Evaluation of a minimal-contact smoking cessation intervention in an outpatient setting

A single-blind clustered randomised controlled trial of daily record-keeping for reducing smoking tobacco expenditure among adult male household heads in rural Bangladesh

Introduction

This study aims to assess the impact of a behavioural intervention, in the form of a self-monitoring record-keeping logbook, in reducing smoking tobacco expenditure amongst adult male household heads in rural Bangladesh.

Method

The experiment was designed as a single-blind clustered randomised controlled trial utilising two-stage random sampling. A total of 650 adult male household heads were sampled from 16 chars (riverine islands) from Gaibandha, Northern Bangladesh, with eight chars in treatment and control groups each, between November 2018 and January 2019. The intervention consisted of a logbook to record daily smoking tobacco intake for 4 weeks provided only to participants in treatment chars (n = 332) while households in control chars received nothing (n = 318).

Results

Final analysis was conducted using 222 and 210 households in the treatment and control chars respectively. The logbook intervention had a significant impact (P-value = 0.040) on reducing daily tobacco expenditure by 14% (α = 95%; CI: −0.273, −0.008) for the treatment group relative to the control group based on a difference-in-difference estimator. This is equivalent to a reduction of 20 cigarettes or 140 bidis smoked in a month.

Conclusion

Our minimal contact intervention successfully induced a reduction in smoking tobacco expenditure, which could effectively be incorporated with existing programs in the char regions of Bangladesh.

Print-based self-help interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Many smokers give up smoking on their own, but materials that provide a structured programme for smokers to follow may increase the number who quit successfully.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this review were to determine the effectiveness of different forms of print-based self-help materials that provide a structured programme for smokers to follow, compared with no treatment and with other minimal contact strategies, and to determine the comparative effectiveness of different components and characteristics of print-based self-help, such as computer-generated feedback, additional materials, tailoring of materials to individuals, and targeting of materials at specific groups.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). The date of the most recent search was March 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials of smoking cessation with follow-up of at least six months, where at least one arm tested print-based materials providing self-help compared with minimal print-based self-help (such as a short leaflet) or a lower-intensity control. We defined 'self-help' as structured programming for smokers trying to quit without intensive contact with a therapist.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data in accordance with standard methodological procedures set out by Cochrane. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months' follow-up in people smoking at baseline. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each study and biochemically validated rates when available. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 75 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Many study reports did not include sufficient detail to allow judgement of risk of bias for some domains. We judged 30 studies (40%) to be at high risk of bias for one or more domains.Thirty-five studies evaluated the effects of standard, non-tailored self-help materials. Eleven studies compared self-help materials alone with no intervention and found a small effect in favour of the intervention (n = 13,241; risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.37; I² = 0%). We judged the evidence to be of moderate certainty in accordance with GRADE, downgraded for indirect relevance to populations in low- and middle-income countries because evidence for this comparison came from studies conducted solely in high-income countries and there is reason to believe the intervention might work differently in low- and middle-income countries. This analysis excluded two studies by the same author team with strongly positive outcomes that were clear outliers and introduced significant heterogeneity. Six further studies of structured self-help compared with brief leaflets did not show evidence of an effect of self-help materials on smoking cessation (n = 7023; RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.07; I² = 21%). We found evidence of benefit from standard self-help materials when there was brief contact that did not include smoking cessation advice (4 studies; n = 2822; RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.88; I² = 0%), but not when self-help was provided as an adjunct to face-to-face smoking cessation advice for all participants (11 studies; n = 5365; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.28; I² = 32%).Thirty-two studies tested materials tailored for the characteristics of individual smokers, with controls receiving no materials, or stage-matched or non-tailored materials. Most of these studies used more than one mailing. Pooling studies that compared tailored self-help with no self-help, either on its own or compared with advice, or as an adjunct to advice, showed a benefit of providing tailored self-help interventions (12 studies; n = 19,190; RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.49; I² = 0%) with little evidence of difference between subgroups (10 studies compared tailored with no materials, n = 14,359; RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.51; I² = 0%; two studies compared tailored materials with brief advice, n = 2992; RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.49; I² = 0%; and two studies evaluated tailored materials as an adjunct to brief advice, n = 1839; RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.53; I² = 10%). When studies compared tailored self-help with non-tailored self-help, results favoured tailored interventions when the tailored interventions involved more mailings than the non-tailored interventions (9 studies; n = 14,166; RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.68; I² = 0%), but not when the two conditions were contact-matched (10 studies; n = 11,024; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.30; I² = 50%). We judged the evidence to be of moderate certainty in accordance with GRADE, downgraded for risk of bias.Five studies evaluated self-help materials as an adjunct to nicotine replacement therapy; pooling three of these provided no evidence of additional benefit (n = 1769; RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.30; I² = 0%). Four studies evaluating additional written materials favoured the intervention, but the lower confidence interval crossed the line of no effect (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.58; I² = 73%). A small number of other studies did not detect benefit from using targeted materials, or find differences between different self-help programmes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-certainty evidence shows that when no other support is available, written self-help materials help more people to stop smoking than no intervention. When people receive advice from a health professional or are using nicotine replacement therapy, there is no evidence that self-help materials add to their effect. However, small benefits cannot be excluded. Moderate-certainty evidence shows that self-help materials that use data from participants to tailor the nature of the advice or support given are more effective than no intervention. However, when tailored self-help materials, which typically involve repeated assessment and mailing, were compared with untailored materials delivered similarly, there was no evidence of benefit.Available evidence tested self-help interventions in high-income countries, where more intensive support is often available. Further research is needed to investigate effects of these interventions in low- and middle-income countries, where more intensive support may not be available.

Nursing interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Health Care Providers as Key Change Agents in the Community Intervention Trial for Smoking Cessation (COMMIT)

The Community Intervention Trial for Smoking Cessation (COMMIT) is a multi-center collaborative trial sponsored by the National Cancer Institute. COMMIT utilizes multiple, community-based channels to facilitate quit attempts among heavy cigarette smokers. The “health care provider channel” is important, in that physicians, dentists, and other health care providers can effect changes in smoking behavior at both the individual and community level. There are over 1,600 primary care physicians and general practice dentists in the COMMIT intervention communities. This article describes the conceptual basis for the health care provider activities; results of a survey of Community attitudes and behaviors regarding smoking and health care; specific training and intervention activities; and the role of health care providers as community change agents in the smoking cessation arena.

