Effect of offering different levels of support and free nicotine replacement therapy via an English national telephone quitline: randomised controlled trial

Evaluating the implementation of adult smoking cessation programs in community settings: a scoping review

Introduction

Tobacco smoking is a leading contributor to preventable morbidity and premature mortality globally. Although evidence-based smoking cessation programs have been implemented, there is limited evidence on the application of theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs), and implementation strategies to support such programs. This scoping review mapped the evidence for interventions, TMFs, and implementation strategies used for smoking cessation programs in the community.

Methods

We searched four electronic databases in addition to grey literature and conducted hand-searching between February and December 2023. Original studies of qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods were considered for inclusion. Studies reporting prospectively planned and/or delivered implementation of smoking cessation interventions or programs, incorporating contextual factors, use of implementation TMF, implementation strategies, or other factors influencing implementation were considered for inclusion. Intervention components were categorized using the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist. Implementation strategies were mapped to the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) Strategy Clusters.

Results

A total of 31 studies were included. We identified 12 discrete interventions, commonly included as part of multicomponent interventions. Most studies reported tailoring or modifying interventions at the population or individual level. We identified 19 distinct implementation TMFs used to prospectively guide or evaluate implementation in 26 out of 31 included studies. Studies reported diverse implementation strategies. Three studies embedded culturally appropriate TMFs or local cultural guidance into the implementation process. These studies took a collaborative approach with the communities through partnership, participation, cultural tailoring, and community-directed implementation.

Discussion

Our findings highlight the methods by which the implementation of smoking cessation may be supported within the community. Whilst there is debate surrounding their necessity, there are practical benefits to applying TMFs for implementing, evaluating, and disseminating findings. We determined that whilst ERIC was well-suited as a framework for guiding the implementation of future smoking cessation programs, there was inconsistent use of implementation strategies across the ERIC domains. Our findings highlight a lack of harmonization in the literature to culturally tailor implementation processes for local communities.

Differences in the effectiveness of individual-level smoking cessation interventions by socioeconomic status

BACKGROUND

People from lower socioeconomic groups are more likely to smoke and less likely to succeed in achieving abstinence, making tobacco smoking a leading driver of health inequalities. Contextual factors affecting subpopulations may moderate the efficacy of individual-level smoking cessation interventions. It is not known whether any intervention performs differently across socioeconomically-diverse populations and contexts.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether the effects of individual-level smoking cessation interventions on combustible tobacco cigarette use differ by socioeconomic groups, and their potential impact on health equalities.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to 1 May 2023 for Cochrane reviews investigating individual-level smoking cessation interventions. We selected studies included in these reviews that met our criteria. We contacted study authors to identify further eligible studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel, cluster or factorial randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating any individual-level smoking cessation intervention which encouraged complete cessation of combustible tobacco cigarette use compared to no intervention, placebo, or another intervention in adults. Studies must have assessed or reported smoking quit rates, split by any measure of socioeconomic status (SES) at longest follow-up (≥ six months), and been published in 2000 or later.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods for screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment. We assessed the availability of smoking abstinence data by SES in lieu of selective reporting. The primary outcome was smoking cessation quit rates, split by lower and higher SES, at the longest follow-up (≥ six months). Where possible, we calculated ratios of odds ratios (ROR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each study, comparing lower to higher SES. We pooled RORs by intervention type in random-effects meta-analyses, using the generic inverse-variance method. We subgrouped by type of SES indicator and economic classification of the study country. We summarised all evidence in effect direction plots and categorised the intervention impact on health equality as: positive (evidence that the relative effect of the intervention on quit rates was greater in lower rather than higher SES groups), possibly positive, neutral, possibly neutral, possibly negative, negative, no reported statistically significant difference, or unclear. We evaluated certainty using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 77 studies (73 from high-income countries), representing 127,791 participants. We deemed 12 studies at low overall risk of bias, 13 at unclear risk, and the remaining 52 at high risk. Included studies investigated a range of pharmacological interventions, behavioural support, or combinations of these. Pharmacological interventions We found very low-certainty evidence for all the main pharmacological interventions compared to control. Evidence on cytisine (ROR 1.13, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.74; 1 study, 2472 participants) and nicotine electronic cigarettes (ROR 4.57, 95% CI 0.88 to 23.72; 1 study, 989 participants) compared to control indicated a greater relative effect of these interventions on quit rates in lower compared to higher SES groups, suggesting a possibly positive impact on health equality. CIs for both estimates included the possibility of no clinically important difference and of favouring higher SES groups. There was a lower relative effect of bupropion versus placebo on quit rates in lower compared to higher SES groups, indicating a possibly negative impact on health equality (ROR 0.05, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.00; from 1 of 2 studies, 354 participants; 1 study reported no difference); however, the CI included the possibility of no clinically important difference. We could not determine the intervention impact of combination or single-form nicotine replacement therapy on relative quit rates by SES. No studies on varenicline versus control were included. Behavioural interventions We found low-certainty evidence of lower quit rates in lower compared to higher SES groups for print-based self-help (ROR 0.85, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.38; 3 studies, 4440 participants) and text-messaging (ROR 0.76, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.23; from 3 of 4 studies, 5339 participants; 1 study reported no difference) versus control, indicating a possibly negative impact on health equality. CIs for both estimates included the possibility of no clinically important difference and of favouring lower SES groups. There was very low-certainty evidence of quit rates favouring higher SES groups for financial incentives compared to balanced intervention components. However, the CI included the possibility of no clinically important difference and of favouring lower SES groups (ROR 0.91, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.85; from 5 of 6 studies, 3018 participants; 1 study reported no difference). This indicates a possibly negative impact on health equality. There was very low-certainty evidence of no difference in quit rates by SES for face-to-face counselling compared to less intensive counselling, balanced components, or usual care. However, the CI included the possibility of favouring lower and higher SES groups (ROR 1.26, 95% CI 0.18 to 8.93; from 1 of 6 studies, 294 participants; 5 studies reported no difference), indicating a possibly neutral impact. We found very low-certainty evidence of a greater relative effect of telephone counselling (ROR 4.31, 95% CI 1.28 to 14.51; from 1 of 7 studies, 903 participants; 5 studies reported no difference, 1 unclear) and internet interventions (ROR 1.49, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.25; from 1 of 5 studies, 4613 participants; 4 studies reported no difference) versus control on quit rates in lower versus higher SES groups, suggesting a possibly positive impact on health equality. The CI for the internet intervention estimate included the possibility of no difference. Although the CI for the telephone counselling estimate only favoured lower SES groups, most studies narratively reported no clear evidence of interaction effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there is no clear evidence to support the use of differential individual-level smoking cessation interventions for people from lower or higher SES groups, or that any one intervention would have an effect on health inequalities. This conclusion may change as further data become available. Many studies did not report sufficient data to be included in a meta-analysis, despite having tested the association of interest. Further RCTs should collect, analyse, and report quit rates by measures of SES, to inform intervention development and ensure recommended interventions do not exacerbate but help reduce health inequalities caused by smoking.

One-year continuous abstinence rate for smoking cessation via telephonic counselling: The Indian scenario

Tobacco control methods differ by country, with telephonic counseling being one of them. The effectiveness of telephone counseling in smoking cessation has been discussed on several occasions. India's tobacco problem is more complex than that of any other country in the world. To begin with, tobacco is consumed in a variety of ways, and India is a large multilingual country with remarkable cultural diversity. In India, the National Tobacco Quitline Service (NTQLS) is a government-run program. Its data from May 2016 to May 2021 were analyzed retrospectively in this cross-sectional study to determine the prevalence and pattern of tobacco use in India, as well as the abstinence rate for smoking cessation. A total of 4,611,866 calls were received by the Interactive Voice Response system (IVR). The number of calls increased from 600 to 5400 per day after the toll-free number was printed on all tobacco products. Smokeless tobacco use was discovered to be more prevalent, with males significantly more likely to use both smoking and smokeless tobacco. At one month and one year after quitting, 33.42% and 21.9%, respectively, remained tobacco-free. The study emphasizes the efficacy of behavioral counseling in increasing abstinence rates. The printing of a toll-free number on tobacco products is an effective strategy for expanding the operation of quit lines. Despite the challenges of cultural diversity and complex tobacco use, India's quit line service has been able to provide counseling to callers with prolonged abstinence and quit rates comparable to the various quit lines around the world.

A smoking quitline integrated with clinician counselling at outpatient health facilities in Vietnam: a single-arm prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Limited evidence is available about the combination of multiple smoking cessation modalities in low- and middle-income countries. The study aimed to assess the feasibility of a smoking cessation intervention that integrates follow-up counselling phone calls and scheduled text messages with brief advice from physicians in Vietnam.

METHODS

This was a single-arm intervention study. Smokers were referred to the study Quitline after brief advice by physicians at three rural district hospitals in Hanoi, Vietnam. Following referral, participants received nine counselling phone calls in 12 months and a scheduled text message service that lasted for three months. Participants who reported smoking cessation for at least 30 days at the 12-month follow-up were invited for a urinary cotinine test to confirm cessation.

RESULTS

The Quitline centre had 431 referrals from participating hospitals. Among them, 221 (51.3%) were enrolled. After the baseline phone call, 141 (63.8%) participated in all 4 follow-up calls within the first month and 117 (52.9%) participated in all phone calls in 12 months. The median number of successful phone calls was 8 (interquartile range: 6 - 8). At the end of the study, 90 (40.7%) self-reported abstinence from smoking over the previous 30 days. Among them, 22 (24.4%) submitted a sample for cotinine test, of which 13 (59.1% of those tested) returned a negative result. The proportion of biochemically-verified quitters was 5.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

The integration of brief advice and referral from healthcare facilities, Quitline counselling phone calls, and scheduled text messaging was feasible in rural health facilities in northern Vietnam.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12619000554167 .

Comparison of saliva cotinine and exhaled carbon monoxide concentrations when smoking and after being offered dual nicotine replacement therapy in pregnancy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although English Stop Smoking Services routinely offer dual nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) to help pregnant women to quit smoking, little is known about how nicotine and tobacco smoke exposures following this compare with that from smoking. We compared, in pregnant women when smoking and after being offered dual NRT, saliva cotinine and exhaled carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations and numbers of daily cigarettes smoked.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Secondary analysis of data from three sequential, observational, mixed-methods cohort studies conducted as part of the Nicotine Replacement Effectiveness and Delivery in Pregnancy programme. Participants were recruited on-line or in Nottingham University Hospitals (UK) antenatal clinics between June 2019 and September 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

Forty pregnant women, who agreed to try stopping smoking.

