A 'Cut-Down-To-Stop' intervention for smokers who find it hard to quit: a qualitative evaluation

The Whole Package: A Multi-Component Smoking Cessation Intervention for Adults With Serious Mental Illness: A Qualitative Study

Introduction: Smoking is one of the most important modifiable risk factors for excess morbidity and mortality in adults with serious mental illness (SMI). Many smokers with SMI are reportedly motivated to quit, however success rates among these smokers remain low and evidence-based treatment targeting this vulnerable group is limited. The purpose of this paper is to report the results of a qualitative inquiry of participants. Methods: We conducted a pilot two-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) targeting adults with SMI. Our smoking cessation intervention included: (a) group-based physical activity (PA) game intervention (50 minutes, 3X/week for 12 weeks), (b) pharmacotherapy (bupropion or nicotine replacement therapy), and (c) smoking cessation counseling. Upon completion of the program, participants in the active and control groups completed a qualitative semi-structured interview in order to determine how the program impacted their smoking cessation. Grounded Theory methodology guided our data collection and analysis. Results: Twenty participants completed an interview. Participants described how the "whole package" of the 3 components of the intervention were critical to their smoking cessation process. The group-based program provided the structure, resources, and encouragement needed to start the process of quitting. Conclusion: Adults with SMI need support, resources, and engaging activities as they begin quitting and practice the skills needed to quit.

An overview of systematic reviews on predictors of smoking cessation among young people

Understanding the factors that influence smoking cessation among young people is crucial for planning targeted cessation approaches. The objective of this review was to comprehensively summarize evidence for predictors of different smoking cessation related behaviors among young people from currently available systematic reviews. We searched six databases and reference lists of the included articles for studies published up to October 20, 2023. All systematic reviews summarizing predictors of intention to quit smoking, quit attempts, or smoking abstinence among people aged 10-35 years were included. We excluded reviews on effectiveness of smoking cessation intervention; smoking prevention and other smoking behaviors; cessation of other tobacco products use, dual use, and polysubstance use. We categorized the identified predictors into 5 different categories for 3 overlapping age groups. JBI critical appraisal tool and GRADE-CERqual approach were used for quality and certainty assessment respectively. A total of 11 systematic reviews were included in this study; all summarized predictors of smoking abstinence/quit attempts and two also identified predictors of intention to quit smoking. Seven reviews had satisfactory critical appraisal score and there was minimal overlapping between the reviews. We found 4 'possible' predictors of intention to quit smoking and 119 predictors of smoking abstinence/quit attempts. Most of these 119 predictors were applicable for ~10-29 years age group. We had moderate confidence on the 'probable', 'possible', 'insufficient evidence', and 'inconsistent direction' predictors and low confidence on the 'probably unrelated' factors. The 'probable' predictors include a wide variety of socio-demographic factors, nicotine dependence, mental health, attitudes, behavioral and psychological factors, peer and family related factors, and jurisdictional policies. These predictors can guide improvement of existing smoking cessation interventions or planning of new targeted intervention programs. Other predictors as well as predictors of intention to quit smoking need to be further investigated among adolescents and young adults separately.

Attitudes & behaviors toward the management of tobacco smoking patients: qualitative study with French primary care physicians

Background

Smoking cessation is a major public health issue. In France, primary care physicians (PCP) are the first contact points for tobacco management. The objective of this study was to understand how PCPs are involved in the management of smoking cessation: ownership, commitment, barriers.

Methods

A qualitative study was conducted using group and individual semi-structured techniques with PCPs. A thematic analysis of verbatim transcripts was performed to identify concepts and sub-concepts of interest. Saturation was evaluated retrospectively to ensure adequate sample size.

Results

A sample of 35 PCPs were interviewed, 31 in four focus groups and four in individual interviews. PCPs discussed their roles in the management of tobacco smoking cessation, including the different strategies they are using (e.g., Minimal Intervention Strategy, Motivational Interviewing), the multiple barriers encountered (e.g., lack of time, patients’ resistance to medical advice), the support resources and the treatment and intervention they prescribed (e.g. nicotine replacement therapy, supporting therapist).

Conclusions

This study provides a better understanding of the beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors of PCPs in managing smoking cessation. Guiding and encouraging patients toward smoking cessation remains a major objective of PCPs. While PCPs reported that progress has been made in recent years in terms of tools, technology and general awareness, they still face major barriers, some of which could be overcome by appropriate training.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12875-021-01620-8.

Quality of smoking cessation advice in guidelines of tobacco-related diseases: An updated systematic review

Tobacco smoking is a major risk factor for a wide range of diseases, and smoking cessation significantly reduces these risks. Clinical guidelines for diseases associated with smoking should therefore include guidance on smoking cessation. This review updated evidence on the proportion of clinical guidelines that do so. We conducted a systematic review investigating clinical guidelines and recommendations developed by UK national or European transnational medical specialty associations and societies between January 2014 and October 2019 on 16 diseases to be at least twice as common among smokers than non-smokers. Outcomes of interest were the reporting of smoking as a risk factor, and the inclusion either of smoking cessation advice or referral to other cessation guidance. We compared our findings with an earlier review of guidelines published between 2000 and 2013. We identified 159 clinical guidelines/recommendations. Over half (51%) made no mention of smoking, while 43% reported smoking as a risk factor for the development of the disease, 31% recommended smoking cessation and 19% provided detailed information on how to deliver smoking cessation support. These proportions were similar to those in our earlier review. Smoking cessation continues to be neglected in clinical management guidance for diseases caused by smoking.

Strategies for Referring Cancer Patients in a Smoking Cessation Program

Most people who smoke and develop cancer are unable to quit smoking. To address this, many cancer centers have now opened smoking cessation programs specifically designed to help cancer patients to quit. An important question has now emerged—what is the most effective approach for engaging smokers within a cancer center in these smoking cessation programs? We report outcomes from a retrospective observational study comparing three referral methods—traditional referral, best practice advisory (BPA), and direct outreach—on utilization of the Duke Cancer Center Smoking Cessation Program. We found that program utilization rate was higher for direct outreach (5.4%) than traditional referral (0.8%), p < 0.001, and BPA (0.2%); p < 0.001. Program utilization was 6.4% for all methods combined. Inferring a causal relationship between referral method and program utilization was not possible because the study did not use a randomized design. Innovation is needed to generate higher utilization rates for cancer center smoking cessation programs.