A Randomized Trial of Physician Training for Smoking Cessation

This randomized controlled trial investigated the effects of a smoking cessation workshop on physician practices and on patients' smoking behavior. Eighty-three community family physicians were randomly allocated by practice to either 1) a Usual Care condition, 2) a group in which physicians were not trained but were asked to address smoking cessation with specific patients, or 3) a condition which included physician training as well as printed resources and in which specific patients were identified as smokers. The intervention taught to the physicians through a four hour training workshop included providing advice about stopping smoking, the setting of a date for stopping, the offer of nicotine gum, take-home materials, and the offer of follow-up visits. The intervention was described, demonstrated, and the physicians practiced with simulated patients.

The outcome of the intervention was assessed in terms of physician behavior and patient smoking behavior. Exit interviews with patients demonstrated that patients of trained physicians did not differ from patients of untrained physicians on how willing they were to try to stop smoking nor on their receptiveness to nicotine gum. However, there was a small but statistically significant difference favoring the patients from the trained physician group who successfully stopped smoking.

Meta-analyses involving cluster randomization trials: a review of published literature in health care

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s cluster randomization trials have been increasingly used to evaluate effectivenessof health care intervention. Such trials have raised several methodologic challenges in analysis. Meta-analyses involving cluster randomization trials are becoming common in the area of health care intervention. However, as yet there has been no empirical evidence of current practice in the meta-analyses. Thus a review was performed to identify and examine synthesis approaches of meta-analyses involving cluster randomization trials in the published literature. Electronic databases were searched for meta-analyses involving cluster randomization trials from the earliest date available to 2000. Once a meta-analysis was identified, papers on the relevant cluster randomization trials included were also requested. Each of the original papers of cluster randomization trials included was examined for its randomized design and unit, and adjustment for clustering effect in analysis. Each of the selected meta-analyses was then evaluated as to its synthesis concerning clustering effect. In total, 25 eligible meta-analyses were reviewed. Of these, 15 meta-analyses reported simple conventional methods of the fixed-effect model as method of analysis, while six did not incorporate the cluster randomization trial results in the synthesis methods but described the trial results individually. Three meta-analyses attempted to account for the clustering effect in the synthesis methods but approaches were in arbitrary. Fifteen meta-analyses included more than one cluster randomization trial, each of which included cluster randomization trials with a mixture of randomized designs and units, and units of analysis. These mixture situations might increase heterogeneity, but have not been considered in any meta-analysis. Some methods dealing with a binary outcome for some specific situations have been discussed. In conclusion, some difficulties in the quantitative synthesis procedures were found in the meta-analyses involving cluster randomization trials. Recommendations in the applications of approaches to some specific situations in a binary outcome variable have also been provided. There are still, however, several methodologic issues of the meta-analyses involving cluster randomization trials that need to be investigated further.

Tobacco Cessation Counselling Practices and Attitude among the Dentist and the Dental Auxiliaries of Urban and Rural Areas of Modinagar, India

BACKGROUND

The increasing use of tobacco among youths warrants the need for dental health professionals to effectively provide tobacco cessation counselling (TCC) in the office and community settings. However, there have been concerns among the dental professionals regarding TCC in dental settings.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To assess the attitude of dental professionals including the dentist and dental hygienist towards the TCC and identify the possible barriers towards the implementation of these practices in the rural and urban areas of Modinagar district.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present questionnaire based survey was carried among the qualified dentist and dental hygienist from the urban and rural areas of the Modinagar district to attitudes in tobacco cessation, practices in tobacco cessation interventions and related barriers towards implementation. The survey data were analyzed using the SPSS 16 version software package. The descriptive statistics (frequency) was generated for the each question to assess their attitude and practice.

RESULTS

The response rate of the questionnaire among the dentist and dental hygienist was 100%. The attitude of the majority of dentist towards the tobacco cessation counselling was positive as compared to the dental hygienist. 69.2% of the dentist were of the view that the dental health professionals should provide TCC as compared to 54.2% among the hygienist. Regarding the practice, only 12.5% and 5.8% of the dentist and dental hygienist had ever used the nicotine replacement therapy in their dental practice. The lack of the knowledge and information regarding TCC was the only perceived barrier among the dentists (51.7%) and dental hygienist (68.3%).

CONCLUSION

Dental professionals must expand their horizon and armamentarium to include TCC strategies inclusive of their regular preventive and therapeutic treatment modalities. Also, the dental institutions should include TCC into the curriculum, but it should not be just theoretical knowledge rather it must have a practical component.