INTERVENTION

Participants were offered dual NRT, agreed a smoking quit date and received an intervention to improve adherence to NRT.

MEASUREMENTS

Saliva cotinine and exhaled CO concentrations and reported number of cigarettes smoked per day.

FINDINGS

There were no differences in saliva cotinine concentrations at baseline and day 7 post quit date [n = 20, mean difference = -32.31 ng/ml, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -68.11 to 3.5 ng/ml; P = 0.074, Bayes factor = 0.04]. There were reductions in the reported number of cigarettes smoked per day (n = 26, mean difference = -7 cigarettes, 95% CI = -8.35 to -5.42 cigarettes, P < 0.001) and concurrently in exhaled CO concentrations (n = 17, ratio of geometric means = 0.30 p.p.m., 95% CI = 0.17-0.52 p.p.m.; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Pregnant women who smoke and are offered dual nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) appear to show no change in their exposure to cotinine compared with their pre-NRT exposure levels but they report smoking fewer cigarettes, as validated by reductions in exhaled carbon monoxide concentrations.

The short-term effectiveness of real-time video counselling on smoking cessation among residents in rural and remote areas: An interim analysis of a randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Real-time video counselling for smoking cessation uses readily accessible software (e.g. Skype). This study aimed to assess the short-term effectiveness of real-time video counselling compared to telephone counselling or written materials (minimal intervention control) on smoking cessation and quit attempts among rural and remote residents.

METHODS

An interim analysis of a three-arm, parallel group randomised trial with participants (n = 655) randomly allocated to; 1) real-time video counselling; 2) telephone counselling; or 3) written materials only (minimal intervention control). Participants were daily tobacco users aged 18 years or older residing in rural or remote areas of New South Wales, Australia. Video and telephone counselling conditions offered up to six counselling sessions while those in the minimal intervention control condition were mailed written materials. The study measured seven-day point prevalence abstinence, prolonged abstinence and quit attempts at 4-months post-baseline.

RESULTS

Video counselling participants were significantly more likely than the minimal intervention control group to achieve 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 4-months (18.9% vs 8.9%, OR = 2.39 (1.34-4.26), p = 0.003), but the video (18.9%) and telephone (12.7%) counselling conditions did not differ significantly for 7-day point prevalence abstinence. The video counselling and minimal intervention control groups or video counselling and telephone counselling groups did not differ significantly for three-month prolonged abstinence or quit attempts.

CONCLUSION

Given video counselling may increase cessation rates at 4 months post-baseline, quitlines and other smoking cessation services may consider integrating video counselling into their routine practices as a further mode of cessation care delivery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.anzctr.org.au ACTRN12617000514303.

Cessation classification likelihood increases with higher expired-air carbon monoxide cutoffs: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Expired-air carbon monoxide (CO) is commonly used to biochemically verify smoking status. The CO cutoff and CO monitor brand may affect the probability of classifying smokers as abstinent, thus influencing conclusions about the efficacy of cessation trials. No systematic reviews have tested this hypothesis. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis examining whether the likelihood of smoking cessation classification varied due to CO cutoff and monitor brand.

METHODS

Eligible studies (k = 122) longitudinally assessed CO-verified cessation in adult smokers in randomized trials. Primary meta-regressions separately assessed differences in quit classification likelihood due to continuous and categorical CO cutoffs (Low, 3-4 parts per million [ppm]; [SRNT] Recommended, 5-6 ppm; Moderate, 7-8 ppm; and High, 9-10 ppm); exploratory analyses compared likelihood outcomes between monitor brands: Bedfont and Vitalograph.

RESULTS

The likelihood of quit classification increased 18% with each 1 ppm increase above the lowest cutoff (3 ppm). Odds of classification as quit significantly increased between each cutoff category and High: 261% increase from Low; 162% increase from Recommended; and 150% increase from Moderate. There were no differences in cessation classification between monitor brands.

CONCLUSIONS

As expected, higher CO cutoffs were associated with greater likelihood of cessation classification. The lack of CO monitor brand differences may have been due to model-level variance not able to be followed up in the present dataset. Researchers are advised to report outcomes using a range of cutoffs-including the recommended range (5-6 ppm)-and the CO monitor brand/model used. Using higher CO cutoffs significantly increases likelihood of quit classification, possibly artificially elevating treatment strategies.

Subsidized pharmacological treatment for smoking cessation by the Spanish public health system: A randomized, pragmatic, clinical trial by clusters

INTRODUCTION

Research has shown that financing drug therapy increases smoking abstinence rates, although most of these studies have been carried out in the private healthcare setting. The aim of this work is to assess the effect of subsidized pharmacological treatment on smoking cessation rates by the Spanish public healthcare system.

METHODS

A pragmatic, randomized, clinical trial was performed by clusters. Randomization unit was the primary healthcare center and the analysis unit was the patient. Smokers consuming ≥10 cigarettes/day were randomly assigned to an intervention group that received financed pharmacological treatment or to a control group that followed usual care. The main outcome was self-reported or CO-confirmed continuous abstinence at 12 months. The main outcome, continuous abstinence rates (%), were compared between groups at 12 months post-intervention. A model was adjusted using mixed-effect logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 1154 patients were included from 23 healthcare centers. In the intention-to-treat analysis, self-reported abstinence after 12 months in the control and intervention groups, respectively, was 9.6% (37/387) and 15.4% (118/767) (gender-adjusted OR=1.75; 95% CI: 1.1–2.8); for CO-confirmed abstinence the corresponding values were 3.1% (12/387) and 6.4% (49/767) (gender-adjusted OR=1.72; 95% CI: 0.7–4.0). Pharmacological treatment use was 35.1% (136/387) in the control group, and 58.3% (447/767) in the intervention group (adjusted OR=4.25; 95% CI: 1.8–9.9)

CONCLUSIONS

Subsidizing pharmacological treatment for smoking cessation increases self-reported or CO-confirmed abstinence rates under realistic conditions in the primary care setting of the Spanish public health system.

Additional behavioural support as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation increase the likelihood of achieving abstinence in a quit attempt. It is plausible that providing support, or, if support is offered, offering more intensive support or support including particular components may increase abstinence further.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of adding or increasing the intensity of behavioural support for people using smoking cessation medications, and to assess whether there are different effects depending on the type of pharmacotherapy, or the amount of support in each condition. We also looked at studies which directly compare behavioural interventions matched for contact time, where pharmacotherapy is provided to both groups (e.g. tests of different components or approaches to behavioural support as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the ICTRP in June 2018 for records with any mention of pharmacotherapy, including any type of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, nortriptyline or varenicline, that evaluated the addition of personal support or compared two or more intensities of behavioural support.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in which all participants received pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation and conditions differed by the amount or type of behavioural support. The intervention condition had to involve person-to-person contact (defined as face-to-face or telephone). The control condition could receive less intensive personal contact, a different type of personal contact, written information, or no behavioural support at all. We excluded trials recruiting only pregnant women and trials which did not set out to assess smoking cessation at six months or longer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For this update, screening and data extraction followed standard Cochrane methods. 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. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighty-three studies, 36 of which were new to this update, met the inclusion criteria, representing 29,536 participants. Overall, we judged 16 studies to be at low risk of bias and 21 studies to be at high risk of bias. All other studies were judged to be at unclear risk of bias. Results were not sensitive to the exclusion of studies at high risk of bias. We pooled all studies comparing more versus less support in the main analysis. Findings demonstrated a benefit of behavioural support in addition to pharmacotherapy. When all studies of additional behavioural therapy were pooled, there was evidence of a statistically significant benefit from additional support (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.22, I² = 8%, 65 studies, n = 23,331) for abstinence at longest follow-up, and this effect was not different when we compared subgroups by type of pharmacotherapy or intensity of contact. This effect was similar in the subgroup of eight studies in which the control group received no behavioural support (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.43, I² = 20%, n = 4,018). Seventeen studies compared interventions matched for contact time but that differed in terms of the behavioural components or approaches employed. Of the 15 comparisons, all had small numbers of participants and events. Only one detected a statistically significant effect, favouring a health education approach (which the authors described as standard counselling containing information and advice) over motivational interviewing approach (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.94, n = 378).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-certainty evidence that providing behavioural support in person or via telephone for people using pharmacotherapy to stop smoking increases quit rates. Increasing the amount of behavioural support is likely to increase the chance of success by about 10% to 20%, based on a pooled estimate from 65 trials. Subgroup analysis suggests that the incremental benefit from more support is similar over a range of levels of baseline support. More research is needed to assess the effectiveness of specific components that comprise behavioural support.

Study protocol for a telephone-based smoking cessation randomized controlled trial in the lung cancer screening setting: The lung screening, tobacco, and health trial

Lung cancer mortality can be reduced by 20% via low dose CT lung cancer screening (LCS) and treatment of early-stage disease. Providing tobacco use treatment to high risk cigarette smokers in the LCS setting may result in health benefits beyond the impact of LCS. As one of the nine trials in the National Cancer Institute's Smoking Cessation at Lung Examination (SCALE) collaboration, the goal of the Lung Screening, Tobacco, and Health (LSTH) trial is to develop a scalable and cost-effective cessation intervention for subsequent implementation by LCS programs. Guided by the RE-AIM Framework, the LSTH trial is a two-arm RCT (N = 1330) enrolling English- and Spanish-speaking smokers registered for LCS at one of seven collaborating sites. Participants are randomly assigned to Usual Care (UC; three proactive telephone counseling sessions/two weeks of nicotine patches) vs. Intensive Telephone Counseling (ITC; eight proactive sessions/eight weeks of nicotine patches, plus discussion of the LCS results to increase motivation to quit). Telephone counseling is provided by tobacco treatment specialists. To increase continuity of care, referring physicians are notified of participant enrollment and smoking status following the intervention. Outcomes include: 1) self-reported 7-day, 30-day, and sustained abstinence, and biochemically-verified at 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-randomization, 2) reach and engagement of the interventions, and 3) cost-effectiveness of the interventions. The Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) will model long-term impacts of six SCALE trials on the cost per life year saved, quality-adjusted life years saved, lung cancer mortality reduction, and population mortality. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at clinical trials.gov: NCT03200236.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a tailored text-message programme (MiQuit) for smoking cessation in pregnancy: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Smoking in pregnancy is a major international public health problem. Self-help support (SHS) increases the likelihood of women stopping smoking in pregnancy and delivering this kind of support by text message could be a cost-effective way to deliver SHS to pregnant women who smoke. SHS delivered by text message helps non-pregnant smokers to stop but the currently available message programmes are not appropriate for use in pregnancy. A randomised controlled trial (RCT) has demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of using a programme called 'MiQuit' to text SHS support to pregnant women who smoke. Another pilot RCT has shown that it would be feasible to run a larger, multi-centre trial within the UK National Health Service (NHS). The aim of this third RCT is to complete MiQuit's evaluation, demonstrating whether or not this is efficacious for smoking cessation in pregnancy.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a multi-centre, parallel-group RCT. Pregnant women aged over 16 years, of less than 25 weeks' gestation who smoke one or more daily cigarettes but smoked at least five daily cigarettes before pregnancy and who understand written English and are being identified in 24 English antenatal care hospitals. Participants are randomised to control or intervention groups in a 1:1 ratio stratified by gestation (< 16 weeks versus ≥ 16 weeks). All participants receive a leaflet on stopping smoking during pregnancy; they are also able to access standard NHS smoking cessation support. Intervention group women also receive the 12-week MiQuit programme of tailored, interactive text message, and self-help cessation support. Women are followed up by telephone at 4 weeks after randomisation and 36 weeks' gestation. The RCT will recruit 692 women (346 per group), enabling a 95% confidence interval for the difference in quit rates to be estimated within ± 3%. To determine whether or not MiQuit helps pregnant smokers to stop, intervention group quit rates from this trial will be combined with those from the two earlier trials in a Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) meta-analysis to derive a pooled efficacy estimate.

