[Smoking cessation interventions in clinical practice].
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Rabenstein A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8413689 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Sep
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
[Smoking cessation interventions in clinical practice].
Rabenstein Andrea A Aydin Darya D Lochbühler Kirsten K
MMW Fortschritte der Medizin 20210901 15
Similar Datasets
Project description:Strategies for assisting smoking cessation include behavioural counselling to enhance motivation and to support attempts to quit and pharmacological intervention to reduce nicotine reinforcement and withdrawal from nicotine. Three drugs are currently used as first line pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation, nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion and varenicline. Compared with placebo, the drug effect varies from 2.27 (95% CI 2.02, 2.55) for varenicline, 1.69 (95% CI 1.53, 1.85) for bupropion and 1.60 (95% CI 1.53, 1.68) for any form of nicotine replacement therapy. Despite some controversy regarding the safety of bupropion and varenicline, regulatory agencies consider these drugs as having a favourable benefit/risk profile. However, given the high rate of psychiatric comorbidity in dependent smokers, practitioners should closely monitor patients for neuropsychiatric symptoms. Second-line pharmacotherapies include nortriptyline and clonidine. This review also offers an overview of pipeline developments and issues related to smoking cessation in special populations such as persons with psychiatric comorbidity and pregnant and adolescent smokers.
| S-EPMC4014023 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealthcare professionals, including nurses, frequently advise people to improve their health by stopping smoking. Such advice may be brief, or part of more intensive interventions.ObjectivesTo 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 methodsWe searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register and CINAHL in January 2017.Selection criteriaRandomized trials of smoking cessation interventions delivered by nurses or health visitors with follow-up of at least six months.Data collection and analysisTwo 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 resultsFifty-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' conclusionsThere 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.
| S-EPMC6486227 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6819982 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6703145 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Hospital admission is a unique opportunity for a smoking cessation attempt; smokers may be more motivated to quit as they are distanced from the usual cues they face associated with nicotine consumption, and the effect of poor lifestyle habits on their health are brought to light. With most hospitals employing smoke-free grounds, patients are further inclined to stop smoking. According to NICE guidance, smoking cessation support should be delivered within 1 working day of admission for inpatients, and NRT products should be recommended and offered to all people who smoke. Despite this, many smokers on the cardiology ward at the John Radcliffe Hospital fail to receive smoking cessation advice, and are unable to benefit from Nicotine Replacement Therapy. This leads to missed opportunities to stop smoking, increased morbidity in patients undergoing cardiovascular procedures, and increased costs for the NHS, with patients who continue smoking being re-admitted with more smoking-related illnesses in the future.
| S-EPMC4645803 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4979976 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7059898 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10042551 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8493442 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundActive smoking increases the risk of tuberculosis (TB) infection 2 to 2.5 times and is significantly associated with recurrent TB and TB mortality. Observational studies have shown associations between smoking and poor TB treatment outcomes such as increased loss to follow-up rate, severity of disease, drug resistance and slow smear conversion. Since most smoking-related immunologic abnormalities are reversible within six weeks of stopping smoking, smoking cessation may have substantial positive effects on TB treatment outcomes, TB relapse and future lung disease.ObjectivesTo analyse the effect of tobacco smoking cessation interventions (SCIs) on the treatment outcomes of people with adult pulmonary TB.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register using free-text and MeSH terms for TB and antitubercular treatment. We also searched MEDLINE and EMBASE using the same topic-related terms, combined with the search terms used to identify trials of tobacco cessation interventions from the Specialised Register. We also searched reference list of articles and reviews, the Conference Paper Index, clinicaltrials.gov and grey literature. The searches are current to 29th July 2015.Selection criteriaIndividual and cluster-randomised controlled trials (RCTs), regardless of date, language and publication status, studies of adults with pulmonary TB on first-line anti-tubercular drugs, with interventions at either an individual or a population level, delivered separately or as part of a larger tobacco control package. This included any type of behavioural or pharmaceutical intervention or both for smoking cessation.Data collection and analysisUsing the eligibility criteria, two authors independently checked the abstracts of retrieved studies for relevance, and acquired full trial reports of candidates for inclusion. The authors resolved any disagreements on eligibility by mutual consent, or by recourse to a third author. Two authors intended to independently extract study data from eligible studies into a data extraction form and compare the findings, synthesise data using risk ratios, and assess risk of bias using standard Cochrane methodologies. However, we found no eligible trials.Main resultsThere were no randomised controlled trials that met the eligibility criteria. A number of potentially eligible studies are underway, and we will assess them for inclusion in the next update of this review.Authors' conclusionsThere is a lack of high-quality evidence, i.e. RCTs, that tests the effectiveness of cessation interventions in improving TB treatment outcomes. There is a need for good-quality randomised controlled trials that assess the effect of SCIs on TB treatment outcomes in both the short and long term. Establishing such an evidence base would be an essential step towards the implementation of SCIs in TB control programmes worldwide.
| S-EPMC7386791 | biostudies-literature