparing a nursing intervention to a control or to usual care, we found the intervention to increase the likelihood of quitting (RR 1.29; 95% CI 1.20 to 1.39). In a subgroup analysis the estimated effect size was similar for the group of seven studies using a particularly low intensity intervention but the confidence interval was wider. There was limited indirect evidence that interventions were more effective for hospital inpatients with cardiovascular disease than for inpatients with other conditions. Interventions in non-hospitalized adults also showed evidence of benefit. Eleven studies comparing different nurse-delivered interventions failed to detect significant benefit from using additional components. Six studies of nurse counselling on smoking cessation during a screening health check or as part of multifactorial secondary prevention in general practice (not included in the main meta-analysis) found nursing intervention to have less effect under these conditions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate the potential benefits of smoking cessation advice and/or counselling given by nurses, with reasonable evidence that intervention is effective. The evidence for an effect is weaker when interventions are brief and are provided by nurses whose main role is not health promotion or smoking cessation. The challenge will be to incorporate smoking behaviour monitoring and smoking cessation interventions as part of standard practice so that all patients are given an opportunity to be asked about their tobacco use and to be given advice and/or counselling to quit along with reinforcement and follow-up.

Supporting smoking cessation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with behavioral intervention: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Cigarette smoking is the major risk factor for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). But a fewer smoking cessation measures were conducted in communities for smokers with COPD in China. The aim of our study was to assess the preventive effects of behavioral interventions for smoking cessation and potential impact factors in smokers with COPD in China.

METHODS

In a randomised controlled smoking cessation trial 3562 patients with COPD who were current smoker were allocated to intervention group received behavioral intervention and control group received the usual care for two years. The primary efficacy endpoint was the complete and continuous abstinence from smoking from the beginning of month 24 to the end of month 30. Participants were followed up at month 48.

RESULTS

Continuous smoking abstinence rates from month 24 to 30 were significantly higher in participants receiving behavioral intervention than in those receiving usual care (46.4% vs 3.4%, p < 0.001). Continuous abstinence rates from months 24 to 36 (45.8% vs 4.0%) and months 24 to 48 (44.3% vs 5.1%) were also higher in participants receiving behavioral intervention than in those control group. Family members or family physicians/nurses smoking were first identified to influence smoking cessation.

CONCLUSIONS

Behavioral intervention doubled the smoking cessation rate in patients with COPD and was complied well by the general practitioners. The family members and family physicians/nurses smoking were the main risk factors for smoking cessation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trials Registration (ChiCTR-TRC-12001958).

Physician advice for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Healthcare professionals frequently advise people to improve their health by stopping smoking. Such advice may be brief, or part of more intensive interventions.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this review were to assess the effectiveness of advice from physicians in promoting smoking cessation; to compare minimal interventions by physicians with more intensive interventions; to assess the effectiveness of various aids to advice in promoting smoking cessation, and to determine the effect of anti-smoking advice on disease-specific and all-cause mortality.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register in January 2013 for trials of interventions involving physicians. We also searched Latin American databases through BVS (Virtual Library in Health) in February 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials of smoking cessation advice from a medical practitioner in which abstinence was assessed at least six months after advice was first provided.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data in duplicate on the setting in which advice was given, type of advice given (minimal or intensive), and whether aids to advice were used, the outcome measures, method of randomisation and completeness of follow-up.The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up. We also considered the effect of advice on mortality where long-term follow-up data were available. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each trial, and biochemically validated rates where available. People lost to follow-up were counted as smokers. Effects were expressed as relative risks. Where possible, we performed meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 42 trials, conducted between 1972 and 2012, including over 31,000 smokers. In some trials, participants were at risk of specified diseases (chest disease, diabetes, ischaemic heart disease), but most were from unselected populations. The most common setting for delivery of advice was primary care. Other settings included hospital wards and outpatient clinics, and industrial clinics.Pooled data from 17 trials of brief advice versus no advice (or usual care) detected a significant increase in the rate of quitting (relative risk (RR) 1.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.42 to 1.94). Amongst 11 trials where the intervention was judged to be more intensive the estimated effect was higher (RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.60 to 2.13) but there was no statistical difference between the intensive and minimal subgroups. Direct comparison of intensive versus minimal advice showed a small advantage of intensive advice (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.56). Direct comparison also suggested a small benefit of follow-up visits. Only one study determined the effect of smoking advice on mortality. This study found no statistically significant differences in death rates at 20 years follow-up.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Simple advice has a small effect on cessation rates. Assuming an unassisted quit rate of 2 to 3%, a brief advice intervention can increase quitting by a further 1 to 3%. Additional components appear to have only a small effect, though there is a small additional benefit of more intensive interventions compared to very brief interventions.