DISCUSSION

If effective, MiQuit will be a cheap, cost-effective method to help pregnant women to stop smoking.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03231553 . Registered on 20 July 2017.

Telephone counselling for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Telephone services can provide information and support for smokers. Counselling may be provided proactively or offered reactively to callers to smoking cessation helplines.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of telephone support to help smokers quit, including proactive or reactive counselling, or the provision of other information to smokers calling a helpline.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the ICTRP for studies of telephone counselling, using search terms including 'hotlines' or 'quitline' or 'helpline'. Date of the most recent search: May 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials which offered proactive or reactive telephone counselling to smokers to assist smoking cessation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We pooled studies using a random-effects model and assessed statistical heterogeneity amongst subgroups of clinically comparable studies using the I2 statistic. In trials including smokers who did not call a quitline, we used meta-regression to investigate moderation of the effect of telephone counselling by the planned number of calls in the intervention, trial selection of participants that were motivated to quit, and the baseline support provided together with telephone counselling (either self-help only, brief face-to-face intervention, pharmacotherapy, or financial incentives).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 104 trials including 111,653 participants that met the inclusion criteria. Participants were mostly adult smokers from the general population, but some studies included teenagers, pregnant women, and people with long-term or mental health conditions. Most trials (58.7%) were at high risk of bias, while 30.8% were at unclear risk, and only 11.5% were at low risk of bias for all domains assessed. Most studies (100/104) assessed proactive telephone counselling, as opposed to reactive forms.Among trials including smokers who contacted helplines (32,484 participants), quit rates were higher for smokers receiving multiple sessions of proactive counselling (risk ratio (RR) 1.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.61; 14 trials, 32,484 participants; I2 = 72%) compared with a control condition providing self-help materials or brief counselling in a single call. Due to the substantial unexplained heterogeneity between studies, we downgraded the certainty of the evidence to moderate.In studies that recruited smokers who did not call a helpline, the provision of telephone counselling increased quit rates (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.35; 65 trials, 41,233 participants; I2 = 52%). Due to the substantial unexplained heterogeneity between studies, we downgraded the certainty of the evidence to moderate. In subgroup analysis, we found no evidence that the effect of telephone counselling depended upon whether or not other interventions were provided (P = 0.21), no evidence that more intensive support was more effective than less intensive (P = 0.43), or that the effect of telephone support depended upon whether or not people were actively trying to quit smoking (P = 0.32). However, in meta-regression, telephone counselling was associated with greater effectiveness when provided as an adjunct to self-help written support (P < 0.01), or to a brief intervention from a health professional (P = 0.02); telephone counselling was less effective when provided as an adjunct to more intensive counselling. Further, telephone support was more effective for people who were motivated to try to quit smoking (P = 0.02). The findings from three additional trials of smokers who had not proactively called a helpline but were offered telephone counselling, found quit rates were higher in those offered three to five telephone calls compared to those offered just one call (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.44; 2602 participants; I2 = 0%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that proactive telephone counselling aids smokers who seek help from quitlines, and moderate-certainty evidence that proactive telephone counselling increases quit rates in smokers in other settings. There is currently insufficient evidence to assess potential variations in effect from differences in the number of contacts, type or timing of telephone counselling, or when telephone counselling is provided as an adjunct to other smoking cessation therapies. Evidence was inconclusive on the effect of reactive telephone counselling, due to a limited number studies, which reflects the difficulty of studying this intervention.

The Growing Proportion of Smokers in Medicaid and Implications for Public Policy

INTRODUCTION

This study examined survey data from before and after California expanded its Medicaid program under the Affordable Care Act. It assessed changes in the insurance status of smokers, the proportion of smokers in Medicaid, and the health and well-being of those smokers relative to their counterparts in other insurance groups.

METHODS

The study compared two data sets from the California Health Interview Study, the 2011-2012 (N=42,935) and 2016 (N=21,055) surveys. Measures include health insurance status, smoking status, chronic health conditions, frequency of doctors' visits, and psychological distress. Data were analyzed in 2018.

RESULTS

From 2011-2012 to 2016, the estimated number of California smokers in Medicaid nearly doubled from 738,113 to 1,447,945, and the proportion of smokers covered by Medicaid increased from 19.3% to 41.5%. Compared with those with private insurance, smokers in Medicaid were more likely to have chronic disease, have made five or more doctors' visits in the past year, and be in severe psychological distress. In 2016, a total of 51.4% of all adult smokers with chronic disease conditions and 57.8% of those in severe psychological distress were covered by Medicaid.

CONCLUSIONS

With Medicaid covering a much higher proportion of smokers, especially of those smokers with chronic disease and in psychological distress, state Medicaid programs and plans must make tobacco cessation a top priority. They should encourage clinicians to ask, advise, and assist all smokers, track progress in reducing smoking prevalence, employ mass communication strategies to drive quit attempts, improve access to medications, and develop or expand programs to help smokers quit.

SUPPLEMENT INFORMATION

This article is part of a supplement entitled Advancing Smoking Cessation in California's Medicaid Population, which is sponsored by the California Department of Public Health.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of an Optimized Smoking Treatment Delivered in Primary Care

Background

The effectiveness of smoking cessation treatment is limited in real-world use, perhaps because we have not selected the components of such treatments optimally nor have treatments typically been developed for and evaluated in real-world clinical settings.

Purpose

To validate an optimized smoking cessation treatment package that comprises intervention components identified as effective in factorial screening experiments conducted as per the Multiphase Optimization Strategy (MOST).

Methods

Adult smokers motivated to quit were recruited from primary care clinics (N = 623). Participants were randomized to receive either recommended usual care (R-UC; 10 min of in-person counseling, 8 weeks of nicotine patch, and referral to quitline services) or abstinence-optimized treatment (A-OT; 3 weeks of prequit mini-lozenges, 26 weeks of nicotine patch + mini-lozenges, three in-person and eight phone counseling sessions, and 7-11 automated calls to prompt medication use). The key outcomes were self-reported and biochemically confirmed (carbon monoxide, CO <6 ppm) 7-day point-prevalence abstinence.

Results

A-OT participants had significantly higher self-reported abstinence rates than R-UC participants at 4, 8, 16, and 26 weeks (ORs: 1.91-3.05; p <. 001). The biochemically confirmed 26-week abstinence rates were lower than the self-reported 26-week rates, but revealed a similar treatment effect size (OR = 2.94, p < .001). There was no moderation of treatment effects on 26-week abstinence by demographic, psychiatric, or nicotine dependence variables. A-OT had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for 26-week CO-confirmed abstinence of $7,800.

Conclusions

A smoking cessation treatment that is optimized via MOST development meaningfully enhances cessation rates beyond R-UC smoking treatment in smokers seen in primary care.

Clinical Trial Registration

NCT02301403.

Estimates of effectiveness and reach for 'return on investment' modelling of smoking cessation interventions using data from England

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Estimating 'return on investment' (ROI) from smoking cessation interventions requires reach and effectiveness parameters for interventions for use in economic models such as the EQUIPT ROI tool (http://roi.equipt.eu). This paper describes the derivation of these parameter estimates for England that can be adapted to create ROI models for use by other countries.

METHODS

Estimates were derived for interventions in terms of their reach and effectiveness in: (1) promoting quit attempts and (2) improving the success of quit attempts (abstinence for at least 12 months). The sources were systematic reviews of efficacy supplemented by individual effectiveness evaluations and national surveys.

FINDINGS

Quit attempt rates were estimated to be increased by the following percentages (with reach in parentheses): 20% by tax increases raising the cost of smoking 5% above the cost of living index (100%); 10% by enforced comprehensive indoor public smoking bans (100%); 3% by mass media campaigns achieving 400 gross rating points (100%); 40% by brief opportunistic physician advice (21%); and 110% by use of a licensed nicotine product to reduce cigarette consumption (12%). Quit success rates were estimated to be increased by the following ratios: 60% by single-form nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (5%); 114% by NRT patch plus a faster-acting NRT (2%);124% by prescribed varenicline (5%); 60% by bupropion (1%); 100% by nortriptyline (0%), 10) 298% by cytisine (0%); 40% by individual face-to-face behavioural support (2%); 37% by telephone support (0.5%); 88% by group behavioural support (1%); 63% by text messaging (0.5%); and 19% by printed self-help materials (1%). There was insufficient evidence to obtain reliable, country-specific estimates for interventions such as websites, smartphone applications and e-cigarettes.

CONCLUSIONS

Tax increases, indoor smoking bans, brief opportunistic physician advice and use of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for smoking reduction can all increase population quit attempt rates. Quit success rates can be increased by provision of NRT, varenicline, bupropion, nortriptyline, cytisine and behavioural support delivered through a variety of modalities. Parameter estimates for the effectiveness and reach of these interventions can contribute to return on investment estimates in support of national or regional policy decisions.