Print-based self-help interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Many smokers give up smoking on their own, but materials giving advice and information may help them and increase the number who quit successfully.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this review were to determine: the effectiveness of different forms of print-based self-help materials, compared with no treatment and with other minimal contact strategies; the effectiveness of adjuncts to print-based self help, such as computer-generated feedback, telephone hotlines and pharmacotherapy; and the effectiveness of approaches tailored to the individual compared with non-tailored materials.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register. Date of the most recent search April 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized trials of smoking cessation with follow-up of at least six months, where at least one arm tested a print-based self-help intervention. We defined self help as structured programming for smokers trying to quit without intensive contact with a therapist.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data in duplicate on the participants, the nature of the self-help materials, the amount of face-to-face contact given to intervention and to control conditions, outcome measures, method of randomization, and completeness of follow-up.The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up in people smoking at baseline. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each trial, and biochemically validated rates when available. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 74 trials which met the inclusion criteria. Many study reports did not include sufficient detail to judge risk of bias for some domains. Twenty-eight studies (38%) were judged at high risk of bias for one or more domains but the overall risk of bias across all included studies was judged to be moderate, and unlikely to alter the conclusions.Thirty-four trials evaluated the effect of standard, non-tailored self-help materials. Pooling 11 of these trials in which there was no face-to-face contact and provision of structured self-help materials was compared to no intervention gave an estimate of benefit that just reached statistical significance (n = 13,241, risk ratio [RR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04 to 1.37). This analysis excluded two trials with strongly positive outcomes that introduced significant heterogeneity. Six further trials without face-to-face contact in which the control group received alternative written materials did not show evidence for an effect of the smoking self-help materials (n = 7023, RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.04). When these two subgroups were pooled, there was no longer evidence for a benefit of standard structured materials (n = 20,264, RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.18). We failed to find evidence of benefit from providing standard self-help materials when there was brief contact with all participants (5 trials, n = 3866, RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.42), or face-to-face advice for all participants (11 trials, n = 5365, RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.18).Thirty-one trials offered materials tailored for the characteristics of individual smokers, with controls receiving either no materials, or stage matched or non-tailored materials. Most of the trials used more than one mailing. Pooling these showed a benefit of tailored materials (n = 40,890, RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.37) with moderate heterogeneity (I² = 32%). The evidence is strongest for the subgroup of nine trials in which tailored materials were compared to no intervention (n = 13,437, RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.53), but also supports tailored materials as more helpful than standard materials. Part of this effect could be due to the additional contact or assessment required to obtain individual data, since the subgroup of 10 trials where the number of contacts was matched did not detect an effect (n = 11,024, RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.20). In two trials including a direct comparison between tailored materials and brief advice from a health care provider, there was no evidence of a difference, but confidence intervals were wide (n = 2992, RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.49).Only four studies evaluated self-help materials as an adjunct to nicotine replacement therapy, with no evidence of additional benefit (n = 2291, RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.25). A small number of other trials failed to detect benefits from using additional materials or targeted materials, or to find differences between different self-help programmes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Standard, print-based self-help materials increase quit rates compared to no intervention, but the effect is likely to be small. We did not find evidence that they have an additional benefit when used alongside other interventions such as advice from a healthcare professional, or nicotine replacement therapy. There is evidence that materials that are tailored for individual smokers are more effective than non-tailored materials, although the absolute size of effect is still small. Available evidence tested self-help interventions in high income countries; further research is needed to investigate their effect in contexts where more intensive support is not available.

Nursing interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Physician advice for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Physician advice for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

A summary of the recommendations for smoking cessation interventions: the quality assurance in the treatment of drug dependence project

This report presents outlines for approaches to smoking cessation. These recommendations are based on a meta-analysis of the treatment-outcome literature, a survey of current treatment practices and the views of a panel of experts. Face-to-face intervention to assist smokers to stop smoking needs to be considered in the context of a public policy approach to reducing the prevalence of smoking. The nature of face-to-face interventions is determined by the time available to practitioners. Where there is no time to intervene (e.g. in some primary health care settings) quality self-help materials should be prominently displayed. Where there is only 10 minutes or less, attention should be focused on personalizing the health effects of smoking, providing firm advice to quit, providing self-help material, setting a quit date (if appropriate), identifying social support for cessation and organizing a follow-up visit. If there is more time to intervene (up to one hour) the previous techniques can be expanded on and supplemented with nicotine replacement and discussion of methods for dealing with high-risk situations. Longer interventions would use all of these methods, presenting them in more detail, and may also address stress management and minimization of weight gain.

Brief opportunistic smoking cessation interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare advice to quit and offer of assistance

AIMS

This study aimed to assess the effects of opportunistic brief physician advice to stop smoking and offer of assistance on incidence of attempts to stop and quit success in smokers not selected by motivation to quit.

METHODS

We included relevant trials from the Cochrane Reviews of physician advice for smoking cessation, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), varenicline and bupropion. We extracted data on quit attempts and quit success. Estimates were combined using the Mantel-Haentszel method and heterogeneity assessed with the I(2) statistic. Study quality was assessed by method of randomization, allocation concealment and follow-up blind to allocation.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included. Compared to no intervention, advice to quit on medical grounds increased the frequency of quit attempts [risk ratio (RR) 1.24, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.16-1.33], but not as much as behavioural support for cessation (RR 2.17, 95% CI 1.52-3.11) or offering NRT (RR 1.68, 95% CI: 1.48-1.89). In a direct comparison, offering assistance generated more quit attempts than giving advice to quit on medical grounds (RR 1.69, 95% CI: 1.24-2.31 for behavioural support and 1.39, 95% CI: 1.25-1.54 for offering medication). There was evidence that medical advice increased the success of quit attempts and inconclusive evidence that offering assistance increased their success.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians may be more effective in promoting attempts to stop smoking by offering assistance to all smokers than by advising smokers to quit and offering assistance only to those who express an interest in doing so.

Secondhand smoke risk in infants discharged from an NICU: potential for significant health disparities?

INTRODUCTION

Secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe) threatens fragile infants discharged from a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Smoking practices were examined in families with a high respiratory risk infant (born at very low birth weight; ventilated > 12 hr) in a Houston, Texas, NICU. Socioeconomic status, race, and mental health status were hypothesized to be related to SHSe and household smoking bans.

METHODS

Data were collected as part of The Baby's Breath Project, a hospital-based SHSe intervention trial targeting parents with a high-risk infant in the NICU who reported a smoker in the household (N = 99). Measures of sociodemographics, smoking, home and car smoking bans, and depression were collected.

RESULTS

Overall, 26% of all families with a high-risk infant in the NICU reported a household smoker. Almost half of the families with a smoker reported an annual income of less than $25,000. 46.2% of families reported having a total smoking ban in place in both their homes and cars. Only 27.8% families earning less than $25,000 reported having a total smoking ban in place relative to almost 60% of families earning more (p < .01). African American and Caucasian families were less likely to have a smoking ban compared with Hispanics (p < .05). Mothers who reported no smoking ban were more depressed than those who had a household smoking ban (p < .02).

CONCLUSIONS

The most disadvantaged families were least likely to have protective health behaviors in place to reduce SHSe and, consequently, are most at-risk for tobacco exposure and subsequent tobacco-related health disparities. Innovative SHSe interventions for this vulnerable population are sorely needed.

The behavioral ecology of secondhand smoke exposure: A pathway to complete tobacco control

INTRODUCTION

This article outlines a theoretical framework for research concerning secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe) prevention as a means to curtail the tobacco industry.

