Effectiveness of mobile smoking cessation treatment with 1-week nicotine replacement therapy sampling at outdoor smoking hotspots: A cluster randomized controlled trial.

AIMS: To evaluate the effectiveness of mobile smoking cessation (SC) treatment with 1-week nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) sampling on recruitment and quitting outcomes. DESIGN: Two-arm cluster RCT (1:1 ratio), single-blinded, at 244 recruitment sessions in Hong Kong outdoor smoking hotspots from October 2018-December 2019. SETTING: Participant were recruited by ambassadors and treated at the mobile SC truck. PARTICIPANTS: 834 adult (≥18 years, male 81.3%) daily smokers, Chinese-speaking, non-NRT users in the past month, consented after nurse-led intervention in mobile SC truck were randomized to the experimental (n = 482 male 79.5%) and the control group (n = 352, male 83.8%). INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: The experimental group received a 1-week free NRT sample, an NRT instruction card, and mobile SC treatment including onsite nurse-led brief medication advice (about 15 minutes) and referral to SC clinics. The control group received the same mobile SC treatment. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome was self-reported quit attempts at 1-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes included SC service use at 1 month, and biochemically validated abstinence (exhaled carbon monoxide < 4 ppm; or saliva cotinine < 10 ng/ml) at 6-month follow-up. Additionally, a post-hoc cost analysis was conducted. FINDINGS: By intention-to-treat, the two groups showed similar prevalence of quit attempts (44·4% versus 43·5%, risk ratio (RR) = 1·04, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0·79-1·37, P = 0·79). Compared with the control group, the experimental group showed lower SC service use at clinics (32·4% versus 44·9%, RR = 0·72, 95%CI = 0·57-0·91, P = 0·006), but no significant difference in validated abstinence (4·6% versus 2·8%, RR = 1·64, 95%CI = 0·76-3·50, P = 0·21). The experimental recruitment sessions recruited more smokers for onsite medication advice than the control session (mean 6·7 vs 5·0, adjusted incident rate ratio = 1·30, 95%CI = 1·08-1·56, P = 0·005). CONCLUSIONS: Mobile smoking cessation treatment with 1-week nicotine replacement therapy sampling did not increase quit attempts or abstinence outcomes among recruited daily smokers in Hong Kong. The intervention increased smokers' uptake of onsite medication advice but reduced subsequent smoking cessation service use at clinics.

Effectiveness of Very Brief Advice on Tobacco Cessation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Very brief advice (VBA; ≤ 3 min) on quitting is practical and scalable during brief medical interactions with patients who smoke. This study aims to synthesize the effectiveness of VBA for smoking cessation and summarize the implementation strategies. METHODS: We searched randomized controlled trials aiming at tobacco abstinence and comparing VBA versus no smoking advice or no contact from Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, PsycInfo databases, six Chinese databases, two trial registries ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO-ICTRP from inception to September 30, 2023. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations framework was used to assess the certainty of the evidence of the meta-analytic findings. The outcomes were self-reported long-term tobacco abstinence at least 6 months after treatment initiation, earlier than 6 months after treatment initiation, and quit attempts. Effect sizes were computed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI using frequentist random-effect models. DATA SYNTHESIS: Thirteen randomized controlled trials from 15 articles (n = 26,437) were included. There was moderate-certainty evidence that VBA significantly increased self-reported tobacco abstinence at ≥ 6 months in the adjusted model (adjusted risk ratio ARR 1.17, 95% CI: 1.07-1.27) compared with controls. The sensitivity analysis showed similar results when abstinence was verified by biochemical validation (n = 6 studies, RR 1.53, 95% CI 0.98-2.40). There was high-certainty evidence that VBA significantly increased abstinence at < 6 months (ARR 1.22, 95% CI: 1.01-1.47). Evidence of effect on quit attempts (ARR 1.03, 95% CI 0.97-1.08) was of very low certainty. DISCUSSION: VBA delivered in a clinical setting is effective in increasing self-reported tobacco abstinence, which provides support for wider adoption in clinical practice.

Efficacy of simple and very brief handgrip and isometric exercises for reducing withdrawal symptoms in cigarette smokers: A pilot randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Withdrawal symptoms lead to smoking relapse and reduce the intention to quit. The present pilot RCT examined the effect of simple and very brief handgrip and isometric exercises on reducing withdrawal symptoms, measured by the strength of tobacco craving, Questionnaire of Smoking Urges-Brief (QSU-B), Mood and Physical Symptoms Scale (MPSS), and Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). METHODS: In this 2-arm, open-labeled pilot RCT, 30 current smokers who had abstained from tobacco for at least 9 hours were randomly assigned (allocation ratio 1:1) to either the intervention group that watched a 5-minute video and did 5-minute handgrip and isometric exercises (pulling and pushing) or control group that watched 10-minute healthy-diet videos. Measurements were taken before, immediately after, and 10 minutes post-intervention. Outcomes were self-reported strength of tobacco craving, QSU-B, MPSS, and PANAS scores. The effect size for group-by-time interaction was assessed using Cohen's f2 (small=0.02, medium=0.15, large=0.35). RESULTS: Group-by-time interactions showed that the intervention group showed larger reductions than the control group in the strength of tobacco craving (Cohen's f2=0.54, 95% CI: 0.52-0.57), QSU-B (Cohen's f2=0.77; 95% CI: 0.74-0.80), and MPSS (Cohen's f2=0.51; 95% CI: 0.46-0.56) over the three measurement points. CONCLUSIONS: This RCT showed that simple and brief handgrip and isometric exercises could immediately reduce withdrawal symptoms and up to 10 minutes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: in https://clinicaltrials.gov/. IDENTIFIER: NCT04059497.

