The effect of training on the use of tobacco-use cessation guidelines in dental settings

Continuing education meetings and workshops: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes

BACKGROUND

Educational meetings are used widely by health personnel to provide continuing medical education and to promote implementation of innovations or translate new knowledge to change practice within healthcare systems. Previous reviews have concluded that educational meetings can result in small changes in behaviour, but that effects vary considerably. Investigations into which characteristics of educational meetings might lead to greater impact have yielded varying results, and factors that might explain heterogeneity in effects remain unclear. This is the second update of this Cochrane Review.

OBJECTIVES

• To assess the effects of educational meetings on professional practice and healthcare outcomes • To investigate factors that might explain the heterogeneity of these effects SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ERIC, Science Citation Index Expanded (ISI Web of Knowledge), and Social Sciences Citation Index (last search in November 2016).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We sought randomised trials examining the effects of educational meetings on professional practice and patient outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. One review author assessed the certainty of evidence (GRADE) and discussed with a second review author. We included studies in the primary analysis that reported baseline data and that we judged to be at low or unclear risk of bias. For each comparison of dichotomous outcomes, we measured treatment effect as risk difference adjusted for baseline compliance. We expressed adjusted risk difference values as percentages, and we noted that values greater than zero favour educational meetings. For continuous outcomes, we measured treatment effect as per cent change relative to the control group mean post test, adjusted for baseline performance; we expressed values as percentages and noted that values greater than zero favour educational meetings. We report means and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and, when appropriate, medians and interquartile ranges to facilitate comparisons to previous versions of this review. We analysed professional and patient outcomes separately and analysed 22 variables that were hypothesised a priori to explain heterogeneity. We explored heterogeneity by using univariate meta-regression and by inspecting violin plots.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 215 studies involving more than 28,167 health professionals, including 142 new studies for this update. Educational meetings as the single intervention or the main component of a multi-faceted intervention compared with no intervention • Probably slightly improve compliance with desired practice when compared with no intervention (65 comparisons, 7868 health professionals for dichotomous outcomes (adjusted risk difference 6.79%, 95% CI 6.62% to 6.97%; median 4.00%; interquartile range 0.29% to 13.00%); 28 comparisons, 2577 health professionals for continuous outcomes (adjusted relative percentage change 44.36%, 95% CI 41.98% to 46.75%; median 20.00%; interquartile range 6.00% to 65.00%)) • Probably slightly improve patient outcomes compared with no intervention (15 comparisons, 2530 health professionals for dichotomous outcomes (adjusted risk difference 3.30%, 95% CI 3.10% to 3.51%; median 0.10%; interquartile range 0.00% to 4.00%); 28 comparisons, 2294 health professionals for continuous outcomes (adjusted relative percentage change 8.35%, 95% CI 7.46% to 9.24%; median 2.00%; interquartile range -1.00% to 21.00%)) The certainty of evidence for this comparison is moderate. Educational meetings alone compared with other interventions • May improve compliance with desired practice when compared with other interventions (6 studies, 1402 health professionals for dichotomous outcomes (adjusted risk difference 9.99%, 95% CI 9.47% to 10.52%; median 16.5%; interquartile range 0.80% to 16.50%); 2 studies, 72 health professionals for continuous outcomes (adjusted relative percentage change 12.00%, 95% CI 9.16% to 14.84%; median 12.00%; interquartile range 0.00% to 24.00%)) No studies met the inclusion criteria for patient outcome measurements. The certainty of evidence for this comparison is low. Interactive educational meetings compared with didactic (lecture-based) educational meetings • We are uncertain of effects on compliance with desired practice (3 studies, 370 health professionals for dichotomous outcomes; 1 study, 192 health professionals for continuous outcomes) or on patient outcomes (1 study, 54 health professionals for continuous outcomes), as the certainty of evidence is very low Any other comparison of different formats and durations of educational meetings • We are uncertain of effects on compliance with desired practice (1 study, 19 health professionals for dichotomous outcomes; 1 study, 20 health professionals for continuous outcomes) or on patient outcomes (1 study, 113 health professionals for continuous outcomes), as the certainty of evidence is very low. Factors that might explain heterogeneity of effects Meta-regression suggests that larger estimates of effect are associated with studies judged to be at high risk of bias, with studies that had unit of analysis errors, and with studies in which the unit of analysis was the provider rather than the patient. Improved compliance with desired practice may be associated with: shorter meetings; poor baseline compliance; better attendance; shorter follow-up; professionals provided with additional take-home material; explicit building of educational meetings on theory; targeting of low- versus high-complexity behaviours; targeting of outcomes with high versus low importance; goal of increasing rather than decreasing behaviour; teaching by opinion leaders; and use of didactic versus interactive teaching methods. Pre-specified exploratory analyses of behaviour change techniques suggest that improved compliance with desired practice may be associated with use of a greater number of behaviour change techniques; goal-setting; provision of feedback; provision for social comparison; and provision for social support. Compliance may be decreased by the use of follow-up prompts, skills training, and barrier identification techniques.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared with no intervention, educational meetings as the main component of an intervention probably slightly improve professional practice and, to a lesser extent, patient outcomes. Educational meetings may improve compliance with desired practice to a greater extent than other kinds of behaviour change interventions, such as text messages, fees, or office systems. Our findings suggest that multi-strategy approaches might positively influence the effects of educational meetings. Additional trials of educational meetings compared with no intervention are unlikely to change the review findings; therefore we will not further update this review comparison in the future. However, we note that randomised trials comparing different types of education are needed.