METHODS

The Behavioral Ecological Model (BEM) assumes interlocking social contingencies of reinforcement (i.e., rewards or punishments) from the highest level of society (e.g., taxing cigarette sales) to physiological reactions to nicotine that influence smoking and SHSe. We review selected research concerning both policy and clinical efforts to restrict smoking and/or SHSe.

RESULTS

Research to date has focused on smoking cessation with modest to weak effects. The BEM and empirical evidence suggest that cultural contingencies of reinforcement should be emphasized to protect people from SHSe, especially vulnerable children, pregnant women, the ill, the elderly, and low-income adults who have not "elected" to smoke. Doing so will protect vulnerable populations from industry-produced SHSe and may yield more and longer-lasting cessation.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions that reduce SHSe may serve as a Trojan horse to counter the tobacco industry. Future studies should: (a) guide policies to restrict SHSe; (b) develop powerful community and clinical interventions to reduce SHSe; (c) test the degree to which policies and other contexts enhance the effects of clinical interventions (e.g., media programs disclosing the disingenuous marketing by the industry); and (d) investigate the effects of all health care providers' ability to reduce SHSe and generate an antitobacco culture, by advising all clients to avoid starting to smoke, to protect their children from SHSe, and to quit smoking.

Physician advice for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Campus physicians' tobacco interventions with university students: a descriptive study of 16 Ontario university clinics

OBJECTIVE

About one-quarter of Canadian post-secondary students smoke cigarettes. We examined how physicians from Ontario university health clinics intervene with these young adult smokers.

METHOD

A convenience sample of 16 universities was identified and surveys were hand-delivered to all 228 physicians from these schools. A total of 125 doctors (54.82%) responded; 70 were from universities that were involved in a government-sponsored, coordinated, multi-campus, tobacco control initiative.

RESULTS

Twenty percent of doctors reported asking all or almost all patients about tobacco use; 25.22% asked fewer than half. Describing how they respond to patients identified as smokers, 96.00% of physicians advised cessation, 72.00% offered assistance, and 64.00% arranged for follow-up. Doctors discussed patients' tobacco use with 78.59% of smokers. Nicotine replacement therapies were rarely offered to patients wanting to quit. Doctors from universities involved in the tobacco control initiative were more likely to keep patient education materials in the examining room.

CONCLUSION

Because most doctors ask only some patients about tobacco use, they may be missing opportunities to provide appropriate advice and assistance to all smokers.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Physician education and support to the clinic are needed to improve the frequency and quality of physician-delivered smoking cessation services to post-secondary students.

Nursing interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Smoking prevention and cessation intervention delivery by pediatric providers, as assessed with patient exit interviews

OBJECTIVE

The goal was to evaluate the degree to which a smoking prevention and cessation intervention was delivered by providers to adolescents in the pediatric office setting.

METHODS

Eight pediatric clinics in central Massachusetts were assigned randomly to either a special intervention (brief pediatric provider-delivered intervention plus peer counseling) or the usual care condition. Subjects (n = 2710) were adolescents 13 to 17 years of age, both smokers (smoked in the past 30 days) and nonsmokers/former smokers. The degree to which smoking prevention and treatment interventions were delivered by providers was assessed through patient exit interviews with adolescents after their clinic visits; interviews assessed the occurrence of 10 possible intervention steps.

RESULTS

The percentage of providers engaging in the smoking interventions differed significantly between the special intervention and usual care conditions, according to adolescent reports in the patient exit interviews. For nonsmokers/former smokers, overall patient exit interview scores were 7.24 for the special intervention condition and 4.95 for the usual care condition. For current smokers, overall patient exit interview scores were 8.40 and 6.24 for the special intervention and usual care conditions, respectively. Intervention fidelity of special intervention providers was 72.2% and 84.0% for nonsmokers/former smokers and current smokers, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric providers who receive training and reminders to deliver a brief smoking prevention and cessation intervention to adolescents in the context of routine pediatric primary care practice can do so feasibly and with a high degree of fidelity to the intervention protocol.

Self-help interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Many smokers give up smoking on their own, but materials giving advice and information may help them and increase the number who quit successfully.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this review were to determine the effectiveness of different forms of self-help materials, compared with no treatment and with other minimal contact strategies; the effectiveness of adjuncts to self help, such as computer-generated feedback, telephone hotlines and pharmacotherapy; and the effectiveness of approaches tailored to the individual compared with non-tailored materials.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register using the terms 'self-help', 'manual*' or 'booklet*'. Date of the most recent search April 2005.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized trials of smoking cessation with follow up of at least six months, where at least one arm tested a self-help intervention. We defined self help as structured programming for smokers trying to quit without intensive contact with a therapist.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data in duplicate on the participants, the nature of the self-help materials, the amount of face-to-face contact given to intervention and to control conditions, outcome measures, method of randomization, and completeness of follow up. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow up in people smoking at baseline. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each trial, and biochemically validated rates when available. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified sixty trials. Thirty-three compared self-help materials to no intervention or tested materials used in addition to advice. In 11 trials in which self help was compared to no intervention there was a pooled effect that just reached statistical significance (N = 13,733; odds ratio [OR] 1.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07 to 1.45). This analysis excluded two trials with strongly positive outcomes that introduced significant heterogeneity. Four further trials in which the control group received alternative written materials did not show evidence for an effect of the smoking self-help materials. We failed to find evidence of benefit from adding self-help materials to face-to-face advice, or to nicotine replacement therapy. There were seventeen trials using materials tailored for the characteristics of individual smokers, where meta-analysis supported a small benefit of tailored materials (N = 20,414; OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.61). The evidence is strongest for tailored materials compared to no intervention, but also supports tailored materials as more helpful than standard materials. Part of this effect could be due to the additional contact or assessment required to obtain individual data. A small number of other trials failed to detect benefits from using additional materials or targeted materials, or to find differences between different self-help programmes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Standard self-help materials may increase quit rates compared to no intervention, but the effect is likely to be small. We failed to find evidence that they have an additional benefit when used alongside other interventions such as advice from a healthcare professional, or nicotine replacement therapy. There is evidence that materials that are tailored for individual smokers are effective, and are more effective than untailored materials, although the absolute size of effect is still small.

