Effectiveness of a motivational intervention based on spirometry results to achieve smoking cessation in primary healthcare patients: randomised, parallel, controlled multicentre study

Long-Term Consequences of Spirometry During Military Routine Medical Examinations on Smoking Cessation Compared to Minimal Advice

BACKGROUND

Smoking kills 8 million people a year worldwide. It is the most prevalent cause of death in France by cancer, cardiovascular, or respiratory diseases. Minimal advice consists in asking patients who smoke if they are interested in quitting. It is effective in reducing smoking. The French High Health Authority recommends its systematic use with patients, whatever their reason for seeking treatment. The beneficial effect of spirometry on smoking cessation is controversial. The objective of our study was to measure the consequences of spirometry associated with minimal advice, compared with only minimal advice in soldiers seen during a routine medical examination.

METHODS

Our prospective, longitudinal, open, multicenter, controlled, randomized study was conducted among French military smokers presenting for an occupational medicine visit. Each participant received, depending on their group (intervention or control), either minimal advice associated with an evaluation of lung function by mini-spirometer, or only minimal advice. Follow-up visits were performed at 6 and 12 months. The primary objective was self-reported tobacco use cessation at 6 months.

RESULTS

A total of 267 participants (126 in the intervention group and 141 for the control arm) were included in 10 centers between June 2019 and June 2020. The response rate was 75.6% at 6 months. The cessation rates were 17% and 18% in the intervention and control groups, respectively, with no significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.9). The cessation rate in the general population was 13% at 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Spirometry does not seem to influence smoke cessation on a military population at 6 months. The overall cessation rate in our study was well in excess of the 3-6% expected from only providing minimal which is underused in general practice and should be encouraged.

Effectiveness of the spirometry-based motivational intervention to quit smoking: RESET randomised trial

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of providing feedback on spirometry results for smoking cessation remains inconclusive according to the current evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of a motivational intervention based on spirometry results in achieving prolonged smoking abstinence (12 months post-intervention).

DESIGN AND SETTING

A randomised, controlled, observer-blinded, multicentre clinical trial was conducted (from January 2012 to December 2015) in 20 primary healthcare centres in the Tarragona province, Spain.

METHODS

Participants, active smokers aged 35-70 without known respiratory disease, were recruited from primary healthcare centres by family doctors and nurses. They were randomly assigned to either the intervention group (IG = 308) or the control group (CG = 306). Both groups received brief smoking cessation counselling. Additionally, the IG underwent spirometry and received detailed information about the results, including lung age. The primary outcome was prolonged abstinence, defined as lasting at least 12 months and validated through cotinine measurement in urine.

RESULTS

The prolonged abstinence rate was 7.8% in the IG, compared to 2.6% in the CG (p = 0.004). At 12 months, in the multivariate analysis, the intervention was identified as an independent factor for smoking cessation (OR 2.8; 95%CI 1.2 to 7.7), a trend maintained throughout the follow-up (HR 2.74; 95%CI 1.13 to 6.62). Moreover, according to the Prochaska and DiClemente model, the preparation or action phase to quit was also associated with smoking cessation (HR 2.55, 95%CI 1.07 to 6.09).

CONCLUSION

A primary care-delivered intervention involving brief counselling and detailed spirometry information proves effective in increasing abstinence rates among active smokers without known respiratory disease. Additionally, smoking cessation is also influenced by the individual's stage of change.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicatTrials.gov NCT02153047.

Spirometry and Smoking Cessation in Primary Care: The ESPIROTAB STUDY, A Randomized Clinical Trial

This study aims to evaluate the effect of regularly reporting spirometry results during smoking cessation counseling from a primary care physician on the quit rate in adult smokers.

METHODS

A randomized, two-arm intervention study was conducted at six primary care centers. A total of 350 smokers, ≥18 years of age, who consulted their primary care physician, participated in the study. At the selection visit, smokers who gave their consent to participate underwent spirometry. Subsequently, an appointment (visit 0) was scheduled to complete a nicotine dependence test, a smoking cessation motivation questionnaire, and a sociodemographic questionnaire. Participants were also offered brief, structured advice on how to quit smoking, as well as detailed information on spirometry results. Patients were then randomized and scheduled for follow-up visits at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. Both arms received brief, structured advice and detailed information on spirometry results at visit 0. At consecutive follow-up visits, the control group only received brief, structured smoking cessation advice, while the intervention group also received information on initial spirometry results at visits 3 and 6, and a spirometry retest at visit 12. Exhaled carbon monoxide testing was used to check smoking cessation.