Dental Professionals' Engagement in Tobacco, Electronic Cigarette, and Cannabis Patient Counseling

OBJECTIVES

California features low smoking prevalence, cautionary electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) public messaging, and legal recreational cannabis: a unique landscape for dental professionals to navigate tobacco cessation promotion. This cross-sectional study assessed California dental professionals' self-reported tobacco patient counseling behaviors and the correlates of providing such assistance.

METHODS

Statewide surveys of dental hygienists (n = 701) and dentists (n = 725) were distributed electronically. The dentist survey was weighted for sampling and nonresponse. Prevalence of asking patients about use was compared for cigarette and noncigarette products (e.g., e-cigarettes, cannabis). Multivariable models identified independent correlates of providing cessation assistance to tobacco-using patients.

RESULTS

Respondents reported frequently (often/always) documenting patient tobacco use (hygienists: 80%; dentists: 73%) but less commonly provided forms of assistance (hygienists: 27%-49%; dentists: 10%-31%). Most respondents asked patients about cigarette smoking, but noncigarette product use (cigar, hookah, pipe, e-cigarette, or cannabis) was not commonly assessed. Greater confidence and willingness to assist were positively associated with providing assistance in multivariable models, but perceived barriers (e.g., lack of time and remuneration) were not. Results were robust to model specifications.

CONCLUSIONS

California dental professionals often ask about smoking but lag in providing cessation assistance and inquiring about noncigarette products. Successful efforts to encourage dental professionals' engagement in tobacco prevention and cessation must enhance providers' self-efficacy and motivation and likely will require system and organizational change.

KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER STATEMENT

Study findings identify substantial gaps in dental professionals' engagement in patient tobacco cessation. The results identify correlates of providing assistance and of dental professionals' willingness and confidence to do so, which could serve to inform interventions to support and enhance engagement.

The effectiveness of guideline implementation strategies in the dental setting: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Guideline implementation has been an ongoing challenge in the dental practice setting. Despite this, there are no reviews summarising the existing evidence regarding effective guideline implementation strategies in this setting. In order to address this, this systematic review examines the effectiveness of guideline implementation strategies in the dental practice setting.

METHODS

A systematic search was undertaken according to the PRISMA statement across nine electronic databases, targeting randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies which evaluated the effectiveness of guideline implementation strategies in improving guideline adherence in the dental setting. All records were independently examined for relevance and appraised for study quality by two authors, with consensus achieved by a third author. Data were extracted from included studies using a standardised data extraction pro forma.

RESULTS

A total of 15 records were eligible for inclusion in this review, which focused on the effects of audit and feedback, reminders, education, patient-mediated interventions, pay for performance and multifaceted interventions. Although there were some conflicting evidence, studies within each category of implementation strategy indicated a positive effect on guideline adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has identified education, reminders and multifaceted interventions as effective implementation strategies for the dental practice setting. Although this is similar to research findings from other health sectors, there is some evidence to suggest patient-mediated interventions may be less effective and pay for performance may be more effective in the dental setting. These findings can inform policy makers, professional associations, colleges and organisations in the future adoption of clinical guidelines in the dental practice setting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This systematic review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration ID CRD42018093023.