Nicotine replacement therapy versus control for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) aims to temporarily replace much of the nicotine from cigarettes to reduce motivation to smoke and nicotine withdrawal symptoms, thus easing the transition from cigarette smoking to complete abstinence.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), including gum, transdermal patch, intranasal spray and inhaled and oral preparations, for achieving long-term smoking cessation, compared to placebo or 'no NRT' interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register for papers mentioning 'NRT' or any type of nicotine replacement therapy in the title, abstract or keywords. Date of most recent search is July 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials in people motivated to quit which compared NRT to placebo or to no treatment. We excluded trials that did not report cessation rates, and those with follow-up of less than six months, except for those in pregnancy (where less than six months, these were excluded from the main analysis). We recorded adverse events from included and excluded studies that compared NRT with placebo. Studies comparing different types, durations, and doses of NRT, and studies comparing NRT to other pharmacotherapies, are covered in separate reviews.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Screening, data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment followed standard Cochrane methods. 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. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 136 studies; 133 with 64,640 participants contributed to the primary comparison between any type of NRT and a placebo or non-NRT control group. The majority of studies were conducted in adults and had similar numbers of men and women. People enrolled in the studies typically smoked at least 15 cigarettes a day at the start of the studies. We judged the evidence to be of high quality; we judged most studies to be at high or unclear risk of bias but restricting the analysis to only those studies at low risk of bias did not significantly alter the result. The RR of abstinence for any form of NRT relative to control was 1.55 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.49 to 1.61). The pooled RRs for each type were 1.49 (95% CI 1.40 to 1.60, 56 trials, 22,581 participants) for nicotine gum; 1.64 (95% CI 1.53 to 1.75, 51 trials, 25,754 participants) for nicotine patch; 1.52 (95% CI 1.32 to 1.74, 8 trials, 4439 participants) for oral tablets/lozenges; 1.90 (95% CI 1.36 to 2.67, 4 trials, 976 participants) for nicotine inhalator; and 2.02 (95% CI 1.49 to 2.73, 4 trials, 887 participants) for nicotine nasal spray. The effects were largely independent of the definition of abstinence, the intensity of additional support provided or the setting in which the NRT was offered. A subset of six trials conducted in pregnant women found a statistically significant benefit of NRT on abstinence close to the time of delivery (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.69; 2129 participants); in the four trials that followed up participants post-partum the result was no longer statistically significant (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.86; 1675 participants). Adverse events from using NRT were related to the type of product, and include skin irritation from patches and irritation to the inside of the mouth from gum and tablets. Attempts to quantitatively synthesize the incidence of various adverse effects were hindered by extensive variation in reporting the nature, timing and duration of symptoms. The odds ratio (OR) of chest pains or palpitations for any form of NRT relative to control was 1.88 (95% CI 1.37 to 2.57, 15 included and excluded trials, 11,074 participants). However, chest pains and palpitations were rare in both groups and serious adverse events were extremely rare.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-quality evidence that all of the licensed forms of NRT (gum, transdermal patch, nasal spray, inhalator and sublingual tablets/lozenges) can help people who make a quit attempt to increase their chances of successfully stopping smoking. NRTs increase the rate of quitting by 50% to 60%, regardless of setting, and further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of the effect. The relative effectiveness of NRT appears to be largely independent of the intensity of additional support provided to the individual. Provision of more intense levels of support, although beneficial in facilitating the likelihood of quitting, is not essential to the success of NRT. NRT often causes minor irritation of the site through which it is administered, and in rare cases can cause non-ischaemic chest pain and palpitations.

Living with Smoker(s) and Smoking Cessation in Chinese Adult Smokers: Cross-Sectional and Prospective Evidence from Hong Kong Population Health Survey

Background: Results on the environmental influence on unassisted quitting are scarce. We investigated the associations of living with smoker(s) with quitting in Chinese adult smokers. Methods: We examined both cross-sectional and prospective data in the Hong Kong Population Health Survey recruited participants in 2003/04, and followed up to 2006. Unconditional logistic regression yielded adjusted odds ratios (AORs) of (i) planning to quit, (ii) ex-smoking (cross-sectional), and quitting (prospective) for living with smoker(s). 1679 ever smokers aged 18+ years at baseline, and 323 of them who were successfully followed-up were included in the cross-sectional, and prospective analysis. Results: At baseline, living with smoker(s) was significantly associated with lower odds of planning to quit in current smokers (AOR 0.41, 95% CI 0.25–0.68), and lower odds of ex-smoking (AOR 0.45, 95% CI 0.34–0.58), particularly if the smoker(s) smoked inside home (AOR 0.35, 95% CI 0.26–0.47). Prospectively, living with smoker(s) non-significantly predicted lower odds of new quitting (AOR 0.48, 95% CI 0.13–1.78). Conclusions: Our study has provided the first evidence in a Chinese general population that living with smoker(s) is an important barrier against smoking cessation. To boost quit rate in nonusers of smoking cessation services, smoking at home should be banned, especially for populations living in crowed urban environments that are typical of economically developed cities in China.

Mailed distribution of free nicotine patches without behavioral support: Predictors of use and cessation

INTRODUCTION

There is growing evidence that the mailed distribution of free nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), usually as part of smokers' helplines, can been effective in increasing the odds of cessation on a population level. However, limited information is available on the utilization of NRT when it is provided for free, and factors associated with regimen adherence have remained largely unexplored.

METHODS

In the context of a randomized controlled trial, 500 adult smokers across Canada hypothetically interested in free NRT were mailed a 5week supply of nicotine patches, but no other support was offered. Analyses evaluated which a priori-defined demographic and smoking characteristics predicted nicotine patch use at 8week follow-up of 421 patch recipients, as well as examined the association between patch use and smoking cessation at 6months.

RESULTS

At 8weeks, 10.9% had used all, 47.5% had used some but not all, and 41.6% had not used any of the provided nicotine patches. Lower age, unemployment, past NRT use and intent to quit in the next 30days at baseline (preparation stage of change) were all identified as independent predictors of some nicotine patch use. Only use of all patches was associated with greater odds of smoking cessation, compared to non-users (Adj. OR=2.96; 95%CI=1.06-8.27).

CONCLUSIONS

The mailed distribution of free nicotine patches to smokers at large can be effective at promoting cessation, particularly among financially disadvantaged groups, those with previous NRT experience and among individuals with already advanced intent to quit.

Effectiveness of the Gold Standard Programme compared with other smoking cessation interventions in Denmark: a cohort study

OBJECTIVES

We compared the effectiveness of the Gold Standard Programme (a comprehensive smoking cessation intervention commonly used in Denmark) with other face-to-face smoking cessation programmes in Denmark after implementation in real life, and we identified factors associated with successful quitting.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

A total of 423 smoking cessation clinics from different settings reported data from 2001 to 2013.

PARTICIPANTS

In total, 82 515 patients were registered. Smokers ≥15 years old and attending a programme with planned follow-up were included. Smokers who did not want further contact, who intentionally were not followed up or who lacked information about the intervention they received were excluded. A total of 46 287 smokers were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Various real-life smoking cessation interventions were identified and compared: The Gold Standard Programme, Come & Quit, crash courses, health promotion counselling (brief intervention) and other interventions.

MAIN OUTCOME

Self-reported continuous abstinence for 6 months.

RESULTS

Overall, 33% (11 184) were continuously abstinent after 6 months; this value was 24% when non-respondents were considered smokers. The follow-up rate was 74%. Women were less likely to remain abstinent, OR 0.83 (CI 0.79 to 0.87). Short interventions were more effective among men. After adjusting for confounders, the Gold Standard Programme was the only intervention with significant results across sex, increasing the odds of abstinence by 69% for men and 31% for women. In particular, compliance, and to a lesser degree, mild smoking, older age and not being disadvantaged were associated with positive outcomes for both sexes. Compliance increased the odds of abstinence more than 3.5-fold.

CONCLUSIONS

Over time, Danish smoking cessation interventions have been effective in real life. Compliance is the main predictor of successful quitting. Interestingly, short programmes seem to have relatively strong effects among men, but the absolute numbers are very small. Only the comprehensive Gold Standard Programme works across sexes.

Psychosocial interventions for supporting women to stop smoking in pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Tobacco smoking remains one of the few preventable factors associated with complications in pregnancy, and has serious long-term implications for women and babies. Smoking in pregnancy is decreasing in high-income countries, but is strongly associated with poverty and is increasing in low- to middle-income countries.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of smoking cessation interventions during pregnancy on smoking behaviour and perinatal health outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

In this sixth update, we searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (13 November 2015), checked reference lists of retrieved studies and contacted trial authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, cluster-randomised trials, and quasi-randomised controlled trials of psychosocial smoking cessation interventions during pregnancy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and trial quality, and extracted data. Direct comparisons were conducted in RevMan, with meta-regression conducted in STATA 14.