Physician advice for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Date of the most recent searches: March 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 39 trials, conducted between 1972 and 2003, including over 31,000 smokers. In some trials, subjects were at risk of specified diseases (chest disease, diabetes, ischaemic heart disease), but most were from unselected populations. The most common setting for delivery of advice was primary care. Other settings included hospital wards and outpatient clinics, and industrial clinics. Pooled data from 17 trials of brief advice versus no advice (or usual care) revealed a small but significant increase in the odds of quitting (odds ratio 1.74, 95% confidence interval 1.48 to 2.05). This equates to an absolute difference in the cessation rate of about 2.5%. There was insufficient evidence, from indirect comparisons, to establish a significant difference in the effectiveness of physician advice according to the intensity of the intervention, the amount of follow up provided, and whether or not various aids were used at the time of the consultation in addition to providing advice. Direct comparison of intensive versus minimal advice showed a small advantage of intensive advice (odds ratio 1.44, 95% confidence interval 1.24 to 1.67). Direct comparison also suggested a small benefit of follow-up visits. Only one study determined the effect of smoking advice on mortality. It found no statistically significant differences in death rates at 20 years follow up.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Simple advice has a small effect on cessation rates. Additional manoeuvres appear to have only a small effect, though more intensive interventions are marginally more effective than minimal interventions.

Physicians taught as residents to conduct smoking cessation intervention: a follow-up study

BACKGROUND

The influence of residency training on use of smoking cessation intervention (SCI) in future practice is unexamined.

METHODS

We surveyed 291 physicians who participated in SCI research during residency between 1986 and 1996. Half received SCI training; half did not. Best practice included: (1) identifying smokers; (2) advising cessation; (3) assisting with a plan; (4) arranging follow-up.

RESULTS

Forty-two percent of respondents were using best practices. Training per se was not associated with current use of best practices (relative risk = 1.04; adjusted relative risk [ARR] = 0.91). However, those who reported use of best practices in residency were twice as likely to currently use best practices [ARR = 2.0; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3, 2.9]. Resources associated with use of best practices included patient education materials (ARR = 1.8; CI 1.1, 2.7), staff familiar with SCI (ARR = 1.8; CI 1.2, 2.6), and opportunity for referral to cessation counselors/programs (ARR = 1.3; CI 1.0, 1.9). Resources related in a dose-response fashion to best practices: 24% of those without resources provide best SCI, 32% with any one resource, 51% with any two, and 74% with all three.

CONCLUSIONS

To expand use of best SCI, residencies must ensure physicians use SCI skills, and health care systems must provide resources to facilitate intervention.

Nursing interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group specialized register and CINAHL in June 2003.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted data independently.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty studies comparing a nursing intervention to a control or to usual care found the intervention to significantly increase the odds of quitting (Peto Odds Ratio 1.47, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.68). There was heterogeneity among the study results, but pooling using a random effects model did not alter the estimate of a statistically significant effect. There was limited evidence that interventions were more effective for hospital inpatients with cardiovascular disease than for inpatients with other conditions. Interventions in non-hospitalized patients also showed evidence of benefit. Five studies comparing different nurse-delivered interventions failed to detect significant benefit from using additional components. Five studies of nurse counselling on smoking cessation during a screening health check, or as part of multifactorial secondary prevention in general practice (not included in the main meta-analysis) found the nursing intervention to have less effect under these conditions.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate the potential benefits of smoking cessation advice and/or counselling given by nurses to patients, with reasonable evidence that interventions can be effective. The challenge will be to incorporate smoking behaviour monitoring and smoking cessation interventions as part of standard practice, so that all patients are given an opportunity to be asked about their tobacco use and to be given advice and/or counselling to quit along with reinforcement and follow-up.

Attitudes Toward Giving Smoking Cessation Advice Among Nursing Staff at a Long-Term Residential Care Facility

The objective of this study was to provide a first assessment of (a) long-term care staffs' prevalence of and attitudes toward giving smoking cessation advice to residents and (b) predictors of advice giving. Results of a survey (N = 115) found that 54.8% of licensed nurses and 34.6% of nursing assistants reported ever advising. Advising was associated with job classification and believing that residents' problem lists should include smoking. Not advising was associated with believing advice is the physicians' responsibility. Staff somewhat endorsed risks of smoking and benefits of cessation for residents, smoking as a right and pleasure, and that some residents cannot make decisions about smoking. Staff moderately endorsed safety concerns: 36% wanted policy changes. Lack of institutional support and perceived residents' cessation disinterest were key barriers. The findings suggest that staff may be missing intervention opportunities and that institutional support of advising cessation may facilitate maintenance and improvement of nursing home residents' health.

The state of office-based interventions for youth tobacco use

Tobacco use is a serious pediatric health issue as dependence begins during childhood or adolescence in the majority of tobacco users. Primary care settings provide tremendous opportunities for delivering tobacco treatment to young tobacco users. Although evidence-based practice guidelines for treating nicotine dependence in youths are not yet available, professional organizations and the current clinical practice guideline for adults provide recommendations based on expert opinion. This article reports on the current tobacco treatment practices of pediatric and family practice clinicians, discusses similarities and differences between adolescent and adult tobacco use, summarizes research efforts to date and current cutting-edge research that may ultimately help to inform and guide clinicians, and presents existing recommendations regarding treating tobacco use in youths. Finally, recommendations are made for the primary care clinician, professional organizations, and health care systems and policies. Pediatricians and other clinicians can and should play an important role in treating tobacco dependence in youths.

Baby, Be Safe: the effect of tailored communications for pediatric injury prevention provided in a primary care setting

Injuries are a major cause of morbidity and mortality to young children. The provision of individually tailored educational materials in primary care settings may be an effective and efficient way to promote adoption of injury prevention measures by parents. A randomized controlled study compared the effectiveness of tailored and generic persuasive communications delivered in a primary care setting on the adoption of home and car safety behaviors. During routine well-child visits, a primarily African-American sample of parents of children ages 6-20 months (n=213) was randomized to receive either tailored or generic information regarding the prevention of injuries to their child. At follow-up, participants who received tailored information reported greater adoption of home and car safety behaviors than those receiving generic information. In addition, within the tailored information group, those who discussed the information with their physician showed significantly greater change than those who did not. However, this difference was not observed among those receiving generic information. Findings support the use of office-based tailored injury prevention education as a component of routine well-child care.

