Identifying barriers and facilitators to increase fibre intakes in UK primary school children and exploring the acceptability of intervention components: a UK qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: Within the UK, dietary fibre intakes are well below recommended intakes and associated with increased risk of obesity. This study aimed to explore the views of parents and children on barriers and facilitators to increasing fibre intakes and improving diets, alongside investigating the appropriateness of intervention components to overcome modifiable barriers. DESIGN: Qualitative study including semi-structured interviews and focus groups informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model. PARTICIPANTS: Year 5 children (aged 9-10-years) and parents, recruited through London primary schools. RESULTS: A total of twenty-four participants (eleven parents and thirteen children) took part. Five key themes were identified as barriers and facilitators, namely lack of (and improving) knowledge, social factors (including parent-child conflicts, limited time for food preparation, influence of peer and family members), current eating habits, influence of the school, community and home environment in shaping eating behaviours, and the importance of choice and variety in finding foods that are healthy and tasty. Parents strongly supported school-based dietary interventions to enable consistent messaging at home and school and help support dietary behaviour change. Practical sessions (such as workshops to strengthen knowledge, taste tests and food swap ideas) were supported by parents and children. CONCLUSIONS: By using a theory-driven approach to explore the barriers and facilitators to increasing fibre intake, this research identified important themes and modifiable barriers to behaviour change and identifies acceptable intervention components to overcome barriers and bring about sustained dietary behaviour change in primary school children.

Exercise interventions for smoking cessation.

BACKGROUND: Taking regular exercise, whether cardiovascular-type exercise or resistance exercise, may help people to give up smoking, particularly by reducing cigarette withdrawal symptoms and cravings, and by helping to manage weight gain. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of exercise-based interventions alone, or combined with a smoking cessation programme, for achieving long-term smoking cessation, compared with a smoking cessation intervention alone or other non-exercise intervention. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register for studies, using the term 'exercise' or 'physical activity' in the title, abstract or keywords. The date of the most recent search was May 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that compared an exercise programme alone, or an exercise programme as an adjunct to a cessation programme, with a cessation programme alone or another non-exercise control group. Trials were required to recruit smokers wishing to quit or recent quitters, to assess abstinence as an outcome and have follow-up of at least six months. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methods. Smoking cessation was measured after at least six months, using the most rigorous definition available, on an intention-to-treat basis. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for smoking cessation for each study, where possible. We grouped eligible studies according to the type of comparison, as either smoking cessation or relapse prevention. We carried out meta-analyses where appropriate, using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 24 eligible trials with a total of 7279 adult participants randomised. Two studies focused on relapse prevention among smokers who had recently stopped smoking, and the remaining 22 studies were concerned with smoking cessation for smokers who wished to quit. Eleven studies were with women only and one with men only. Most studies recruited fairly inactive people. Most of the trials employed supervised, group-based cardiovascular-type exercise supplemented by a home-based exercise programme and combined with a multi-session cognitive behavioural smoking cessation programme. The comparator in most cases was a multi-session cognitive behavioural smoking cessation programme alone. Overall, we judged two studies to be at low risk of bias, 11 at high risk of bias, and 11 at unclear risk of bias. Among the 21 studies analysed, we found low-certainty evidence, limited by potential publication bias and by imprecision, comparing the effect of exercise plus smoking cessation support with smoking cessation support alone on smoking cessation outcomes (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.22; I2 = 0%; 6607 participants). We excluded one study from this analysis as smoking abstinence rates for the study groups were not reported. There was no evidence of subgroup differences according to the type of exercise promoted; the subgroups considered were: cardiovascular-type exercise alone (17 studies), resistance training alone (one study), combined cardiovascular-type and resistance exercise (one study) and type of exercise not specified (two studies). The results were not significantly altered when we excluded trials with high risk of bias, or those with special populations, or those where smoking cessation intervention support was not matched between the intervention and control arms. Among the two relapse prevention studies, we found very low-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias and imprecision, that adding exercise to relapse prevention did not improve long-term abstinence compared with relapse prevention alone (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.47; I2 = 0%; 453 participants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence that adding exercise to smoking cessation support improves abstinence compared with support alone, but the evidence is insufficient to assess whether there is a modest benefit. Estimates of treatment effect were of low or very low certainty, because of concerns about bias in the trials, imprecision and publication bias. Consequently, future trials may change these conclusions.