MAIN RESULTS

The overall quality of evidence was moderate to high, with reductions in confidence due to imprecision and heterogeneity for some outcomes. One hundred and two trials with 120 intervention arms (studies) were included, with 88 trials (involving over 28,000 women) providing data on smoking abstinence in late pregnancy. Interventions were categorised as counselling, health education, feedback, incentives, social support, exercise and dissemination.In separate comparisons, there is high-quality evidence that counselling increased smoking cessation in late pregnancy compared with usual care (30 studies; average risk ratio (RR) 1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.73) and less intensive interventions (18 studies; average RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.47). There was uncertainty whether counselling increased the chance of smoking cessation when provided as one component of a broader maternal health intervention or comparing one type of counselling with another. In studies comparing counselling and usual care (largest comparison), it was unclear whether interventions prevented smoking relapse among women who had stopped smoking spontaneously in early pregnancy. However, a clear effect was seen in smoking abstinence at zero to five months postpartum (11 studies; average RR 1.59, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.01) and 12 to 17 months (two studies, average RR 2.20, 95% CI 1.23 to 3.96), with a borderline effect at six to 11 months (six studies; average RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.77). In other comparisons, the effect was unclear for most secondary outcomes, but sample sizes were small.Evidence suggests a borderline effect of health education compared with usual care (five studies; average RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.55), but the quality was downgraded to moderate as the effect was unclear when compared with less intensive interventions (four studies; average RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.70), alternative interventions (one study; RR 1.88, 95% CI 0.19 to 18.60), or when smoking cessation health education was provided as one component of a broader maternal health intervention.There was evidence feedback increased smoking cessation when compared with usual care and provided in conjunction with other strategies, such as counselling (average RR 4.39, 95% CI 1.89 to 10.21), but the confidence in the quality of evidence was downgraded to moderate as this was based on only two studies and the effect was uncertain when feedback was compared to less intensive interventions (three studies; average RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.20).High-quality evidence suggests incentive-based interventions are effective when compared with an alternative (non-contingent incentive) intervention (four studies; RR 2.36, 95% CI 1.36 to 4.09). However pooled effects were not calculable for comparisons with usual care or less intensive interventions (substantial heterogeneity, I2 = 93%).High-quality evidence suggests the effect is unclear in social support interventions provided by peers (six studies; average RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.07), in a single trial of support provided by partners, or when social support for smoking cessation was provided as part of a broader intervention to improve maternal health.The effect was unclear in single interventions of exercise compared to usual care (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.01) and dissemination of counselling (RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.62 to 4.32).Importantly, high-quality evidence from pooled results demonstrated that women who received psychosocial interventions had a 17% reduction in infants born with low birthweight, a significantly higher mean birthweight (mean difference (MD) 55.60 g, 95% CI 29.82 to 81.38 g higher) and a 22% reduction in neonatal intensive care admissions. However the difference in preterm births and stillbirths was unclear. There did not appear to be adverse psychological effects from the interventions.The intensity of support women received in both the intervention and comparison groups has increased over time, with higher-intensity interventions more likely to have higher-intensity comparisons, potentially explaining why no clear differences were seen with increasing intervention intensity in meta-regression analyses. Among meta-regression analyses: studies classified as having 'unclear' implementation and unequal baseline characteristics were less effective than other studies. There was no clear difference between trials implemented by researchers (efficacy studies), and those implemented by routine pregnancy staff (effectiveness studies), however there was uncertainty in the effectiveness of counselling in four dissemination trials where the focus on the intervention was at an organisational level. The pooled effects were similar in interventions provided for women classified as having predominantly low socio-economic status, compared to other women. The effect was significant in interventions among women from ethnic minority groups; however not among indigenous women. There were similar effect sizes in trials with biochemically validated smoking abstinence and those with self-reported abstinence. It was unclear whether incorporating use of self-help manuals or telephone support increased the effectiveness of interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Psychosocial interventions to support women to stop smoking in pregnancy can increase the proportion of women who stop smoking in late pregnancy and the proportion of infants born low birthweight. Counselling, feedback and incentives appear to be effective, however the characteristics and context of the interventions should be carefully considered. The effect of health education and social support is less clear. New trials have been published during the preparation of this review and will be included in the next update.

Helping Hospitalized Smokers: A Factorial RCT of Nicotine Patches and Counseling

INTRODUCTION

Most smokers abstain from smoking during hospitalization but relapse upon discharge. This study tests the effectiveness of two proven treatments (i.e., nicotine patches and telephone counseling) in helping these patients stay quit after discharge from the hospital, and assesses a model of hospital-quitline partnership.

STUDY DESIGN

This study had a 2×2 factorial design in which participants were stratified by recruitment site and smoking rate and randomly assigned to usual care, nicotine patches only, counseling only, or patches plus counseling. They were evaluated at 2 and 6 months post-randomization.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1,270 hospitalized adult smokers were recruited from August 2011 to November 2013 from five hospitals within three healthcare systems.

INTERVENTION

Participants in the patch condition were provided 8 weeks of nicotine patches at discharge (or were mailed them post-discharge). Quitline staff started proactively calling participants in the counseling condition 3 days post-discharge to provide standard quitline counseling.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was self-reported 30-day abstinence at 6 months using an intention-to-treat analysis. Data were analyzed from September 2015 to May 2016.

RESULTS

The 30-day abstinence rate at 6 months was 22.8% for the nicotine patch condition and 18.3% for the no-patch condition (p=0.051). Nearly all participants (99%) in the patch condition were provided nicotine patches, although 36% were sent post-discharge. The abstinence rates were 20.0% and 21.1% for counseling and no counseling conditions, respectively (p=0.651). Fewer than half of the participants in the counseling condition (47%) received counseling (mean follow-up sessions, 3.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Provision of nicotine patches proved feasible, although their effectiveness in helping discharged patients stay quit was not significant. Telephone counseling was not effective, in large part because of low rates of engagement. Future interventions will need to be more immediate to be effective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01289275.

Evaluating Long-term Outcomes of NHS Stop Smoking Services (ELONS): a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

NHS Stop Smoking Services (SSSs) provide free at the point of use treatment for smokers who would like to stop. Since their inception in 1999 they have evolved to offer a variety of support options. Given the changes that have happened in the provision of services and the ongoing need for evidence on effectiveness, the Evaluating Long-term Outcomes for NHS Stop Smoking Services (ELONS) study was commissioned.

OBJECTIVES

The main aim of the study was to explore the factors that determine longer-term abstinence from smoking following intervention by SSSs. There were also a number of additional objectives.

DESIGN

The ELONS study was an observational study with two main stages: secondary analysis of routine data collected by SSSs and a prospective cohort study of service clients. The prospective study had additional elements on client satisfaction, well-being and longer-term nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) use.

SETTING

The setting for the study was SSSs in England. For the secondary analysis, routine data from 49 services were obtained. For the prospective study and its added elements, nine services were involved. The target population was clients of these services.

PARTICIPANTS

There were 202,804 cases included in secondary analysis and 3075 in the prospective study.

INTERVENTIONS

A combination of behavioural support and stop smoking medication delivered by SSS practitioners.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Abstinence from smoking at 4 and 52 weeks after setting a quit date, validated by a carbon monoxide (CO) breath test.

RESULTS

Just over 4 in 10 smokers (41%) recruited to the prospective study were biochemically validated as abstinent from smoking at 4 weeks (which was broadly comparable with findings from the secondary analysis of routine service data, where self-reported 4-week quit rates were 48%, falling to 34% when biochemical validation had occurred). At the 1-year follow-up, 8% of prospective study clients were CO validated as abstinent from smoking. Clients who received specialist one-to-one behavioural support were twice as likely to have remained abstinent than those who were seen by a general practitioner (GP) practice and pharmacy providers [odds ratio (OR) 2.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2 to 4.6]. Clients who received group behavioural support (either closed or rolling groups) were three times more likely to stop smoking than those who were seen by a GP practice or pharmacy providers (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.7 to 6.7). Satisfaction with services was high and well-being at baseline was found to be a predictor of abstinence from smoking at longer-term follow-up. Continued use of NRT at 1 year was rare, but no evidence of harm from longer-term use was identified from the data collected.

CONCLUSIONS

Stop Smoking Services in England are effective in helping smokers to move away from tobacco use. Using the 52-week CO-validated quit rate of 8% found in this study, we estimate that in the year 2012-13 the services supported 36,249 clients to become non-smokers for the remainder of their lives. This is a substantial figure and provides one indicator of the ongoing value of the treatment that the services provide. The study raises a number of issues for future research including (1) examining the role of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) in smoking cessation for service clients [this study did not look at e-cigarette use (except briefly in the longer-term NRT study) but this is a priority for future studies]; (2) more detailed comparisons of rolling groups with other forms of behavioural support; (3) further exploration of the role of practitioner knowledge, skills and use of effective behaviour change techniques in supporting service clients to stop smoking; (4) surveillance of the impact of structural and funding changes on the future development and sustainability of SSSs; and (5) more detailed analysis of well-being over time between those who successfully stop smoking and those who relapse. Further research on longer-term use of non-combustible nicotine products that measures a wider array of biomarkers of smoking-related harm such as lung function tests or carcinogen metabolites.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme. The UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies provided funding for the longer-term NRT study.

Combined pharmacotherapy and behavioural interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Both behavioural support (including brief advice and counselling) and pharmacotherapies (including nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), varenicline and bupropion) are effective in helping people to stop smoking. Combining both treatment approaches is recommended where possible, but the size of the treatment effect with different combinations and in different settings and populations is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of combining behavioural support and medication to aid smoking cessation, compared to a minimal intervention or usual care, and to identify whether there are different effects depending on characteristics of the treatment setting, intervention, population treated, or take-up of treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register in July 2015 for records with any mention of pharmacotherapy, including any type of NRT, bupropion, nortriptyline or varenicline.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials evaluating combinations of pharmacotherapy and behavioural support for smoking cessation, compared to a control receiving usual care or brief advice or less intensive behavioural support. We excluded trials recruiting only pregnant women, trials recruiting only adolescents, and trials with less than six months follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Search results were prescreened by one author and inclusion or exclusion of potentially relevant trials was agreed by two authors. Data was extracted by one author and checked by another.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. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-three studies with a total of more than 25,000 participants met the inclusion criteria. A large proportion of studies recruited people in healthcare settings or with specific health needs. Most studies provided NRT. Behavioural support was typically provided by specialists in cessation counselling, who offered between four and eight contact sessions. The planned maximum duration of contact was typically more than 30 minutes but less than 300 minutes. Overall, studies were at low or unclear risk of bias, and findings were not sensitive to the exclusion of any of the six studies rated at high risk of bias in one domain. One large study (the Lung Health Study) contributed heterogeneity due to a substantially larger treatment effect than seen in other studies (RR 3.88, 95% CI 3.35 to 4.50). Since this study used a particularly intensive intervention which included extended availability of nicotine gum, multiple group sessions and long term maintenance and recycling contacts, the results may not be comparable with the interventions used in other studies, and hence it was not pooled in other analyses. Based on the remaining 52 studies (19,488 participants) there was high quality evidence (using GRADE) for a benefit of combined pharmacotherapy and behavioural treatment compared to usual care, brief advice or less intensive behavioural support (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.68 to 1.98) with moderate statistical heterogeneity (I² = 36%).The pooled estimate for 43 trials that recruited participants in healthcare settings (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.18) was higher than for eight trials with community-based recruitment (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.76). Compared to the first version of the review, previous weak evidence of differences in other subgroup analyses has disappeared. We did not detect differences between subgroups defined by motivation to quit, treatment provider, number or duration of support sessions, or take-up of treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Interventions that combine pharmacotherapy and behavioural support increase smoking cessation success compared to a minimal intervention or usual care. Updating this review with an additional 12 studies (5,000 participants) did not materially change the effect estimate. Although trials differed in the details of their populations and interventions, we did not detect any factors that modified treatment effects apart from the recruitment setting. We did not find evidence from indirect comparisons that offering more intensive behavioural support was associated with larger treatment effects.