Self-help interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Many smokers give up smoking on their own, but materials giving advice and information may help them and increase the number who quit successfully.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this review were to determine the effectiveness of different forms of self-help materials, compared with no treatment and with other minimal contact strategies; the effectiveness of adjuncts to self-help, such as computer generated feedback, telephone hotlines and pharmacotherapy; and the effectiveness of approaches tailored to the individual compared with non-tailored materials.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register using the terms 'self-help', 'manual*' or 'booklet*'. Date of the most recent search March 2002.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials of smoking cessation with follow-up of at least six months, where at least one arm tested a self-help intervention. We defined self-help as structured programming for smokers trying to quit without intensive contact with a therapist.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data in duplicate on the type of subjects, the nature of the self-help materials, the amount of face to face contact given to subjects and to controls, outcome measures, method of randomisation, and completeness of follow-up. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up in patients smoking at baseline. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each trial, and biochemically validated rates when available. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified fifty-one trials. Thirty two compared self-help materials to no intervention or tested materials used in addition to advice. In eleven trials in which self-help was compared to no intervention there was a pooled effect that just reached statistical significance (odds ratio 1.24, 95% confidence interval 1.07 to 1.45) This analysis excluded one trial with a strongly positive outcome that introduced significant heterogeneity. Four further trials in which the control group received alternative written materials did not show evidence for an effect of the smoking self-help materials. We failed to find evidence of benefit from adding self-help materials to face to face advice, or to nicotine replacement therapy. There was evidence from fourteen trials using materials tailored for the characteristics of individual smokers that such personalised materials were more effective than standard manuals (ten trials, odds ratio 1.36, 95% confidence interval 1.13 to 1.64) or no materials (three trials, odds ratio 1.80, 95% confidence interval 1.46 to 2.23). A small numbers of trials failed to detect benefit from using additional materials or targetted materials.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Standard self-help materials may increase quit rates compared to no intervention, but the effect is likely to be small. We failed to find evidence that they have an additional benefit when used alongside other interventions such as advice from a health care professional, or nicotine replacement therapy. There is evidence that materials that are tailored for individual smokers are more effective.

Predictors of tobacco control among nursing students

As the most numerous health care providers, nurses could reduce tobacco-related morbidity and mortality. A cross-sectional survey of 476 junior and senior students at 12 schools of nursing in the New York metropolitan area was conducted, to determine nurse knowledge of tobacco control, their attitudes, beliefs, and practices. Overall, 76% of all nursing students reported that they practiced tobacco control. Current smokers were less likely to participate in tobacco control with targets ranging from the nurse herself to the community than either never or ex-smokers. Nurses were more likely to engage in tobacco control among individual, family, or group clients than to advocate for changes in the community. Student nurses who were African American or Hispanic, had never smoked or were ex-smokers, those who had better knowledge of cessation approaches, and those who tended to have more confidence in their cessation counseling skills were more likely to engage in multi-target tobacco control than other similar nurses. Tailored interventions that emphasize discrete counseling skills are suggested.

Effectiveness of a minimal contact smoking cessation program for Dutch general practitioners: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Until recently, Dutch general practitioners contributed little to tobacco control. This is due to several factors, among which is the lack of a feasible intervention program for adult smokers. Such a minimal contact behavioral intervention, using the Stage-of-Change concept, is now available. Effectiveness was tested in a randomized trial.

METHOD

Twenty-two general practitioners and their practice assistants were trained in applying the program. In all, 530 smoking patients were enrolled, randomly assigned to either the intervention or the usual treatment condition. Analysis of treatment effects was performed with logistic regression analysis. In a backward stepwise procedure confounding effects of baseline differences were eliminated.

RESULTS

At 12-month follow-up, self-reported abstinence rates (including nonrespondents as smokers) differed significantly between intervention subjects and controls: 13.4 vs 7.3% point prevalence (odds ratio 1.51, P < 0.05). An analysis of consecutive abstinence, defined as being abstinent at both 6- and 12-month follow-up, showed that 8.2% of the intervention group compared to 3.1% of the controls had sustained abstinence for more than 6 months (odds ratio 3.04, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicate that an effective smoking cessation program for use in Dutch general practice, already shown to be feasible, is now available. Outcomes are generally consistent with recent international literature.

The effect of a structured smoking cessation program, independent of exposure to existing interventions

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed the effectiveness of a smoking cessation program for women in public health clinics, controlling for reported exposures to 4 common intervention components (provider advice, booklet, video segment, posters) among smokers in the control group.

METHODS

After a baseline control period, 10 pair-matched clinics were randomly assigned to study groups. A total of 1042 smokers in the combined baseline and control groups and 454 smokers in the intervention group completed a preintervention questionnaire and a postintervention telephone interview 5 to 8 weeks later. Eight smoking outcomes, including quitting, were analyzed for the effect of reported exposure to intervention components, experimental program, and clinic service.

RESULTS

Greater exposure to intervention components, being in the experimental program, and being seen in prenatal clinics independently improved smoking outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of interventions reported by smokers in the control group ranged from none to 4 and varied across clinic services. The experimental program we tested produced better outcomes than the minimal smoking cessation interventions already existing in the control clinics, after we controlled for whether smokers were or were not exposed to these interventions.

A comparison of smoking cessation efforts in African Americans by resident physicians in a traditional and primary care internal medicine residency

Tobacco use causes significant morbidity and mortality among African Americans. Physicians may inconsistently counsel patients against smoking. This retrospective chart review evaluated smoking cessation efforts in African Americans by internal medicine resident physicians in a traditional and a primary care residency program. One hundred twenty-nine African-American patients were evaluated by resident physicians in the traditional internal medicine residency. A tobacco use history was obtained in 84 patients. Twenty-eight patients smoked and two patients were counseled against smoking. Fifty-two African-American patients were evaluated by resident physicians in the primary care residency. A tobacco use history was obtained in 47 patients. Twenty patients smoked and 12 patients were counseled against smoking. There was a statistically significant difference in the rate at which smoking histories were obtained (p = 0.0011) and frequency of counseling against smoking (p < 0.0001). Gender analysis revealed that African-American women were less frequently asked about their smoking history (p = 0.0058) and counseled against smoking (p = 0.0016) by resident physicians in the traditional residency. African-American men received less counseling against smoking (p = 0.055) by resident physicians in the traditional residency. Resident physicians in the primary care residency program demonstrated greater smoking cessation efforts for African American patients. Smoking cessation should be emphasized in all internal medicine residency training programs.