Supervised, Vigorous Intensity Exercise Intervention for Depressed Female Smokers: A Pilot Study.

INTRODUCTION: Few studies have evaluated exercise interventions for smokers with depression or other psychiatric comorbidities. This pilot study evaluated the potential role of supervised vigorous exercise as a smoking cessation intervention for depressed females. METHODS: Thirty adult women with moderate-severe depressive symptoms were enrolled and randomly assigned to 12 weeks of thrice weekly, in person sessions of vigorous intensity supervised exercise at a YMCA setting (EX; n = 15) or health education (HE; n = 15). All participants received behavioral smoking cessation counseling and nicotine patch therapy. Assessments were done in person at baseline, at the end of 12 weeks of treatment, and at 6 months post-target quit date. Primary end points were exercise adherence (proportion of 36 sessions attended) and biochemically confirmed 7-day point prevalence abstinence at Week 12. Biomarkers of inflammation were explored for differences between treatment groups and between women who smoked and those abstinent at Week 12. RESULTS: Treatment adherence was high for both groups (72% for EX and 66% for HE; p = .55). The Week 12 smoking abstinence rate was higher for EX than HE (11/15 [73%] vs. 5/15 [33%]; p = .028), but no significant differences emerged at 6-month follow-up. Interleukin-6 levels increased more for those smoking than women abstinent at Week 12 (p = .040). CONCLUSIONS: Vigorous intensity supervised exercise is feasible and enhances short-term smoking cessation among depressed female smokers. Innovative and cost-effective strategies to bolster long-term exercise adherence and smoking cessation need evaluation in this population. Inflammatory biomarkers could be examined in future research as mediators of treatment efficacy. IMPLICATIONS: This preliminary study found that vigorous intensity supervised exercise is feasible and enhances short-term smoking cessation among depressed female smokers. This research addressed an important gap in the field. Despite decades of research examining exercise interventions for smoking cessation, few studies were done among depressed smokers or those with comorbid psychiatric disorders. A novel finding was increases in levels of a pro-inflammatory biomarker observed among women who smoked at the end of the intervention compared to those who did not.

Exercise interventions for smoking cessation.

BACKGROUND: Taking regular exercise may help people give up smoking by moderating nicotine withdrawal and cravings, and by helping to manage weight gain. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether exercise-based interventions alone, or combined with a smoking cessation programme, are more effective than a smoking cessation intervention alone. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register in April 2014, and searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL Plus in May 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized trials which compared an exercise programme alone, or an exercise programme as an adjunct to a cessation programme, with a cessation programme (which we considered the control in this review). Studies were required to recruit smokers or recent quitters and have a follow-up of six months or more. Studies that did not meet the full inclusion criteria because they only assessed the acute effects of exercise on smoking behaviour, or because the outcome was smoking reduction, are summarised but not formally included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data on study characteristics and smoking outcomes. Because of differences between studies in the characteristics of the interventions used we summarized the results narratively, making no attempt at meta-analysis. We assessed risk of selection and attrition bias using standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 20 trials with a total of 5,870 participants. The largest study was an internet trial with 2,318 participants, and eight trials had fewer than 30 people in each treatment arm. Studies varied in the timing and intensity of the smoking cessation and exercise programmes offered. Only one included study was judged to be at low risk of bias across all domains assessed. Four studies showed significantly higher abstinence rates in a physically active group versus a control group at end of treatment. One of these studies also showed a significant benefit for exercise versus control on abstinence at the three-month follow-up and a benefit for exercise of borderline significance (p = 0.05) at the 12-month follow-up. Another study reported significantly higher abstinence rates at six month follow-up for a combined exercise and smoking cessation programme compared with brief smoking cessation advice. One study showed significantly higher abstinence rates for the exercise group versus a control group at the three-month follow-up but not at the end of treatment or 12-month follow-up. The other studies showed no significant effect for exercise on abstinence. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Only two of the 20 trials offered evidence for exercise aiding smoking cessation in the long term. All the other trials were too small to reliably exclude an effect of intervention, or included an exercise intervention which may not have been sufficiently intense to achieve the desired level of exercise. Trials are needed with larger sample sizes, sufficiently intense interventions in terms of both exercise intensity and intensity of support being provided, equal contact control conditions, and measures of exercise adherence and change in physical activity in both exercise and comparison groups.