Electronic Cigarettes: Trends, Health Effects and Advising Patients Amid Uncertainty

Dental professionals can be effective tobacco prevention and cessation partners. Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), which deliver aerosolized nicotine but fewer toxicants than found in cigarette smoke, present new and contentious questions for clinicians, patients, and researchers. Evidence suggests e-cigarettes are not harmless but are less dangerous than cigarettes. Smoking cessation effectiveness is unproven and oral and systemic health effects remain under study. Dental professionals must stay informed to provide patients truthful information as new data emerge.

Short-term impact of the EuroPean Accredited Curriculum on Tobacco Treatment Training (EPACTT) program

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this pilot study was to assess the short-term effectiveness of the EuroPean Accredited Curriculum on Tobacco Treatment Training intervention in improving health care providers' knowledge, attitudes and self-efficacy related to tobacco dependence treatment.

METHODS

A pre-post pilot study was conducted. The two-day training intervention took place in Brussels in April 2016. Health care professionals from six European countries (Russia, Ukraine, Georgia, Armenia, Romania and Greece) were purposively invited to participate in the study. Evaluation was performed before the intervention, immediately after, and at approximately two months following the intervention. Changes in outcomes of interest were examined before and after exposure to the intervention program.

RESULTS

In all, 47 health care professionals participated in the training of which 40 completed the evaluation surveys. Significant increases in providers' self-efficacy and perceived behavioral control related to tobacco treatment delivery were documented immediately following the training and at the 2 months follow-up. Significant improvement in provider knowledge and attitudes were observed in some items assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

The results demonstrate that training is able to improve provider self-efficacy related to tobacco treatment delivery in this cross-national European sample of health care professionals. Additional research is required to examine the generalizability of our findings.

Tobacco-Nicotine Education and Training for Health-Care Professional Students and Practitioners: A Systematic Review

Introduction

The objective of this systematic review was to investigate what education and training characteristics prepares and supports health-care professionals (HCPs) in the delivery of competent and effective care to clients who use tobacco-nicotine.

Aims and Methods

A search of eight bibliographic databases for English-language peer-reviewed publications from January 2006 to March 2015. Studies were included if they met the a priori inclusion criteria, which consisted of: (1) quantitative study design and (2) focus on tobacco-nicotine education or training for HCP students and practitioners. All studies were independently screened for inclusion by two reviewers. Data from included studies were extracted for study characteristics and key outcomes then critically appraised for methodological quality.

Results

Fifty-nine studies were included for narrative synthesis. Two categories emerged: (1) curriculum characteristics (n = 10) and (2) education and training interventions (n = 49). Included curriculum studies identified the following themes: content, intensity, competencies evaluation, and barriers. Study findings about education and training interventions were grouped by level of education (prelicensure, post-licensure, and faculty training), teaching modality, health discipline, and the associated HCP and client outcomes.

Conclusions

This comprehensive review suggests that there is a lack of consistency in HCP tobacco-nicotine education and training characteristics. This paper provides valuable categorization of the most frequently utilized components of academic curriculum and discusses the interventions in relation to HCP and client outcomes. Gaps in the literature are highlighted, and the need for standardization of tobacco-nicotine training competencies and evaluation is discussed. Future research investigating the most effective approaches to training is needed.

Implications

This systematic review summarizes existing tobacco-related curriculum components (content, intensity, competency evaluation, and barriers) and training interventions for health-care professionals worldwide and demonstrates that they are associated with positive health-care professional outcomes (knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and skills) and client outcomes (quit attempts and smoking abstinence).