Non-responders in a quitline evaluation are more likely to be smokers - a drop-out and long-term follow-up study of the Swedish National Tobacco Quitline

Background

A previous randomized controlled trial (RCT) of the Swedish National Tobacco Quitline detected no significant differences in smoking cessation outcomes between proactive and reactive services at 12-month follow-up. However, the response rate was only 59 % and non-responders were over-represented in the proactive service. We performed a drop-out analysis to assess the smoking status of initial responders and non-responders.

Methods

At 29–48 months after the first call, a postal questionnaire with six questions was sent to 150 random clients from the RCT database, with equal numbers from the proactive and reactive services as well as responders and non-responders at 12-month follow-up. Clients who did not return the questionnaire were contacted by telephone. The outcome measures were point prevalence (PP) and 6-month continuous abstinence (CA), and their associations with response status at 12 months were assessed by logistic regression.

Results

The response rate was 74 % (111/150). Abstinence was significantly higher among initial responders than non-responders (PP 54 % vs. 32 %, p = .023 and CA 49 % vs. 21 %, p = .003). The odds ratios for initial responders vs. initial non-responders were, for PP = 2.5 (95 % CI 1.1–5.6, p = .024), and for CA = 3.7 (95 % CI 1.5–8.9, p = .004), after adjusting for proactive/reactive service.

Conclusions

Non-responders to a 12-month follow-up smoking cessation questionnaire in a quitline setting were more likely to be smokers 1.5–3 years later. We propose a conservative correction factor of 0.8 for self-reported abstinence in telephone-based cessation studies if the response rate is approximately 55–65 %.

Health-care interventions to promote and assist tobacco cessation: a review of efficacy, effectiveness and affordability for use in national guideline development

AIMS

This paper provides a concise review of the efficacy, effectiveness and affordability of health-care interventions to promote and assist tobacco cessation, in order to inform national guideline development and assist countries in planning their provision of tobacco cessation support.

METHODS

Cochrane reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of major health-care tobacco cessation interventions were used to derive efficacy estimates in terms of percentage-point increases relative to comparison conditions in 6-12-month continuous abstinence rates. This was combined with analysis and evidence from 'real world' studies to form a judgement on the probable effectiveness of each intervention in different settings. The affordability of each intervention was assessed for exemplar countries in each World Bank income category (low, lower middle, upper middle, high). Based on World Health Organization (WHO) criteria, an intervention was judged as affordable for a given income category if the estimated extra cost of saving a life-year was less than or equal to the per-capita gross domestic product for that category of country.

RESULTS

Brief advice from a health-care worker given opportunistically to smokers attending health-care services can promote smoking cessation, and is affordable for countries in all World Bank income categories (i.e. globally). Proactive telephone support, automated text messaging programmes and printed self-help materials can assist smokers wanting help with a quit attempt and are affordable globally. Multi-session, face-to-face behavioural support can increase quit success for cigarettes and smokeless tobacco and is affordable in middle- and high-income countries. Nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, nortriptyline, varenicline and cytisine can all aid quitting smoking when given with at least some behavioural support; of these, cytisine and nortriptyline are affordable globally.

CONCLUSIONS

Brief advice from a health-care worker, telephone helplines, automated text messaging, printed self-help materials, cytisine and nortriptyline are globally affordable health-care interventions to promote and assist smoking cessation. Evidence on smokeless tobacco cessation suggests that face-to-face behavioural support and varenicline can promote cessation.

Community-based navigators for tobacco cessation treatment: a proof-of-concept pilot study among low-income smokers

BACKGROUND

A majority of continuing smokers in the United States are socioeconomically disadvantaged (SED) adults, who are less likely than others to achieve and maintain abstinence despite comparable quit-attempt rates. A national research initiative seeks effective new strategies for increasing successful smoking cessation outcomes among SED populations. There is evidence that chronic and acute stressors may interfere with SED smokers who try to quit on their own. Patient navigators have been effectively used to improve adherence to chronic disease treatment. We designed and have pilot-tested an innovative, non-clinical community-based intervention--smoking cessation treatment navigators--to determine feasibility (acceptance, adherence, and uncontrolled results) for evaluation by randomized controlled trial (RCT).

METHODS

The intervention was developed for smokers among parents and other household members of inner city pre-school for low-income children. Smoking cessation treatment navigators were trained and deployed to help participants choose and adhere to evidence-based cessation treatment (EBCT). Navigators provided empathy, resource-linking, problem-solving, and motivational reinforcement. Measures included rates of study follow-up completion, EBCT utilization, navigation participation, perceived intervention quality, 7-day point abstinence and longest abstinence at three months. Both complete-case and intent-to-treat analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Eighty-five percent of study participants (n = 40) completed final data collection. More than half (53%) enrolled in a telephone quitline and nearly three-fourths (71%) initiated nicotine replacement therapy. Participants completed a mean 3.4 navigation sessions (mean 30 min duration) and gave the intervention very high quality and satisfaction ratings. Self-reported abstinence was comparable to rates for evidence-based cessation strategies (21% among study completers, 18% using intent-to-treat analysis; median 21 days abstinent among relapsers).

CONCLUSIONS

The pilot results suggest that smoking cessation treatment navigators are feasible to study in community settings and are well-accepted for increasing use of EBCT among low-income smokers. Randomized controlled trial for efficacy is warranted.

Do cravings predict smoking cessation in smokers calling a national quit line: secondary analyses from a randomised trial for the utility of 'urges to smoke' measures

Background

Single-item urges to smoke measures have been contemplated as important measures of nicotine dependence This study aimed to prospectively determine the relationships between measures of craving to smoke and smoking cessation, and compare their ability to predict cessation with the Heaviness of Smoking Index, an established measure of nicotine dependence.

Methods

We conducted a secondary analysis of data from the randomised controlled PORTSSS trial. Measures of nicotine dependence, ascertained before making a quit attempt, were the HSI, frequency of urges to smoke (FUTS) and strength of urges to smoke (SUTS). Self-reported abstinence at six months after quitting was the primary outcome measure. Multivariate logistic regression and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis were used to assess associations and abilities of the nicotine dependence measures to predict smoking cessation.

Results

Of 2,535 participants, 53.5% were female; the median (Interquartile range) age was 38 (28–50) years. Both FUTS and HSI were inversely associated with abstinence six months after quitting; for each point increase in HSI score, participants were 16% less likely to have stopped smoking (OR 0.84, 95% C.I 0.78-0.89, p < 0.0001). Compared to participants with the lowest possible FUTS scores, those with greater scores had generally lower odds of cessation (p across frequency of urges categories=0.0026). SUTS was not associated with smoking cessation. ROC analysis suggested the HSI and FUTS had similar predictive validity for cessation.

Conclusions

Higher FUTS and HSI scores were inversely associated with successful smoking cessation six months after quit attempts began and both had similar validity for predicting cessation.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13011-015-0011-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Mindfulness training for smokers via web-based video instruction with phone support: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Many smokers are unable to access effective behavioral smoking cessation therapies due to location, financial limitations, schedule, transportation issues or other reasons. We report results from a prospective observational study in which a promising novel behavioral intervention, Mindfulness Training for Smokers was provided via web-based video instruction with telephone-based counseling support.

METHODS

Data were collected on 26 low socioeconomic status smokers. Participants were asked to watch eight video-based classes describing mindfulness skills and how to use these skills to overcome various core challenges in tobacco dependence. Participants received eight weekly phone calls from a smoking cessation coach who provided general support and answered questions about the videos. On the quit day, participants received two weeks of nicotine patches.

RESULTS

Participants were a mean of 40.5 years of age, smoked 16.31 cigarettes per day for 21.88 years, with a mean of 6.81 prior failed quit attempts. Participants completed a mean of 5.55 of 8 online video classes with a mean of 23.33 minutes per login, completed a mean of 3.19 of 8 phone coach calls, and reported a mean meditation practice time of 12.17 minutes per day. Smoking abstinence was defined as self-reported abstinence on a smoking calendar with biochemical confirmation via carbon monoxide breath-test under 7 parts per million. Intent-to-treat analysis demonstrated 7-day point prevalence smoking abstinence at 4 and 6-months post-quit of 23.1% and 15.4% respectively. Participants showed a significant pre- to post-intervention increase in mindfulness as measured by the Five-Factor Mindfulness Questionnaire, and a significant pre- to post-intervention decrease in the Anxiety Sub-scale of the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that Mindfulness Training for Smokers can be provided via web-based video instruction with phone support and yield reasonable participant engagement on intervention practices and that intervention efficacy and mechanism of effect deserve further study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02164656 , Registration Date June 13, 2014.

Pilot study to evaluate a tailored text message intervention for pregnant smokers (MiQuit): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Smoking in pregnancy is a public health problem. Self-help smoking cessation support can help pregnant women to stop smoking, but the effects of delivering this kind of support via SMS text message are not known. A previous randomised controlled trial (RCT) demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of providing such support to pregnant smokers using an automated, tailored text message intervention called MiQuit. This larger RCT will estimate key parameters for and will test the feasibility of delivering a major trial run within the United Kingdom National Health Service settings aimed at providing definitive evidence on the utility of MiQuit for helping pregnant smokers to stop.

METHODS/DESIGN

This will be a multi-centre, parallel group RCT. Participants are being identified in 16 English antenatal care settings and must be >16 years old, pregnant, <25 weeks gestation, smoke >1 daily cigarette, have smoked >5 daily cigarettes before pregnancy, and able to understand texts in English. After consenting and the collection of baseline data, participants are randomised to control or intervention groups in a 1:1 ratio; randomisation is stratified by trial site and gestation and employs computer-generated pseudo-random code using random permuted blocks of randomly varying size, and held on a secure server. All participants receive a National Health Service (NHS) leaflet aimed at helping them to stop smoking. Intervention group women also receive the 12-week MiQuit programme of tailored, supportive, interactive text message, self-help cessation support. Women are followed up by telephone 4 weeks after randomisation and at 36 weeks gestation. The study aims to recruit 400 women, and with this sample we will be able to estimate trial centres' recruitment rates to within +/-1% (margin of error = half width of 95% confidence interval); individual trial groups' ascertainment of rates for smoking outcomes between 4 weeks after randomisation until approximately 36 weeks gestation to within +/-4%, and across both groups, the combined cessation rate at 36 weeks +/-3%.

DISCUSSION

Pilot trial completion will provide data to facilitate planning for a definitive trial investigating whether MiQuit works for smoking cessation in pregnancy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02043509 Registered 14 January 2014.