A pilot randomised trial to assess the methods and procedures for evaluating the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Exercise Assisted Reduction then Stop (EARS) among disadvantaged smokers.

BACKGROUND: There have been few rigorous studies on the effects of behavioural support for helping smokers to reduce who do not immediately wish to quit. While reduction may not have the health benefits of quitting, it may lead smokers to want to quit. Physical activity (PA) helps to reduce cravings and withdrawal symptoms, and also reduces weight gain after quitting, but smokers may be less inclined to exercise. There is scope to develop and determine the effectiveness of interventions to support smoking reduction and increase physical activity, for those not ready to quit. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) [Exercise Assisted Reduction then Stop (EARS) smoking study] to (1) design and evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a PA and smoking-reduction counselling intervention [for disadvantaged smokers who do not wish to quit but do want to reduce their smoking (to increase the likelihood of quitting)], and (2) to inform the design of a large RCT to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the intervention. DESIGN: A single-centre, pragmatic, pilot trial with follow-up up to 16 weeks. A mixed methods approach assessed the acceptability and feasibility of the intervention and trial methods. Smokers were individually randomised to intervention or control arms. SETTING: General practices, NHS buildings, community venues, and the Stop Smoking Service (SSS) within Plymouth, UK. PARTICIPANTS: Aged > 18 years, smoking ≥ 10 cigarettes per day (for ≥ 2 years) who wished to cut down. We excluded individuals who were contraindicated for moderate PA, posed a safety risk to the research team, wished to quit immediately or use Nicotine Replacement Therapy, not registered with a general practitioner, or did not converse in English. INTERVENTION: We designed a client-centred, counselling-based intervention designed to support smoking reduction and increases in PA. Support sessions were delivered by trained counsellors either face to face or by telephone. Both intervention and control arms were given information at baseline on specialist SSS support available should they have wished to quit. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was 4-week post-quit expired air carbon monoxide (CO)-confirmed abstinence from smoking. Secondary outcomes included validated behavioural, cognitive and emotional/affective and health-related quality of life measures and treatment costs. RESULTS: The study randomised 99 participants, 49 to the intervention arm and 50 to the control arm, with a 62% follow-up rate at 16 weeks. In the intervention and control arms, 14% versus 4%, respectively [relative risk = 3.57; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 16.35], had expired CO-confirmed abstinence at least 4 and up to 8 weeks after quit day; 22% versus 6% (relative risk = 3.74; 95% CI 1.11 to 12.60) made a quit attempt; 10% versus 4% (relative risk = 92.55; 95% CI 0.52 to 12.53) achieved point-prevalent abstinence at 16 weeks; and 39% versus 20% (relative risk = 1.94; 95% CI 1.01 to 3.74) achieved at least a 50% reduction in the number of cigarettes smoked daily. The percentage reporting using PA for controlling smoking in the intervention versus control arms was 55% versus 22%, respectively at 8 weeks and 37% versus 16%, respectively, at 16 weeks. The counsellors generally delivered the intervention as planned and participants responded with a variety of smoking reduction strategies, sometimes supported by changes in PA. The intervention costs were approximately £192 per participant. Exploratory cost-effectiveness modelling indicates that the intervention may be cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: The study provided valuable information on the resources needed to improve study recruitment and retention. Offering support for smoking reduction and PA appears to have value in promoting reduction and cessation in disadvantaged smokers not currently motivated to quit. A large RCT is needed to assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the intervention in this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 13837944. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment, Vol. 18, No. 4. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Exercise interventions for smoking cessation.