Physician advice for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Healthcare professionals frequently advise people to improve their health by stopping smoking. Such advice may be brief, or part of more intensive interventions.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this review were to assess the effectiveness of advice from physicians in promoting smoking cessation; to compare minimal interventions by physicians with more intensive interventions; to assess the effectiveness of various aids to advice in promoting smoking cessation, and to determine the effect of anti-smoking advice on disease-specific and all-cause mortality.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register in January 2013 for trials of interventions involving physicians. We also searched Latin American databases through BVS (Virtual Library in Health) in February 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials of smoking cessation advice from a medical practitioner in which abstinence was assessed at least six months after advice was first provided.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data in duplicate on the setting in which advice was given, type of advice given (minimal or intensive), and whether aids to advice were used, the outcome measures, method of randomisation and completeness of follow-up.The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up. We also considered the effect of advice on mortality where long-term follow-up data were available. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each trial, and biochemically validated rates where available. People lost to follow-up were counted as smokers. Effects were expressed as relative risks. Where possible, we performed meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 42 trials, conducted between 1972 and 2012, including over 31,000 smokers. In some trials, participants were at risk of specified diseases (chest disease, diabetes, ischaemic heart disease), but most were from unselected populations. The most common setting for delivery of advice was primary care. Other settings included hospital wards and outpatient clinics, and industrial clinics.Pooled data from 17 trials of brief advice versus no advice (or usual care) detected a significant increase in the rate of quitting (relative risk (RR) 1.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.42 to 1.94). Amongst 11 trials where the intervention was judged to be more intensive the estimated effect was higher (RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.60 to 2.13) but there was no statistical difference between the intensive and minimal subgroups. Direct comparison of intensive versus minimal advice showed a small advantage of intensive advice (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.56). Direct comparison also suggested a small benefit of follow-up visits. Only one study determined the effect of smoking advice on mortality. This study found no statistically significant differences in death rates at 20 years follow-up.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Simple advice has a small effect on cessation rates. Assuming an unassisted quit rate of 2 to 3%, a brief advice intervention can increase quitting by a further 1 to 3%. Additional components appear to have only a small effect, though there is a small additional benefit of more intensive interventions compared to very brief interventions.

State quitlines and cessation patterns among adults with selected chronic diseases in 15 states, 2005-2008

Introduction

The death rate of people who have a chronic disease is lower among former smokers than current smokers. State tobacco cessation quitlines are available for free in every state. The objective of our study was to compare demographic characteristics, use of quitline services, and quit rates among a sample of quitline callers.

Results

Among 195,057 callers, 32.3% reported having 1 or more of the following chronic diseases: 17.7%, asthma; 5.9%, coronary artery disease; 11.1%, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; and 9.3%, diabetes; 9.0% had 2 or more chronic diseases. Callers who had a chronic disease were older and better educated; more likely to be female, have Medicaid or other health insurance, and have used tobacco for 20 years or more; and less likely to quit smoking (22.3%) at 7 months than callers who had none of these chronic diseases (29.7%).