Predictors of cessation treatment outcome and treatment moderators among smoking parents receiving quitline counselling or self-help material

OBJECTIVE

Several cessation treatments effectively enhance cessation, but it is not always clear which treatment may be most suitable for a particular client. We examined predictors of treatment outcome and treatment moderators among smoking parents in the Netherlands.

METHOD

We conducted secondary analyses of a randomized controlled trial in which smoking parents received either quitline counselling (n=256) or a self-help brochure (n=256). Data collection was completed in October 2012. Endpoints were 7-day point prevalence abstinence and 6-month prolonged abstinence at 12-month follow-up. Potential predictors and moderators included socio-demographic characteristics, smoking-related variables, and child-related variables.

RESULTS

Male gender, higher employment status, lower daily cigarette consumption, higher levels of confidence in quitting, presence of a child with a chronic respiratory illness, and wanting to quit for the health of one's child predicted abstinence at 12months. Significant treatment moderators were intention to quit and educational level. Quitline counselling was effective regardless of intention to quit and educational level, but self-help material was less effective among less motivated and lower educated parents.

CONCLUSION

Certain subgroups of smokers, such as parents who are concerned about the health of their child, are particularly receptive to cessation support. Individual characteristics should be considered in treatment selections.

Effectiveness of proactive and reactive services at the Swedish National Tobacco Quitline in a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

The Swedish National Tobacco Quitline (SNTQ), which has both a proactive and a reactive service, has successfully provided tobacco cessation support since 1998. As there is a demand for an increase in national cessation support, and because the quitline works under funding constraints, it is crucial to identify the most clinically effective and cost-effective service. A randomized controlled trial was performed to compare the effectiveness of the high-intensity proactive service with the low-intensity reactive service at the SNTQ.

METHODS

Those who called the SNTQ for smoking or tobacco cessation from February 2009 to September 2010 were randomized to proactive service (even dates) and reactive service (odd dates). Data were collected through postal questionnaires at baseline and after 12 months. Those who replied to the baseline questionnaire constituted the study base. Outcome measures were self-reported point prevalence and 6-month continuous abstinence at the 12-month follow-up. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and responder-only analyses were performed.

RESULTS

The study base consisted of 586 persons, and 59% completed the 12-month follow-up. Neither ITT- nor responder-only analyses showed any differences in outcome between proactive and reactive service. Point prevalence was 27% and continuous abstinence was 21% in analyses treating non-responders as smokers, and 47% and 35%, respectively, in responder-only analyses.

CONCLUSION

Reactive service may be used as the standard procedure to optimize resource utilization at the SNTQ. However, further research is needed to assess effectiveness in different subgroups of clients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02085616.

The freeze on mass media campaigns in England: a natural experiment of the impact of tobacco control campaigns on quitting behaviour

AIMS

To measure the impact of the suspension of tobacco control mass media campaigns in England in April 2010 on measures of smoking cessation behaviour.

DESIGN

Interrupted time series design using routinely collected population-level data. Analysis of use of a range of types of smoking cessation support using segmented negative binomial regression.

SETTING

England.

MEASUREMENTS

Use of non-intensive support: monthly calls to the National Health Service (NHS) quitline (April 2005-September 2011), text requests for quit support packs (December 2007-10) and web hits on the national smoking cessation website (January 2009-March 2011). Use of intensive cessation support: quarterly data on the number of people setting a quit date and 4-week quitters at the NHS Stop Smoking Services (SSS) (quarter 1, 2001 and quarter 3, 2011).

FINDINGS

During the suspension of tobacco control mass media spending, literature requests fell by 98% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 96-99], and quitline calls and web hits fell by 65% (95% CI = 43-79) and 34% (95% CI: 11-50), respectively. The number of people setting a quit date and 4-week quitters at the SSS increased throughout the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

The suspension of tobacco control mass media campaigns in England in 2012 appeared to markedly reduce the use of smoking cessation literature, quitline calls and hits on the national smoking cessation website, but did not affect attendance at the Stop Smoking Services. Within a comprehensive tobacco control programme, mass media campaigns can play an important role in maximizing quitting activity.

Psychosocial interventions for supporting women to stop smoking in pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Tobacco smoking in pregnancy remains one of the few preventable factors associated with complications in pregnancy, stillbirth, low birthweight and preterm birth and has serious long-term implications for women and babies. Smoking in pregnancy is decreasing in high-income countries, but is strongly associated with poverty and increasing in low- to middle-income countries.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of smoking cessation interventions during pregnancy on smoking behaviour and perinatal health outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

In this fifth update, we searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (1 March 2013), checked reference lists of retrieved studies and contacted trial authors to locate additional unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, cluster-randomised trials, randomised cross-over trials, and quasi-randomised controlled trials (with allocation by maternal birth date or hospital record number) of psychosocial smoking cessation interventions during pregnancy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and trial quality, and extracted data. Direct comparisons were conducted in RevMan, and subgroup analyses and sensitivity analysis were conducted in SPSS.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighty-six trials were included in this updated review, with 77 trials (involving over 29,000 women) providing data on smoking abstinence in late pregnancy.In separate comparisons, counselling interventions demonstrated a significant effect compared with usual care (27 studies; average risk ratio (RR) 1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.75), and a borderline effect compared with less intensive interventions (16 studies; average RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.82). However, a significant effect was only seen in subsets where counselling was provided in conjunction with other strategies. It was unclear whether any type of counselling strategy is more effective than others (one study; RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.53). In studies comparing counselling and usual care (the largest comparison), it was unclear whether interventions prevented smoking relapse among women who had stopped smoking spontaneously in early pregnancy (eight studies; average RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.21). However, a clear effect was seen in smoking abstinence at zero to five months postpartum (10 studies; average RR 1.76, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.95), a borderline effect at six to 11 months (six studies; average RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.77), and a significant effect at 12 to 17 months (two studies, average RR 2.20, 95% CI 1.23 to 3.96), but not in the longer term. In other comparisons, the effect was not significantly different from the null effect for most secondary outcomes, but sample sizes were small.Incentive-based interventions had the largest effect size compared with a less intensive intervention (one study; RR 3.64, 95% CI 1.84 to 7.23) and an alternative intervention (one study; RR 4.05, 95% CI 1.48 to 11.11).Feedback interventions demonstrated a significant effect only when compared with usual care and provided in conjunction with other strategies, such as counselling (two studies; average RR 4.39, 95% CI 1.89 to 10.21), but the effect was unclear when compared with a less intensive intervention (two studies; average RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.45 to 3.12).The effect of health education was unclear when compared with usual care (three studies; average RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.64 to 3.59) or less intensive interventions (two studies; average RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.31).Social support interventions appeared effective when provided by peers (five studies; average RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.19), but the effect was unclear in a single trial of support provided by partners.The effects were mixed where the smoking interventions were provided as part of broader interventions to improve maternal health, rather than targeted smoking cessation interventions.Subgroup analyses on primary outcome for all studies showed the intensity of interventions and comparisons has increased over time, with higher intensity interventions more likely to have higher intensity comparisons. While there was no significant difference, trials where the comparison group received usual care had the largest pooled effect size (37 studies; average RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.44), with lower effect sizes when the comparison group received less intensive interventions (30 studies; average RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.31), or alternative interventions (two studies; average RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.53). More recent studies included in this update had a lower effect size (20 studies; average RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.59), I(2)= 3%, compared to those in the previous version of the review (50 studies; average RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.73). There were similar effect sizes in trials with biochemically validated smoking abstinence (49 studies; average RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.67) and those with self-reported abstinence (20 studies; average RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.87). There was no significant difference between trials implemented by researchers (efficacy studies), and those implemented by routine pregnancy staff (effectiveness studies), however the effect was unclear in three dissemination trials of counselling interventions where the focus on the intervention was at an organisational level (average RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.37 to 2.50). The pooled effects were similar in interventions provided for women with predominantly low socio-economic status (44 studies; average RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.66), compared to other women (26 studies; average RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.79); though the effect was unclear in interventions among women from ethnic minority groups (five studies; average RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.40) and aboriginal women (two studies; average RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.06 to 2.67). Importantly, pooled results demonstrated that women who received psychosocial interventions had an 18% reduction in preterm births (14 studies; average RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.96), and infants born with low birthweight (14 studies; average RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.94). There did not appear to be any adverse effects from the psychosocial interventions, and three studies measured an improvement in women's psychological wellbeing.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Psychosocial interventions to support women to stop smoking in pregnancy can increase the proportion of women who stop smoking in late pregnancy, and reduce low birthweight and preterm births.

Telephone counselling for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Telephone services can provide information and support for smokers. Counselling may be provided proactively or offered reactively to callers to smoking cessation helplines.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of proactive and reactive telephone support via helplines and in other settings to help smokers quit.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register for studies of telephone counselling, using search terms including 'hotlines' or 'quitline' or 'helpline'. Date of the most recent search: May 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

randomized or quasi-randomised controlled trials in which proactive or reactive telephone counselling to assist smoking cessation was offered to smokers or recent quitters.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One author identified and data extracted trials, and a second author checked them. The main outcome measure was the risk ratio for abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up. We selected the strictest measure of abstinence, using biochemically validated rates where available. We considered participants lost to follow-up to be continuing smokers. Where trials had more than one arm with a less intensive intervention we used only the most similar intervention without the telephone component as the control group in the primary analysis. We assessed statistical heterogeneity amongst subgroups of clinically comparable studies using the I² statistic. We considered trials recruiting callers to quitlines separately from studies recruiting in other settings. Where appropriate, we pooled studies using a fixed-effect model. We used a meta-regression to investigate the effect of differences in planned number of calls, selection for motivation, and the nature of the control condition (self help only, minimal intervention, pharmacotherapy) in the group of studies recruiting in non-quitline settings.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-seven trials met the inclusion criteria. Some trials were judged to be at risk of bias in some domains but overall we did not judge the results to be at high risk of bias. Among smokers who contacted helplines, quit rates were higher for groups randomized to receive multiple sessions of proactive counselling (nine studies, > 24,000 participants, risk ratio (RR) for cessation at longest follow-up 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26 to 1.50). There was mixed evidence about whether increasing the number of calls altered quit rates but most trials used more than two calls. Three studies comparing different counselling approaches during a single quitline contact did not detect significant differences. Of three studies that tested the provision of access to a hotline two detected a significant benefit and one did not.Telephone counselling not initiated by calls to helplines also increased quitting (51 studies, > 30,000 participants, RR 1.27; 95% CI 1.20 to 1.36). In a meta-regression controlling for other factors the effect was estimated to be slightly larger if more calls were offered, and in trials that specifically recruited smokers motivated to try to quit. The relative extra benefit of counselling was smaller when it was provided in addition to pharmacotherapy (usually nicotine replacement therapy) than when the control group only received self-help material or a brief intervention.A further eight studies were too diverse to contribute to meta-analyses and are discussed separately. Two compared different intensities of counselling, both of which detected a dose response; one of these detected a benefit of multiple counselling sessions over a single call for people prescribed bupropion. The others tested a variety of interventions largely involving offering telephone counselling as part of a referral or systems change and none detected evidence of effect.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Proactive telephone counselling aids smokers who seek help from quitlines. Telephone quitlines provide an important route of access to support for smokers, and call-back counselling enhances their usefulness. There is limited evidence about the optimal number of calls. Proactive telephone counselling also helps people who receive it in other settings. There is some evidence of a dose response; one or two brief calls are less likely to provide a measurable benefit. Three or more calls increase the chances of quitting compared to a minimal intervention such as providing standard self-help materials, or brief advice, or compared to pharmacotherapy alone.