BACKGROUND: Taking regular exercise may help people give up smoking by moderating nicotine withdrawal and cravings, and by helping to manage weight gain. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether exercise-based interventions alone, or combined with a smoking cessation programme, are more effective than a smoking cessation intervention alone. SEARCH METHODS: In July 2011, we searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register for studies including the terms 'exercise' or 'physical activity'. We also searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Dissertation Abstracts and CINAHL using the terms 'exercise' or 'physical activity' and 'smoking cessation'. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized trials which compared an exercise programme alone, or an exercise programme as an adjunct to a cessation programme, with a cessation programme, recruiting smokers or recent quitters, and with a follow up of six months or more. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data on study characteristics and smoking outcomes. Because of differences in studies we summarized the results narratively, making no attempt at meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 15 trials, seven of which had fewer than 25 people in each treatment arm. They varied in the timing and intensity of the smoking cessation and exercise programmes. Three studies showed significantly higher abstinence rates in a physically active group versus a control group at end of treatment. One of these studies also showed a significant benefit for exercise versus control on abstinence at the three-month follow up and a benefit for exercise of borderline significance (p = 0.05) at the 12-month follow up. One study showed significantly higher abstinence rates for the exercise group versus a control group at the three-month follow up but not at the end of treatment or 12-month follow up. The other studies showed no significant effect for exercise on abstinence. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Only one of the 15 trials offered evidence for exercise aiding smoking cessation at a 12-month follow up. All the other trials were too small to reliably exclude an effect of intervention, or included an exercise intervention which was insufficiently intense to achieve the desired level of exercise. Trials are needed with larger sample sizes, sufficiently intense interventions, equal contact control conditions, and measures of exercise adherence and change in physical activity in both exercise and comparison groups.

Acute effects of moderate intensity aerobic exercise on affective withdrawal symptoms and cravings among women smokers.

A growing number of laboratory studies have shown that acute bouts of aerobic exercise favorably impact affect and cravings among smokers. However, randomized trials have generally shown exercise to have no favorable effect on smoking cessation or withdrawal symptoms during quit attempts. The purpose of the present study was to explore this apparent contradiction by assessing acute changes in affect and cravings immediately prior to and following each exercise and contact control session during an eight-week smoking cessation trial. Sixty previously low-active, healthy, female smokers were randomized to an eight-week program consisting of brief baseline smoking cessation counseling and the nicotine patch plus either three sessions/week of moderate intensity aerobic exercise or contact control. Findings revealed a favorable impact of exercise on acute changes in positive activated affect (i.e., energy), negative deactivated affect (i.e., tiredness), and cigarette cravings relative to contact control. However, effects dissipated from session to session. Results suggest that aerobic exercise has potential as a smoking cessation treatment, but that it must be engaged in frequently and consistently over time in order to derive benefits. Thus, it is not surprising that previous randomized controlled trials-in which adherence to exercise programs has generally been poor-have been unsuccessful in showing effects of aerobic exercise on smoking cessation outcomes.

Resistance training as an aid to standard smoking cessation treatment: a pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Research indicates that exercise may be helpful for smoking cessation; however, the majority of studies have focused only on women and only on aerobic exercise. This pilot study explored the use of resistance training (RT) (i.e., weight lifting) as an adjunctive strategy for quitting smoking for both men and women. METHODS: A sample of 25 smokers received a brief smoking cessation counseling session and the nicotine patch prior to being randomized into a 12-week RT or contact control (CC) group. Assessments were conducted at baseline, 3-month, and at a 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Participants (52% female) averaged 36.5 years (SD = 12.0) of age and 19.1 years (SD = 12.0) of smoking. At the 3-month assessment, objectively verified 7-day point prevalence abstinence (PPA) rates were 46% for the RT group and 17% for CC; prolonged abstinence rates were 16% and 8%, respectively. At the 6-month assessment, objectively verified 7-day PPA rates were 38% for the RT group and 17% for CC; prolonged abstinence rates were 15% and 8%, respectively. Mean body weight decreased 0.6 kg (SD = 1.7) in the RT group and increased 0.6 kg (SD = 2.8) in the CC group. Mean body fat decreased 0.5% (SD = 1.8) in the RT group and increased 0.6% (SD = 0.7) in the CC. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study reporting on the use of a RT program as an aid to smoking cessation treatment. The findings suggest that such a program is feasible as an adjunctive treatment for smoking cessation. An adequately powered trial is warranted.

Cannabinoid type 1 receptor antagonists for smoking cessation.