Conclusion

About one-third of tobacco users who call state quitlines have a chronic disease, and those who have a chronic disease are less likely to quit using tobacco. Continued efforts are needed to ensure cessation treatments are reaching tobacco users who have a chronic disease and to develop and test ways to increase quit rates among them.

Moving beyond a limited follow-up in cost-effectiveness analyses of behavioral interventions

BACKGROUND

Cost-effectiveness analyses of behavioral interventions typically use a dichotomous outcome criterion. However, achieving behavioral change is a complex process involving several steps towards a change in behavior. Delayed effects may occur after an intervention period ends, which can lead to underestimation of these interventions. To account for such delayed effects, intermediate outcomes of behavioral change may be used in cost-effectiveness analyses. The aim of this study is to model cognitive parameters of behavioral change into a cost-effectiveness model of a behavioral intervention.

METHODS

The cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of an existing dataset from an RCT in which an high-intensity smoking cessation intervention was compared with a medium-intensity intervention, was re-analyzed by modeling the stages of change of the Transtheoretical Model of behavioral change. Probabilities were obtained from the dataset and literature and a sensitivity analysis was performed.

RESULTS

In the original CEA over the first 12 months, the high-intensity intervention dominated in approximately 58% of the cases. After modeling the cognitive parameters to a future 2nd year of follow-up, this was the case in approximately 79%.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that modeling of future behavioral change in CEA of a behavioral intervention further strengthened the results of the standard CEA. Ultimately, modeling future behavioral change could have important consequences for health policy development in general and the adoption of behavioral interventions in particular.

Developing and applying a stochastic dynamic population model for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

OBJECTIVES

To develop a stochastic population model of disease progression in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) that includes the effects of COPD exacerbations on health-related quality of life, costs, disease progression, and mortality and can be used to assess the effects of a wide range of interventions.

METHODS

The model is a multistate Markov model with time varying transition rates specified by age, sex, smoking status, COPD disease severity, and/or exacerbation type. The model simulates annual changes in COPD prevalence due to COPD incidence, exacerbations, disease progression (annual decline in the forced expiratory volume in 1 second as percentage of the predicted value), and mortality. The main outcome variables are quality-adjusted life years, total exacerbations, and COPD-related health care costs. Exacerbation-related input parameters were based on quantitative meta-analysis. All important model parameters are entered into the model as probability distributions. To illustrate the potential use of the model, costs and effects were calculated for 3-year implementation of three different COPD interventions, one pharmacologic, one on smoking cessation, and one on pulmonary rehabilitation using a time horizon of 10 years for reporting outcomes.

RESULTS

Compared with minimal treatment the cost/quality-adjusted life year was €8,300 for the pharmacologic intervention, €10,800 for the smoking cessation therapy, €8,700 for the combination of the pharmacologic intervention and the smoking cessation therapy, and €17,200 for the pulmonary rehabilitation program. The probability of the interventions to be cost-effective at a ceiling ratio of €20,000 varied from 58% to 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

The COPD model provides policy makers with information about the long-term costs and effects of interventions over the entire chain of care, from primary prevention to care for very severe COPD and includes uncertainty around the outcomes.

Effective smoking cessation interventions for COPD patients: a review of the evidence

OBJECTIVES

To review the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions offered to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, and identify barriers to quitting experienced by them, so that a more effective service can be developed for this group.

DESIGN

A rapid systematic literature review comprising computerized searches of electronic databases, hand searches and snowballing were used to identify both published and grey literature.

SETTING

A review of studies undertaken in north-western Europe (defined as: United Kingdom, Ireland, France, Germany, Benelux and Nordic countries).

PARTICIPANTS

COPD patients participating in studies looking at the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in this patient group, or exploring the barriers to quitting experienced by these patients.

METHOD

Quantitative and qualitative papers were selected according to pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria, critically appraised, and quantitative papers scored against the NICE Levels of Evidence standardized hierarchy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Percentages of successful quitters and length of quit, assessed by self-report or biochemical analysis. Among qualitative studies, identified barriers to smoking cessation had to be explored.