Healthcare financing systems for increasing the use of tobacco dependence treatment

BACKGROUND

Tobacco smoking is the leading preventable cause of death worldwide, which makes it essential to stimulate smoking cessation. The financial cost of smoking cessation treatment can act as a barrier to those seeking support. We hypothesised that provision of financial assistance for people trying to quit smoking, or reimbursement of their care providers, could lead to an increased rate of successful quit attempts. This is an update of the original 2005 review.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this review was to assess the impact of reducing the costs for tobacco smokers or healthcare providers for using or providing smoking cessation treatment through healthcare financing interventions on abstinence from smoking. The secondary objectives were to examine the effects of different levels of financial support on the use or prescription of smoking cessation treatment, or both, and on the number of smokers making a quit attempt (quitting smoking for at least 24 hours). We also assessed the cost effectiveness of different financial interventions, and analysed the costs per additional quitter, or per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register in September 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled trials and interrupted time series studies involving financial benefit interventions to smokers or their healthcare providers, or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the quality of the included studies. We calculated risk ratios (RR) for individual studies on an intention-to-treat basis and performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

In the current update, we have added six new relevant studies, resulting in a total of 17 studies included in this review involving financial interventions directed at smokers or healthcare providers, or both.Full financial interventions directed at smokers had a favourable effect on abstinence at six months or longer when compared to no intervention (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.28, I² = 33%, 9333 participants). There was no evidence that full coverage interventions increased smoking abstinence compared to partial coverage interventions (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.48, I² = 64%, 5914 participants), but partial coverage interventions were more effective in increasing abstinence than no intervention (RR 1.27 95% CI 1.02 to 1.59, I² = 21%, 7108 participants). The economic evaluation showed costs per additional quitter ranging from USD 97 to USD 7646 for the comparison of full coverage with partial or no coverage.There was no clear evidence of an effect on smoking cessation when we pooled two trials of financial incentives directed at healthcare providers (RR 1.16, CI 0.98 to 1.37, I² = 0%, 2311 participants).Full financial interventions increased the number of participants making a quit attempt when compared to no interventions (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.17, I² = 15%, 9065 participants). There was insufficient evidence to show whether partial financial interventions increased quit attempts compared to no interventions (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.31, I² = 88%, 6944 participants).Full financial interventions increased the use of smoking cessation treatment compared to no interventions with regard to various pharmacological and behavioural treatments: nicotine replacement therapy (NRT): RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.54 to 2.09, I² = 35%, 9455 participants; bupropion: RR 3.22, 95% CI 1.41 to 7.34, I² = 71%, 6321 participants; behavioural therapy: RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.65, I² = 75%, 9215 participants.There was evidence that partial coverage compared to no coverage reported a small positive effect on the use of bupropion (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.29, I² = 0%, 6765 participants). Interventions directed at healthcare providers increased the use of behavioural therapy (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.86, I² = 85%, 25820 participants), but not the use of NRT and/or bupropion (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.18, I² = 6%, 2311 participants).We assessed the quality of the evidence for the main outcome, abstinence from smoking, as moderate. In most studies participants were not blinded to the different study arms and researchers were not blinded to the allocated interventions. Furthermore, there was not always sufficient information on attrition rates. We detected some imprecision but we judged this to be of minor consequence on the outcomes of this study.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Full financial interventions directed at smokers when compared to no financial interventions increase the proportion of smokers who attempt to quit, use smoking cessation treatments, and succeed in quitting. There was no clear and consistent evidence of an effect on smoking cessation from financial incentives directed at healthcare providers. We are only moderately confident in the effect estimate because there was some risk of bias due to a lack of blinding in participants and researchers, and insufficient information on attrition rates.

Association of strong smoke-free laws with dentists' advice to quit smoking, 2006-2007

OBJECTIVES

We examined the association of smoke-free laws with dentists' advice to quit smoking and referral to a quit line, among smokers who reported visiting the dentist in the past 12 months.

METHODS

We used the 2006 to 2007 Tobacco Use Supplement of the Current Population Survey merged with the American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation Local Ordinance Database of smoke-free laws. The dependent variables were advice from a dentist to quit smoking and referral to a quit line, and the independent variable of interest was 100% smoke-free law coverage. We controlled for respondent demographics and an index of state-level smoking ban attitudes (included to ensure that the effect detected was not the result of social attitudes).

RESULTS

Smoke-free law coverage was associated with dental advice to quit smoking (odds ratio [OR] = 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01, 1.59; P = .041), but not with referral to a quit line (OR = 1.33; 95% CI = 0.79, 2.25; P = .283).

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions with dentists are needed to increase referrals to quit lines and other smoking cessation efforts.