The effects of flow settings during high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy for neonates and young children.

BACKGROUND: During neonatal and paediatric high-flow nasal cannula therapy, optimising the flow setting is crucial for favourable physiological and clinical outcomes. However, considerable variability exists in clinical practice regarding initial flows and subsequent adjustments for these patients. Our review aimed to summarise the impact of various flows during high-flow nasal cannula treatment in neonates and children. METHODS: Two investigators independently searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane for in vitro and in vivo studies published in English before 30 April 2023. Studies enrolling adults (≥18 years) or those using a single flow setting were excluded. Data extraction and risk of bias assessments were performed independently by two investigators. The study protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022345419). RESULTS: 38 406 studies were identified, with 44 included. In vitro studies explored flow settings' effects on airway pressures, humidity and carbon dioxide clearance; all were flow-dependent. Observational clinical studies consistently reported that higher flows led to increased pharyngeal pressure and potentially increased intrathoracic airway pressure (especially among neonates), improved oxygenation, and reduced respiratory rate and work of breathing up to a certain threshold. Three randomised controlled trials found no significant differences in treatment failure among different flow settings. Flow impacts exhibited significant heterogeneity among different patients. CONCLUSION: Individualising flow settings in neonates and young children requires consideration of the patient's peak inspiratory flow, respiratory rate, heart rate, tolerance, work of breathing and lung aeration for optimal care.

Effectiveness of personalized smoking cessation intervention based on ecological momentary assessment for smokers who prefer unaided quitting: protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Introduction: Ecological momentary assessment (EMA)-based smoking cessation intervention may help personalize intervention for smokers who prefer to quit smoking unaided. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of EMA-based phone counseling and instant messaging for smoking cessation. Methods/design: This is a two-arm, accessor-blinded, simple individual randomized controlled trial (allocation ratio 1:1). Participants will be recruited from community sites and online platforms in Hong Kong. Interventions will be delivered via a phone call and instant messaging. Current adult smokers who (1) self-report no intention to use smoking cessation services and medication in the coming month and (2) have not used smoking cessation services or nicotine replacement therapy in the past 7 days will be recruited. Recruited participants will be randomized to intervention or control groups via an online randomizer. All participants will be required to complete EMAs (five times per day for 7 consecutive days). The intervention group (n = 220) will receive a nurse-led brief phone counseling immediately after the 1-week EMAs and 10-week EMA-based advice via instant messaging applications (e.g., WhatsApp, WeChat). The 10-week EMA-based advice covers a summary of the 1-week EMAs, and tailored cessation support focused on personalized smoking triggers. The control group (n = 220) will not receive any intervention during the same period. The primary outcomes are participants' progression toward smoking cessation assessed by the Incremental Behavior Change toward Smoking Cessation (IBC-S) and biochemically validated abstinence at the 3-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes include self-reported and biochemically validated tobacco abstinence at the 6-month follow-up. Discussion: The findings will provide evidence that the EMA-based tailored smoking cessation intervention can be adapted as a new health promotion strategy for current smokers who are unwilling to use smoking cessation aids. Clinical trial registration: https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05212220, identifier: NCT05212220.

[Risk factors for massive ascites after living donor liver transplantation in adult and impact of massive ascites on patient survival].

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the risk factors relate to massive ascites after the living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in adult and the impact of massive ascites on patient survival. METHODS: Clinical data of 105 adult patients undergone LDLT from 2005 to 2011 in West China Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. The risk factors for massive ascites were firstly determined with univariate analysis, then with two logistic regression analysis if P< 0.1 by univariate analysis. Kaplan-Meier survival curve was used to investigate the association between massive ascites and patient survival. RESULTS: The average amount of ascites within seven days postoperatively in 105 LDLT cases was 5 362 mL (766 mL per day), and massive ascites developed in 27 patients (25.7%). The variables, including receptor age, liver disease, preoperative MELD score, Child-Pugh score, preoperative ascites, preoperative INR, preoperative total bilirubin, preoperative serum albumin, operative time, postoperative SOFA score, postoperative total bilirubin, showed significant difference between massive ascites group and non-massive ascites group. Another variable that P < 0.1 was graft to recipient weight ratio (GRWR) (P = 0.069). The two logistic regression showed that preoperative ascites (OR = 3.33, P < 0.001), postoperative SOFA score (OR = 1.25, P = 0.027) were independent risk factors for massive ascites after LDLT. The results of Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that the 3-month, 6-month, 1-year survival rates of control group were 89.6%, 81.2%, 79.5% respectively, and those rates of massive ascites group were 80.8%, 80.8%, 74.1% respectively. The survival of the patients who developed massive ascites after LDLT was reduced when compared with control group, but it was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Preoperative ascites, postoperative SOFA score were independent risk factors for massive ascites after LDLT. The impact of massive ascites on patients survival need further investigation.