RESULTS

Three qualitative and 13 quantitative papers were finally selected. Effective interventions and barriers to smoking cessation were identified. Pharmacological support with Buproprion combined with counselling was significantly more efficacious in achieving prolonged abstinence than a placebo by 18.9% (95% CI 3.6-26.4%). Annual spirometry with a brief smoking cessation intervention, followed by a personal letter from a doctor, had a significantly higher ≥1 year abstinence rate at three years among COPD patient smokers, compared to smokers with normal lung function (P < 0.001; z = 3.93). Identified barriers to cessation included: patient misinformation, levels of motivation, health beliefs, and poor communication with health professionals.

CONCLUSION

Despite the public health significance of COPD, there is a lack of high-quality evidence showing which smoking cessation support methods work for these patients. This review describes three effective interventions, as well as predictors of quitting success that service providers could use to improve quit rates in this group. Areas that would benefit from urgent further research are also identified.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Smoking Cessation

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major and increasing cause of morbidity and mortality. Cigarette smoking is the most important risk factor for COPD, and smoking cessation is, in most cases, the most effective way of preventing the onset and progression of COPD. The purpose of the present article was to review the current state of interventions for smokers with COPD. Because 70% of smokers visit a physician annually, primary care providers play a key role in the counseling of all patients at every visit. If smoking cessation is achieved at an early stage of disease, it is associated with a decrease in pulmonary symptoms and improves prognosis and prolonged abstinence. The health benefits of smoking cessation are immediate and substantial, and interventions provided for smokers suggest that multiple modalities are needed. Smoking cessation counseling in combination with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) appears to be the most effective modality followed by smoking cessation in combination with an antidepressant to enhance prolonged abstinence.

General practice counseling for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to quit smoking: impact after 1 year of two complex interventions

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate two counseling programs in general practice to help smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to quit smoking.

METHODS

Cluster randomized controlled trial including 68 general practices (667 patients) using a randomly assigned intervention program with counseling and advice about nicotine replacement therapy (and additional bupropion-SR in one of the programs) or usual care. Usual care consisted of periodic regular check-ups and COPD information. The main outcome measure was biochemically verified point prevalence at 12 months.

RESULTS

The two intervention groups were treated as one in the analysis because they were equally effective. The intervention resulted in a significantly self-reported higher success rate (14.5%) compared to usual care (7.4%); odds ratio=2.1, 95% confidence interval=1.1-4.1. Biochemically verified quit rates were 7.5% (intervention) and 3.4% (usual care); odds ratio=2.3, 95% confidence interval=0.9-6.0.

CONCLUSION

The program doubled the cessation rates (statistically nonsignificant). Too few participants used the additional bupropion-SR to prove its effectiveness.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The protocols can be used for COPD patients in general practice, but expectations should be modest. If quitting is unsuccessful, a stepped care approach should be considered.

Are oral health complaints related to smoking cessation intentions?

OBJECTIVE

Smoking influences oral health in several ways (such as the occurrence of periodontitis, teeth discolouration and oral cancer); therefore, smoking behaviour should be addressed in dental care. Dentists can play a role in primary and secondary prevention of tobacco dependence. They see their patients repeatedly over time. This study investigates whether oral health complaints can be seized as an opportunity to start smoking cessation counselling.

METHODS

A structured patient questionnaire in a sample of 1101 smokers (52.1% women, mean age 40.4 years) in a convenience sample of 87 primary care dental practices. The I-change model was used to describe factors influencing behavioural change. Dependent factors such as intention to quit smoking and related factors (attitude, social support and self-efficacy) were analysed in relation to independent factors such as oral health complaints (gingiva problems, gingiva inflammation, oral cancer and discoloured teeth) using a general linear model (univariate analysis), multinomial logistic regression analysis and multiple linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 56.3% had discoloured teeth, 27% of the smokers had a problem with their gums and 15.7% had gingiva inflammation. We found no direct relation between oral health complaints and the intention to quit smoking. However, teeth discolouration was positively related to attitudes towards smoking cessation [β, Confidential interval (95%); 1.92 (1.45-2.40 for advantages and -0.86(-1.18 to -0.53) for disadvantages] and negatively to self-efficacy regarding quitting [-2.69 (-3.49 to 1.88)].