BACKGROUND: Selective type 1 cannabinoid (CB1) receptor antagonists may assist with smoking cessation by restoring the balance of the endocannabinoid system, which can be disrupted by prolonged use of nicotine. They also seeks to address many smokers' reluctance to persist with a quit attempt because of concerns about weight gain. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether selective CB1 receptor antagonists (currently rimonabant and taranabant) increase the numbers of people stopping smoking To assess their effects on weight change in successful quitters and in those who try to quit but fail. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Review Group specialized register for trials, using the terms ('rimonabant' or 'taranabant') and 'smoking' in the title or abstract, or as keywords. We also searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO, using major MESH terms. We acquired electronic or paper copies of posters of preliminary trial results presented at the American Thoracic Society Meeting in 2005, and at the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco European Meeting 2006. We also attempted to contact the authors of ongoing studies of rimonabant, and Sanofi Aventis (manufacturers of rimonabant). The most recent search was in January 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Types of studies Randomized controlled trialsTypes of participants Adult smokersTypes of interventions Selective CB1 receptor antagonists, such as rimonabant and taranabant. Types of outcome measures The primary outcome is smoking status at a minimum of six months after the start of treatment. We preferred sustained cessation rates to point prevalence, and biochemically verified cessation to self-reported quitting. We regarded smokers who drop out or are lost to follow up as continuing smokers. We have noted any adverse effects of treatment.A secondary outcome is weight change associated with the cessation attempt. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors checked the abstracts for relevance, and attempted to acquire full trial reports. One author extracted the data, and a second author checked them. MAIN RESULTS: We found three trials which met our inclusion criteria, covering 1567 smokers (cessation: STRATUS-EU and STRATUS-US), and 1661 quitters (relapse prevention: STRATUS-WW). At one year, the pooled risk ratio (RR) for quitting with rimonabant 20 mg was 1.50 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10 to 2.05). No significant benefit was demonstrated for rimonabant at 5 mg dosage. Adverse events included nausea and upper respiratory tract infections. In the relapse prevention trial, smokers who had quit on the 20 mg regimen were more likely to remain abstinent on either active regimen than on placebo; the RR for the 20 mg maintenance group was 1.29 (95% CI 1.06 to 1.57), and for the 5 mg maintenance group 1.30 (95% CI 1.06 to 1.59). There appeared to be no significant benefit of maintenance treatment for the 5 mg quitters. One trial of taranabant was not included in our meta-analyses, as it followed participants only until end of treatment; at eight weeks it found no benefit for treatment over placebo, with an OR of 1.2 (90% CI 0.6 to 2.5). For rimonabant, weight gain was reported to be significantly lower among the 20 mg quitters than in the 5 mg or placebo quitters. During treatment, overweight or obese smokers tended to lose weight, while normal weight smokers did not. For taranabant, weight gain was significantly lower for 2-8 mg versus placebo at the end of eight weeks of treatment. In 2008, post-marketing surveillance led the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) to require Sanofi Aventis to withdraw rimonabant, because of links to mental disorders. The development of taranabant was also suspended by Merck & Co because of unacceptable adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: From the trial reports available, rimonabant 20 mg may increase the chances of quitting approximately 1½-fold. The evidence for rimonabant in maintaining abstinence is inconclusive. Rimonabant 20 mg may moderate weight gain in the long term. Taranabant 2-8 mg may moderate weight gain, at least in the short term. In 2008, development of both rimonabant and taranabant was discontinued by the manufacturers.

Moderate intensity exercise as an adjunct to standard smoking cessation treatment for women: a pilot study.

Previous randomized controlled trials have not supported moderate intensity exercise as an efficacious adjunct to smoking cessation treatments for women; however, compliance with exercise programs in these studies has been poor. The purpose of this pilot study was to estimate the effects of moderate intensity exercise on smoking cessation outcomes under optimal conditions for exercise program compliance. Sixty previously sedentary, healthy, female smokers were randomized to an 8-week program consisting of brief baseline smoking cessation counseling and the nicotine patch plus either 150 min/week of moderate intensity exercise or contact control. Participants attended a median of 86.4% and 95.5% of prescribed exercise/control sessions, respectively. There was a moderate, though statistically nonsignificant, effect of exercise at post-treatment for objectively verified 7-day point prevalence abstinence (48.3% vs. 23.3%; OR = 3.07, 95% CI: 0.89-11.07) and prolonged abstinence (34.5% vs. 20.0%; OR = 2.11, 95% CI: 0.56-8.32). Effects were attenuated when controlling for potential confounders, and after a 1-month, no-treatment period. The findings provide a preliminary indication that, given adequate compliance, moderate intensity exercise may enhance short-term smoking cessation outcomes for women; however, a larger trial is warranted.

Exercise interventions for smoking cessation.