RESULTS

The study included 350 smokers; 179 were assigned to the control group and 171 to the intervention group. Smoking cessation at one year was 24.0% in the intervention group compared to 16.2% in the control group. At two years, it was 25.2% in the intervention group and 18.4% in the control group. Overall, the adjusted odds of quitting smoking in the intervention group were 42% higher than in the control group (p = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

Regular and detailed feedback of spirometry results with smokers increases smoking cessation. Specifically, the likelihood of quitting smoking in the intervention group is 1.42 times higher than in the control group (p = 0.018).

Attitudes towards the integration of smoking cessation into lung cancer screening in the United Kingdom: A qualitative study of individuals eligible to attend

INTRODUCTION

There is limited research exploring how smoking cessation treatment should be implemented into lung cancer screening in the United Kingdom. This study aimed to understand attitudes and preferences regarding the integration of smoking cessation support within lung cancer screening from the perspective of those eligible.

METHODS

Thirty-one lung cancer screening eligible individuals aged 55-80 years with current or former smoking histories were recruited using community outreach and social media. Two focus groups (three participants each) and 25 individual telephone interviews were conducted. Data were analysed using the framework approach to thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Three themes were generated: (1) bringing lung cancer closer to home, where screening was viewed as providing an opportunity to motivate smoking cessation, depending on perceived personal risk and screening result; (2) a sensitive approach to cessation with the uptake of cessation support considered to be largely dependent on screening practitioners' communication style and expectations of stigma and (3) creating an equitable service that focuses on ease of access as a key determinant of uptake, where integrating cessation within the screening appointment may sustain increased quit motivation and prevent loss to follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The integration of smoking cessation into lung cancer screening was viewed positively by those eligible to attend. Screening appointments providing personalized lung health information may increase cessation motivation. Services should proactively support participants with possible fatalistic views regarding risk and decreased cessation motivation upon receiving a good screening result. To increase engagement in cessation, services need to be person-centred.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This study has included patient and public involvement throughout, including input regarding study design, research materials, recruitment strategies and research summaries.

Pharmacist Provided Spirometry Services: A Scoping Review

PURPOSE

Despite international guidelines' recommendations, spirometry is underutilized in the diagnosis and management of asthma and COPD. Spirometry may be an opportunity for trained pharmacists to meet the needs of patients with suspected or diagnosed lung conditions. The aim of this scoping review is to describe the literature including pharmacist provided spirometry services, specifically to identify: 1) the models of pharmacist provided spirometry services, and additional services commonly offered alongside spirometry, 2) pharmacist training and capability to obtain quality results, and (3) pharmacist, physician, and patient perspectives.

METHODS

In September 2020, a comprehensive literature search in PubMed and EMBASE was conducted to identify all relevant literature on the topic of pharmacist provided spirometry services using the search term: "pharmacist or pharmacy" and "spirometry or pulmonary function test or lung function test." Literature was screened using inclusion/exclusion criteria and selected articles were charted and analyzed using the themes above.

RESULTS

A total of 27 records were included. The scoping review found that pharmacist provided spirometry has been conducted around the world in community pharmacies and clinic settings. Community pharmacists may increase access to spirometry screening; the lack of communication with primary care providers and remuneration are barriers that need to be overcome to optimize the utility of the service. Clinic-based services are interprofessional and collaborative, allowing a patient to receive the test, results, diagnosis, and medication changes in one visit. Following comprehensive training, pharmacists felt confident in their ability to perform spirometry and met quality standards at acceptable rates.

CONCLUSION

Spirometry is an opportunity for pharmacists to improve evidence-based practice for screening and diagnosing lung conditions along with providing comprehensive services to complement testing. Data around provider and patient perspectives is limited and should be further investigated to determine if providers and patients would value and collaborate with pharmacists providing spirometry services.