CONCLUSIONS

We found no direct relation between oral health complaints and the intention to quit smoking, but oral health complaints and especially teeth discolouration were related to factors influencing the quit intention. Patients with discoloured teeth are more likely to have a positive attitude towards smoking cessation but are uncertain to persist smoking cessation. It is suggested that teeth discolouration can be a good entrance for addressing smoking cessation in daily dental practice.

Validation of smoking cessation self-reported by patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

PURPOSE

The present study reports on the biochemical validation of the self-reported smoking status of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The objective is to establish the proportion of overestimation of self-reported success rates.

METHODS

A cross-sectional smoking-status validation study including 60 patients with COPD who reported that they had stopped smoking. In the analysis of urine samples, a cut-off point of 50 ng/mL of cotinine was used.

RESULTS

At the time of biochemical validation, 55 patients reported that they had quit smoking while five patients resumed smoking. Smoking status was biochemically confirmed for 43 patients (78%) and 12 patients (22%) were classified as smokers. The sensitivity of the self- report of smoking was 29% and the specificity was 100%.

CONCLUSION

Many primary care patients with COPD do not provide valid information on their smoking status, which hamper adequate therapeutic interventions. Integration of biochemical validation in daily care could overcome this problem, but may harm the doctor-patient relationship.

Trends in mortality from COPD in selected U.S. States differing in tobacco control efforts

U.S. state tobacco control programs have been associated with both temporal increases in smoking cessation rates in young adults and temporal declines in tobacco-related chronic diseases, but mortality from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease apparently has not been studied. Annual percent change (APC) (1990-2005) in age standardized mortality rate at ages 35-64 and 65+ years from this cause was analyzed for California (which started a comprehensive tobacco control program in 1989), the "U.S. exclusive of California," New Jersey and New York (which had relatively high cigarette prices in the 1990s), and a group of six southern tobacco-growing states (which had limited tobacco control efforts and low cigarette prices in the 1990s). Declines in mortality rates from 1990-2005 for age 35-64 were larger and statistically significant in California (annual % change -1.6%) and New Jersey-New York (annual % change -1.8%), while declines the "U.S. exclusive of California" (annual % change -0.5%) and in six southern tobacco-growing states (annual % change -0.3%). Declines in mortality at age 65+ years were small or nonexistent. The geographic differences in mortality for age 35-64 years after 1990 were not a continuation of earlier trends (in 1980-89), and may be related to differences in tobacco control efforts. This suggests that states should increase their tobacco-control efforts, to reduce chronic obstructive pulmonary disease mortality in the entire U.S.