The effectiveness of a directly mailed smoking cessation intervention to Australian discharged hospital patients

BACKGROUND

The objective was to assess the effectiveness of a directly mailed smoking cessation intervention to discharged hospital patients.

METHODS

A randomized controlled trial was used. In the 2 weeks after discharge, smokers in the intervention group were sent by mail a personally addressed letter from their medical consultant urging them to quit plus a self-help quitting manual, and smokers in the control group received usual care. Patients were surveyed about their smoking status at 6 and 12 months after discharge. A total of 1858 discharged patients responded to both questionnaires. The main outcome measures were self-reported smoking in past week at 6 and 12 months after discharge. Quitters at 12 months were biochemically tested for evidence of smoking.

RESULTS

The results failed to show that smoking cessation advice directly mailed to a broad cross-section of discharged hospital patients who smoke led to smoking cessation. However, the intervention increased cessation among smokers with medical conditions for which quitting is highly relevant. In general, patients who were more likely to quit were older, had entered the hospital as an emergency case, and had a medical diagnosis for which quitting is highly relevant.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that hospital patients who smoke and are also diagnosed with conditions which call for quitting are more likely to quit if they receive from their consultant a personalized letter advising them to quit and a self-help manual.

Nursing intervention and smoking cessation: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine with meta-analysis the effects of nursing-delivered smoking cessation interventions.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies comparing nursing intervention with a control or usual care found intervention to significantly increase the odds of smoking cessation. There was heterogeneity among the study results, but pooling by using a random effects model did not alter the estimate of effect. There was no evidence from indirect comparison that interventions classified as intensive had a larger effect than less intensive ones. There was evidence that interventions were more effective for hospital inpatients with cardiovascular disease than for inpatients with other conditions. Interventions in nonhospitalized patients also showed evidence of efficacy. Nurse counseling on smoking cessation during a screening health check was likely to have less effect. The results indicate the potential benefits of smoking cessation advice and counseling given by nurses to their patients, with reasonable evidence that intervention can be effective.

Smoking status as a vital sign

OBJECTIVE

We conducted this study to determine if a smoking status stamp would prompt physicians to increase the number of times they ask, advise, assist, and arrange follow-up for African-American patients about smoking-related issues.

DESIGN

An intervention study with a posttest assessment (after the physician visit) conducted over four 1-month blocks. The control period was the first 2 weeks of each month, while the following 2 weeks served as the intervention period.

SETTING

An adult walk-in clinic in a large inner-city hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

We consecutively enrolled into the study 2,595 African-American patients (1,229 intervention and 1, 366 control subjects) seen by a housestaff physician.

INTERVENTIONS

A smoking status stamp placed on clinic charts during the intervention period.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-five housestaff rotated through the clinic in 1-month blocks. In univariate analyses, patients were significantly more likely to be asked by their physicians if they smoke cigarettes during the intervention compared with the control period, 78.4% versus 45.6% (odds ratio [OR] 4.28; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.58, 5.10). Patients were also more likely to be told by their physician to quit, 39.9% versus 26.9% (OR 1.81; 95% CI 1.36, 2.40), and have follow-up arranged, 12.3% versus 6.2% (OR 2.16; 95% CI 1.30, 3.38).

CONCLUSIONS

The stamp had a significant effect on increasing rates of asking about cigarette smoking, telling patients to quit, and arranging follow-up for smoking cessation. However, the stamp did not improve the low rate at which physicians offered patients specific advice on how to quit or in setting a quit date.

Nurses counseling patients about smoking cessation--why, when, and how

In patient health education, nurses are a natural choice for on-the-spot counsellors and teachers. Yet many nurses feel uncomfortable about broaching subjects such as smoking cessation with their patients or the patients' families. The authors argue that it is time for nursing programs and hospitals to prepare and encourage nurses to take the initiative in smoking-cessation counseling.

Patient perceptions of tobacco cessation services in dental offices

BACKGROUND

Tobacco use is a leading cause of periodontitis and other oral diseases. Dental professionals can help patients quit, but few routinely offer tobacco cessation services, or TCS. In this article, the authors examine dental professionals' attitudes toward offering TCS and patients' attitudes toward receiving TCS from their dental offices.

METHODS

The authors used baseline data from a three-year randomized controlled trial designed to test the effectiveness of a dissemination strategy aimed at increasing the proportion of tobacco users identified by the dental office, as well as the proportion of tobacco users advised to quit. Fifty-two dental offices in rural communities completed a questionnaire asking for demographic and professional information about their offices, usual TCS offered, barriers to providing TCS and their views on patient receptivity to TCS. A random sample of patients seen during one month were interviewed over the telephone about the TCS provided during their last visit and their comfort in receiving such services from their dental offices.

RESULTS

The authors found that 58.5 percent of the 3,088 dental patients surveyed believed that dental offices should provide TCS to patients. There was equal support among tobacco users and nonusers. Male patients (60.8 percent) and younger patients (69.6 percent) were more likely to believe that dental offices should provide TCS than were female patients (56.8 percent, P < .05) and older patients (57.3 percent, P < .05). The authors also found that patients who had an interest in quitting were more likely to feel comfortable receiving TCS than were those patients who were not interested in quitting (59.7 percent vs. 39.4 percent, P < .01). A total of 61.5 percent of dentists, however, thought patients did not expect such services. When dentists were asked about barriers to providing TCS, 94.3 percent listed patient resistance as a barrier, and 53.9 percent were concerned that patients would leave their practices.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors found a wide discrepancy between patients' and dental professionals' views on TCS. A total of 58.5 percent of patients believe dentists routinely should offer such services, while 61.5 percent of dental professionals believed patients did not expect TCS. Patients who were interested in quitting felt more comfortable receiving quit advice.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Periodontitis and other oral diseases are linked directly to tobacco use. Advising patients to quit is a professional responsibility. Tobacco users expect and are comfortable receiving such advice. It is up to dental professionals to overcome their concerns about patient receptivity and provide these services.