Enhancing tobacco quitline effectiveness: identifying a superior pharmacotherapy adjuvant

INTRODUCTION

Telephone tobacco quitlines are effective and are widely used, with more than 500,000 U.S. callers in 2010. This study investigated the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of 3 different quitline enhancements: combination nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), longer duration of NRT, and counseling to increase NRT adherence.

METHODS

In this study, 987 quitline callers were randomized to a combination of quitline treatments in a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial design: NRT duration (2 vs. 6 weeks), NRT type (nicotine patch only vs. patch plus nicotine gum), and standard 4-call counseling (SC) versus SC plus medication adherence counseling (MAC). The primary outcome was 7-day point-prevalence abstinence (PPA) at 6 months postquit in intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses.

RESULTS

Combination NRT for 6 weeks yielded the highest 6-month PPA rate (51.6%) compared with 2 weeks of nicotine patch (38.4%), odds ratios [OR] = 1.71 (95% confidence interval [CI]:1.20-2.45). A similar result was found for 2 weeks of combination NRT (48.2%), OR = 1.49 (95% CI: 1.04-2.14) but not for 6 weeks of nicotine patch alone (46.2%), OR = 1.38 (95% CI: 0.96-1.97). The MAC intervention effect was nonsignificant. Cost analyses showed that the 2-week combination NRT group had the lowest cost per quit ($442 vs. $464 for 2-week patch only, $505 for 6-week patch only, and $675 for 6-week combination NRT).

CONCLUSIONS

Combination NRT for 2 or 6 weeks increased 6-month abstinence rates by 10% and 13%, respectively, over rates produced by 2 weeks of nicotine patch when offered with quitline counseling. A 10% improvement would potentially yield an additional 50,000 quitters annually, assuming 500,000 callers to U.S. quitlines per year.

Interventions for tobacco smoking

Around 19% of US adults smoke cigarettes, and smoking remains the leading avoidable cause of death in this country. Without treatment only ~5% of smokers who try to quit achieve long-term abstinence, but evidence-based cessation treatment increases this figure to 10% to 30%. The process of smoking cessation comprises different pragmatically defined phases, and these can help guide smoking treatment development and evaluation. This review evaluates the effectiveness of smoking interventions for smokers who are unwilling to make a quit attempt (motivation phase), who are willing to make a quit attempt (cessation phase), who have recently quit (maintenance phase), and who have recently relapsed (relapse recovery phase). Multiple effective treatments exist for some phases (cessation), but not others (relapse recovery). A chronic care approach to treating smoking requires effective interventions for every phase, especially interventions that exert complementary effects both within and across phases and that can be disseminated broadly and cost-effectively.

Nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

The aim of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is to temporarily replace much of the nicotine from cigarettes to reduce motivation to smoke and nicotine withdrawal symptoms, thus easing the transition from cigarette smoking to complete abstinence.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this review were: To determine the effect of NRT compared to placebo in aiding smoking cessation, and to consider whether there is a difference in effect for the different forms of NRT (chewing gum, transdermal patches, oral and nasal sprays, inhalers and tablets/lozenges) in achieving abstinence from cigarettes. To determine whether the effect is influenced by the dosage, form and timing of use of NRT; the intensity of additional advice and support offered to the smoker; or the clinical setting in which the smoker is recruited and treated. To determine whether combinations of NRT are more likely to lead to successful quitting than one type alone. To determine whether NRT is more or less likely to lead to successful quitting compared to other pharmacotherapies.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register for papers mentioning 'NRT' or any type of nicotine replacement therapy in the title, abstract or keywords. Date of most recent search July 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials in which NRT was compared to placebo or to no treatment, or where different doses of NRT were compared. We excluded trials which did not report cessation rates, and those with follow-up of less than six months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data in duplicate on the type of participants, the dose, duration and form of nicotine therapy, the outcome measures, method of randomization, and completeness of follow-up. 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. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 150 trials; 117 with over 50,000 participants contributed to the primary comparison between any type of NRT and a placebo or non-NRT control group. The risk ratio (RR) of abstinence for any form of NRT relative to control was 1.60 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.53 to 1.68). The pooled RRs for each type were 1.49 (95% CI 1.40 to 1.60, 55 trials) for nicotine gum; 1.64 (95% CI 1.52 to 1.78, 43 trials) for nicotine patch; 1.95 (95% CI 1.61 to 2.36, 6 trials) for oral tablets/lozenges; 1.90 (95% CI 1.36 to 2.67, 4 trials) for nicotine inhaler; and 2.02 (95% CI 1.49 to 2.73, 4 trials) for nicotine nasal spray. One trial of oral spray had an RR of 2.48 (95% CI 1.24 to 4.94). The effects were largely independent of the duration of therapy, the intensity of additional support provided or the setting in which the NRT was offered. The effect was similar in a small group of studies that aimed to assess use of NRT obtained without a prescription. In highly dependent smokers there was a significant benefit of 4 mg gum compared with 2 mg gum, but weaker evidence of a benefit from higher doses of patch. There was evidence that combining a nicotine patch with a rapid delivery form of NRT was more effective than a single type of NRT (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.51, 9 trials). The RR for NRT used for a short period prior to the quit date was 1.18 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.40, 8 trials), just missing statistical significance, though the efficacy increased when we pooled only patch trials and when we removed one trial in which confounding was likely. Five studies directly compared NRT to a non-nicotine pharmacotherapy, bupropion; there was no evidence of a difference in efficacy (RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.87 to 1.18). A combination of NRT and bupropion was more effective than bupropion alone (RR 1.24; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.45, 4 trials). Adverse effects from using NRT are related to the type of product, and include skin irritation from patches and irritation to the inside of the mouth from gum and tablets. There is no evidence that NRT increases the risk of heart attacks.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

All of the commercially available forms of NRT (gum, transdermal patch, nasal spray, inhaler and sublingual tablets/lozenges) can help people who make a quit attempt to increase their chances of successfully stopping smoking. NRTs increase the rate of quitting by 50 to 70%, regardless of setting. The effectiveness of NRT appears to be largely independent of the intensity of additional support provided to the individual. Provision of more intense levels of support, although beneficial in facilitating the likelihood of quitting, is not essential to the success of NRT.

Combined pharmacotherapy and behavioural interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Both behavioural support (including brief advice and counselling) and pharmacotherapies (including nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), varenicline and bupropion) are effective in helping people to stop smoking. Combining both treatment approaches is recommended where possible, but the size of the treatment effect with different combinations and in different settings and populations is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of combining behavioural support and medication to aid smoking cessation, compared to a minimal intervention or usual care, and to identify whether there are different effects depending on characteristics of the treatment setting, intervention, population treated, or take-up of treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register in July 2012 for records with any mention of pharmacotherapy, including any type of NRT, bupropion, nortriptyline or varenicline.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials evaluating combinations of pharmacotherapy and behavioural support for smoking cessation, compared to a control receiving usual care or brief advice or less intensive behavioural support. We excluded trials recruiting only pregnant women, trials recruiting only adolescents, and trials with less than six months follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Search results were prescreened by one author and inclusion or exclusion of potentially relevant trials was agreed by both authors. Data was extracted by one author and checked by the other.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. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-one studies with a total of more than 20,000 participants met the inclusion criteria. A large proportion of studies recruited people in healthcare settings or with specific health needs. Most studies provided NRT. Behavioural support was typically provided by specialists in cessation counselling, who offered between four and eight contact sessions. The planned maximum duration of contact was typically more than 30 minutes but less than 300 minutes. Overall, studies were at low or unclear risk of bias, and findings were not sensitive to the exclusion of any of the three studies rated at high risk of bias in one domain. One large study (the Lung Health Study) contributed heterogeneity due to a substantially larger treatment effect than seen in other studies (RR 3.88, 95% CI 3.35 to 4.50). Since this study used a particularly intensive intervention which included extended availability of nicotine gum, multiple group sessions and long term maintenance and recycling contacts, the results may not be comparable with the interventions used in other studies, and hence it was not pooled in other analyses. Based on the remaining 40 studies (15,021 participants) there was good evidence for a benefit of combination pharmacotherapy and behavioural treatment compared to usual care or brief advice or less intensive behavioural support (RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.66 to 2.00) with moderate statistical heterogeneity (I² = 40%). The pooled estimate for 31 trials that recruited participants in healthcare settings (RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.81 to 2.34) was higher than for eight trials with community-based recruitment (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.76). Pooled estimates were lower in a subgroup of trials where the behavioural intervention was provided by specialist counsellors versus trials where counselling was linked to usual care (specialist: RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.55 to 1.93, 28 trials; usual provider: RR 2.41, 95% CI 1.91 to 3.02, 8 trials) but this was largely attributable to the small effect size in two trials using specialist counsellors where the take-up of the planned intervention was low, and one usual provider trial with alarge effect. There was little indirect evidence that the relative effect of an intervention differed according to whether participants in a trial were required to be motivated to make a quit attempt or not. There was only weak evidence that studies offering more sessions had larger effects and there was not clear evidence that increasing the duration of contact increased the effect, but there was more evidence of a dose-response relationship when analyses were limited to trials where the take-up of treatment was high.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Interventions that combine pharmacotherapy and behavioural support increase smoking cessation success compared to a minimal intervention or usual care. Further trials would be unlikely to change this conclusion. We did not find strong evidence from indirect comparisons that offering more intensive behavioural support was associated with larger treatment effects but this could be because intensive interventions are less likely to be delivered in full.