Physician advice for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Healthcare professionals frequently advise patients to improve their health by stopping smoking. Such advice may be brief, or part of more intensive interventions.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this review were to assess the effectiveness of advice from physicians in promoting smoking cessation; to compare minimal interventions by physicians with more intensive interventions; to assess the effectiveness of various aids to advice in promoting smoking cessation, and to determine the effect of anti-smoking advice on disease-specific and all-cause mortality.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register. Date of the most recent search: September 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials of smoking cessation advice from a medical practitioner in which abstinence was assessed at least six months after advice was first provided.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data in duplicate on the setting in which advice was given, type of advice given (minimal or intensive), and whether aids to advice were used, the outcome measures, method of randomization and completeness of follow up. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow up. We also considered the effect of advice on mortality where long-term follow-up data were available. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each trial, and biochemically validated rates where available. Subjects lost to follow up were counted as smokers. Effects were expressed as relative risks. Where possible, meta-analysis was performed using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 41 trials, conducted between 1972 and 2007, including over 31,000 smokers. In some trials, subjects were at risk of specified diseases (chest disease, diabetes, ischaemic heart disease), but most were from unselected populations. The most common setting for delivery of advice was primary care. Other settings included hospital wards and outpatient clinics, and industrial clinics. Pooled data from 17 trials of brief advice versus no advice (or usual care) detected a significant increase in the rate of quitting (relative risk (RR) 1.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.42 to 1.94). Amongst 11 trials where the intervention was judged to be more intensive the estimated effect was higher (RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.60 to 2.13) but there was no statistical difference between the intensive and minimal subgroups. Direct comparison of intensive versus minimal advice showed a small advantage of intensive advice (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.56). Direct comparison also suggested a small benefit of follow-up visits. Only one study determined the effect of smoking advice on mortality. This study found no statistically significant differences in death rates at 20 years follow up.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Simple advice has a small effect on cessation rates. Assuming an unassisted quit rate of 2 to 3%, a brief advice intervention can increase quitting by a further 1 to 3%. Additional components appear to have only a small effect, though there is a small additional benefit of more intensive interventions compared to very brief interventions.

Nursing interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Healthcare professionals, including nurses, frequently advise patients to improve their health by stopping smoking. Such advice may be brief, or part of more intensive interventions.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of nursing-delivered smoking cessation interventions.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group specialized register and CINAHL in July 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials of smoking cessation interventions delivered by nurses or health visitors with follow up of at least six months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted data independently. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Where statistically and clinically appropriate, we pooled studies using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed effect model and reported the outcome as a risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Thirty-one studies comparing a nursing intervention to a control or to usual care found the intervention to significantly increase the likelihood of quitting (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.38). There was heterogeneity among the study results, but pooling using a random effects model did not alter the estimate of a statistically significant effect. In a subgroup analysis there was weaker evidence that lower intensity interventions were effective (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.62). There was limited indirect evidence that interventions were more effective for hospital inpatients with cardiovascular disease than for inpatients with other conditions. Interventions in non-hospitalized patients also showed evidence of benefit. Nine studies comparing different nurse-delivered interventions failed to detect significant benefit from using additional components. Five studies of nurse counselling on smoking cessation during a screening health check, or as part of multifactorial secondary prevention in general practice (not included in the main meta-analysis) found nursing intervention to have less effect under these conditions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate the potential benefits of smoking cessation advice and/or counselling given by nurses to patients, with reasonable evidence that intervention is effective. The evidence of an effect is weaker when interventions are brief and are provided by nurses whose main role is not health promotion or smoking cessation. The challenge will be to incorporate smoking behaviour monitoring and smoking cessation interventions as part of standard practice, so that all patients are given an opportunity to be asked about their tobacco use and to be given advice and/or counselling to quit along with reinforcement and follow up.

Smoking cessation a critical component of medical management in chronic disease populations

Many innovative and effective smoking-cessation treatments, both behavioral and pharmacologic, have been developed over the past several decades. However, these treatments traditionally have been developed for use with populations of healthy smokers. Despite the disease management implications, efforts to design and evaluate cessation interventions targeting smokers diagnosed with chronic diseases are reported infrequently in the literature. The purpose of this paper is to provide a brief overview of the evidence linking continued smoking to disease progression and adverse treatment outcomes across a range of common chronic diseases: cardiovascular disease (CVD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes, asthma, cancer, and human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS). Where studies are available, the efficacy of smoking-cessation interventions specifically developed or applied to these patient populations is reviewed. Finally, limitations and gaps in smoking research and treatment with chronically ill patients are discussed, and future research priorities are recommended.

Smoking cessation interventions in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and the role of the family: a systematic literature review

AIM

This paper is a report of a systematic review to assess the effectiveness of family-focused smoking cessation interventions for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and to determine what data on families are documented in studies of smoking cessation interventions.