Providers' smoking cessation attitudes and practices for older patients

A mail survey of 136 providers in a health maintenance organization in the Chicago metropolitan area examined smoking cessation attitudes and performance of the 4As protocol (asking, advising, assisting, arranging) for patients aged 50 years or older. Asking about smoking was most frequent, followed by arranging, advising, and assisting. Physicians and nurse practitioners performed each of the 4As more often than did registered and licensed practical nurses. In multiple logistic regression analyses, provider type was the only significant predictor of asking about smoking. Advising, assisting, and arranging follow-ups were more likely to be performed by providers who perceived a sense of professional responsibility about older patients' smoking; advising was more likely for providers who perceived that they had enough time to advise older patients about smoking; and assisting and arranging were more likely for providers with a stronger sense of self-efficacy for helping older patients stop smoking.

HIV and medical nutrition therapy

In those who are infected with human immunodeficiency virus, poor nutritional status can result from numerous causes, including anorexia, catabolism, chronic infection, fever, poor nutrient intake, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, malabsorption, metabolic disturbances, lack of access to food, depression, and side effects of drug, radiation, and chemotherapy treatments. A compromised immune system may not be reversed by any medical treatments at this time, but malnutrition may be prevented and reversed by using current therapies, including medical nutrition therapy that includes nutrition assessment, the development of an individualized nutrition therapy plan, and implementation of the therapy. There is substantial evidence that medical nutrition therapy saves lives, reduces morbidity, improves health outcomes, reduces costs, and shortens hospital stays.

Patients' perceptions of their physician's role in smoking cessation by age and readiness to stop smoking

BACKGROUND

Patients' perceptions of their physician's role in smoking cessation, using the 4As protocol (asking, advising, assisting, and arranging), were assessed with a focus on associations with age (18-29, 30-49, and > or = 50) and stage of readiness to stop smoking (precontemplation, contemplation, and preparation).

METHODS

Self-administered questionnaires were completed by 524 smokers presenting for regularly scheduled appointments at six clinics of an HMO in the Chicago metropolitan area.

RESULTS

Almost all patients said their physician should ask about their smoking status and advise them to quit. About half said their physician should assist them with quitting, and about two-thirds said their physician should follow up (arrange) on their smoking behavior. Bivariate associations were found for endorsement of the 4As with both age and stage. Multiple logistic regressions found age was the most consistent and strongest correlate of 4As endorsement, with younger smokers more likely than those age 50 or older to endorse the 4As protocol.

CONCLUSIONS

A proactive health promotion orientation should be encouraged among physicians. Patients should be screened for stage of readiness to stop smoking so that health-care providers can emphasize aspects of the 4As protocol that are most appropriate for each patient. Age-tailored smoking cessation strategies should be employed within stages of readiness to stop smoking.

Effect of a hospital nonsmoking policy on patients' knowledge, attitudes, and smoking behavior

PURPOSE

To explore patients' knowledge of and attitudes toward a hospital nonsmoking policy and to examine changes in patients' smoking behavior before admission and after discharge.

DESIGN

Patients were surveyed by mail 1 week after hospitalization.

SETTING

A 379-bed Boston tertiary teaching hospital.

SUBJECTS

Seven hundred twenty-six patients were surveyed. There were 337 respondents, yielding a response rate of 59%.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Policy knowledge, policy satisfaction, and smoking cessation assistance. Smoking status was assessed retrospectively by self-report 1 week before admission and at the time of the survey.

RESULTS

Bivariate and multiple logistic regression techniques were used to explore relationships among explanatory variables and outcomes. Knowledge of the policy was fair, although satisfaction with the policy was high. Twenty percent of patients reported that they had quit smoking at the time of the survey; 53% of quitters said they quit because of the policy. Thirty-nine percent of patients reported receiving assistance from medical providers, and 88% were satisfied with this help. Smoking cessation assistance was not associated with quitting but was related to smoking less (p < 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

A hospital nonsmoking policy was well accepted by patients and may have had a favorable impact on patients' smoking behavior. Because intervention by health care providers was limited but appeared to be effective, smoking cessation assistance programs need to be developed and implemented in other hospitals so that these results can be generalizable.

Quitting smoking: estimation by meta-analysis of the rate of unaided smoking cessation

The rates (after 12 months' follow-up) of unassisted smoking cessation reported in the literature have varied from 13.8 per cent to 8.5 per cent. A meta-analysis was conducted of the abstinence rates observed in 14 samples of smokers who presented at primary health settings and received either no intervention aimed at smoking or usual care (which involved no deliberate intervention for smoking cessation). The estimated rate of stopping smoking without intervention, over an average 10-month period, was 7.33 per cent. This rate is consistent with others reported in the literature when motivation to quit is taken into account. The estimate provides a baseline to judge the effects of smoking-cessation interventions.

Making the most of a teachable moment: a smokeless-tobacco cessation intervention in the dental office

OBJECTIVES

Primary care medical clinics are good settings for smoking interventions. This study extends this strategy with a smokeless tobacco intervention delivered by dentists and dental hygienists in the course of routine dental care.

METHODS

Male users of moist snuff and chewing tobacco (n = 518) were identified by questionnaire in clinic waiting rooms and then randomly assigned to either usual care or intervention. The intervention included a routine oral examination with special attention to the part of the mouth in which tobacco was kept and an explanation of the health risks of using smokeless tobacco. After receiving unequivocal advice to stop using tobacco, each patient viewed a 9-minute videotape, received a self-help manual, and was briefly counseled by the dental hygienist.

RESULTS

Long-term success was defined as no smokeless tobacco use at both 3- and 12-month follow-ups, with those lost to follow-up counted as smokeless tobacco users. The intervention increased the proportion of patients who quit by about one half (12.5% vs 18.4%, P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate the efficacy of a brief dental office intervention for the general population of smokeless tobacco users.