BACKGROUND: Taking regular exercise may help people give up smoking by moderating nicotine withdrawal and cravings, and by helping to manage weight gain. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether exercise-based interventions alone or combined with a smoking cessation programme are more effective than a smoking cessation intervention alone. SEARCH STRATEGY: In July 2008, we searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register for studies including the terms 'exercise' or 'physical activity'. We also searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Dissertation Abstracts and CINAHL. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized trials which compared an exercise programme alone, or an exercise programme as an adjunct to a cessation programme, with a cessation programme, recruiting smokers or recent quitters, and with a follow up of six months or more. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data on study characteristics and smoking outcomes. Because of differences in studies we summarized the results narratively, making no attempt at meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 13 trials, six of which had fewer than 25 people in each treatment arm. They varied in the timing and intensity of the smoking cessation and exercise programmes. Three studies showed significantly higher abstinence rates in a physically active group versus a control group at end of treatment. One of these studies also showed a significant benefit for exercise versus control on abstinence at the three-month follow up and a benefit for exercise of borderline significance (P = 0.05) at the 12-month follow up. One study showed significantly higher abstinence rates for the exercise group versus a control group at the three-month follow up but not at the end of treatment or 12-month follow up. The other studies showed no significant effect for exercise on abstinence. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Only one of the 13 trials offered evidence for exercise aiding smoking cessation at a 12-month follow up. All the other trials were too small to exclude reliably an effect of intervention, or included an exercise intervention which was insufficiently intense to achieve the desired level of exercise. Trials are needed with larger sample sizes, sufficiently intense interventions, equal contact control conditions, measures of exercise adherence and change in physical activity in both exercise and comparison groups.

The relationship between physical activity, sedentary behaviour and psychological wellbeing among adolescents.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies examining the relationship between physical activity levels and broad-based measures of psychological wellbeing in adolescents have been limited by not controlling for potentially confounding variables. The present study examined the relationship between adolescents' self-reported physical activity level, sedentary behaviour and psychological wellbeing; while controlling for a broad range of sociodemographic, health and developmental factors. METHODS: The study entailed a cross-sectional school-based survey in ten British towns. Two thousand six hundred and twenty three adolescents (aged 13-16 years) reported physical activity levels, patterns of sedentary behaviour (TV/computer/video usage) and completed the strengths and difficulties questionnaire (SDQ). RESULTS: Lower levels of self-reported physical activity and higher levels of sedentary behaviour showed graded associations with higher SDQ total difficulties scores, both for boys (P < 0.001) and girls (P < 0.02) after adjustment for age and town. Additional adjustment for social class, number of parents, predicted school examination results, body mass index, ethnicity, alcohol intake and smoking status had little effect on these findings. CONCLUSIONS: Low levels of self-reported physical activity are independently associated with diminished psychological wellbeing among adolescents. Longitudinal studies may provide further insights into the relationship between wellbeing and activity levels in this population. Ultimately, randomised controlled trials are needed to evaluate the effects of increasing physical activity on psychological wellbeing among adolescents.

The acute effects of exercise on cigarette cravings, withdrawal symptoms, affect and smoking behaviour: a systematic review.

AIM: To review the effects of a single session of exercise on cigarette cravings, withdrawal symptoms and smoking behaviour. METHODS: A systematic search and critical appraisal of all 14 relevant studies. RESULTS: All 12 studies that compared a bout of exercise with a passive condition reported a positive effect on cigarette cravings, withdrawal symptoms and smoking behaviour. Two other studies that compared two intensities of exercise revealed no differences in outcomes. Single and multi-item measures of cigarette cravings, withdrawal symptoms and negative affect decreased rapidly during exercise and remained reduced for up to 50 minutes after exercise. Effect sizes for seven studies that assessed "strength of desire to smoke" showed a mean reduction, 10 minutes after exercise, of 1.1 (SD 0.9). Four studies reported a two- to threefold longer time to the next cigarette following exercise. Cravings and withdrawal symptoms were reduced with an exercise intensity from as high as 60-85% heart rate reserve (HRR) (lasting 30-40 minutes) to as low as 24% HRR (lasting 15 minutes), and also with isometric exercise (for 5 minutes). All but one study involved participants temporarily abstaining for the purposes of the experiment. Distraction was probably not the primary reason for the effects. CONCLUSIONS: Relatively small doses of exercise should be recommended as an aid to managing cigarette cravings and withdrawal symptoms. Further research to understand the mechanisms involved, such as stress reduction or neurobiological mechanisms, could lead to development of more effective and practical methods to reduce withdrawal phenomena.