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is a major public health problem and cigarette smoking is the most important factor contributing to its development and progression. However, smoking cessation rates are low and relapse is common. The role of families in smoking cessation efforts has received little attention.

METHODS

All studies were included in the review that (i) addressed an evaluation of a psycho-social/educational smoking cessation intervention for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, (ii) addressed some information on the family (i.e. living arrangements, marital status, smoking history of family members, support for quitting) and/or included the family as part of the intervention and (iii) were published between 1990 and 2006. Electronic data sources, existing systematic reviews of smoking cessation interventions and the grey literature were reviewed.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included. Six studies (11 papers) included data on marital status, smoking status of household members, support for quitting smoking and related variables. In two of the studies, the variable on the family was used to analyse smoking cessation outcomes. One additional study met the inclusion criterion of an evaluation of a smoking cessation intervention, which also included a family focus in the intervention.

CONCLUSION

No conclusions about the effectiveness of a family-focused smoking cessation intervention could be drawn from this review. Further research is needed to determine if a more family-focused intervention, in conjunction with pharmacological and counselling approaches, would lead to improved smoking cessation outcomes.

Pulmonary Rehabilitation: Joint ACCP/AACVPR Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary rehabilitation has become a standard of care for patients with chronic lung diseases. This document provides a systematic, evidence-based review of the pulmonary rehabilitation literature that updates the 1997 guidelines published by the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) and the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation.

METHODS

The guideline panel reviewed evidence tables, which were prepared by the ACCP Clinical Research Analyst, that were based on a systematic review of published literature from 1996 to 2004. This guideline updates the previous recommendations and also examines new areas of research relevant to pulmonary rehabilitation. Recommendations were developed by consensus and rated according to the ACCP guideline grading system.

RESULTS

The new evidence strengthens the previous recommendations supporting the benefits of lower and upper extremity exercise training and improvements in dyspnea and health-related quality-of-life outcomes of pulmonary rehabilitation. Additional evidence supports improvements in health-care utilization and psychosocial outcomes. There are few additional data about survival. Some new evidence indicates that longer term rehabilitation, maintenance strategies following rehabilitation, and the incorporation of education and strength training in pulmonary rehabilitation are beneficial. Current evidence does not support the routine use of inspiratory muscle training, anabolic drugs, or nutritional supplementation in pulmonary rehabilitation. Evidence does support the use of supplemental oxygen therapy for patients with severe hypoxemia at rest or with exercise. Noninvasive ventilation may be helpful for selected patients with advanced COPD. Finally, pulmonary rehabilitation appears to benefit patients with chronic lung diseases other than COPD.

CONCLUSIONS

There is substantial new evidence that pulmonary rehabilitation is beneficial for patients with COPD and other chronic lung diseases. Several areas of research provide opportunities for future research that can advance the field and make rehabilitative treatment available to many more eligible patients in need.

Individual behavioural counselling for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Individual counselling from a smoking cessation specialist may help smokers to make a successful attempt to stop smoking.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the review is to determine the effects of individual counselling.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register for studies with counsel* in any field. Date of the most recent search: December 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized or quasi-randomized trials with at least one treatment arm consisting of face-to-face individual counselling from a healthcare worker not involved in routine clinical care. The outcome was smoking cessation at follow up at least six months after the start of counselling.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Both authors extracted data. The intervention and population, method of randomization and completeness of follow up were recorded.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 21 trials with over 7000 participants. Eighteen trials compared individual counselling to a minimal behavioural intervention, four compared different types or intensities of counselling. Individual counselling was more effective than control. The odds ratio for successful smoking cessation was 1.56 (95% confidence interval 1.32 to 1.84). In a subgroup of three trials where all participants received nicotine replacement therapy the point estimate of effect was smaller and did not reach significance (odds ratio 1.34, 95% confidence interval 0.98 to 1.83). We failed to detect a greater effect of intensive counselling compared to brief counselling (odds ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 1.56).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Smoking cessation counselling can assist smokers to quit.