Vaping among young people-Our best defence is self-defence.

Use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes or 'vapes') has risen rapidly among young Australians in recent years. To combat this, on 2 May 2023, the Albanese Government announced a suite of reforms to reduce the desirability and accessibility of e-cigarettes to young people-including a ban on disposable e-cigarettes, restricting flavours, colours and nicotine content and requiring pharmaceutical-like packaging. While many have welcomed this announcement, the efficacy of such reforms in reducing the availability of e-cigarettes to young people remain to be seen, particularly given the current prescription-only model has done little to curb youth vaping. We argue that, in an uncertain landscape where e-cigarettes will likely remain accessible and desirable to young people, it is critical that we also upskill, empower and arm our young people with the skills, resilience, resources and knowledge to make informed and positive health decisions so that: (i) fewer young people opt to take up vaping (primary prevention); and (ii) among those who already do vape, more seek help earlier on to reduce or cease their use before dependency develops (secondary prevention). Schools are an ideal setting for the delivery of these programs, where they can be delivered en masse, integrated into existing alcohol and other drug programs and aligned with school curricula. Skills-based school prevention programs have demonstrated significant and sustained reductions in drug-related harms up to 7 years post-intervention. For as long as vapes remain widely available, desirable and purposefully marketed towards young people, we believe our best defence is self-defence.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the provision of preventive care for modifiable chronic disease risk behaviours by mental health services.

People with mental illness experience increased chronic disease burden, contributed to by a greater prevalence of modifiable chronic disease risk behaviours. Policies recommend mental health services provide preventive care for such risk behaviours. Provision of such care has not previously been synthesised. This review assessed the provision of preventive care for modifiable chronic disease risk behaviours by mental health services. Four databases were searched from 2006 to 2017. Eligible studies were observational quantitative study designs conducted in mental health services, where preventive care was provided to clients for tobacco smoking, harmful alcohol consumption, inadequate nutrition, or inadequate physical activity. Two reviewers independently screened studies, conducted data extraction and critical appraisal. Results were pooled as proportions of clients receiving or clinicians providing preventive care using random effects meta-analyses, by risk behaviour and preventive care element (ask/assess, advise, assist, arrange). Subgroup analyses were conducted by mental health service type (inpatient, outpatient, other/multiple). Narrative synthesis was used where meta-analysis was not possible. Thirty-eight studies were included with 26 amenable to meta-analyses. Analyses revealed that rates of assessment were highest for smoking (78%, 95% confidence interval [CI]:59%-96%) and lowest for nutrition (17%, 95% CI:1%-35%); with variable rates of care provision for all behaviours, care elements, and across service types, with substantial heterogeneity across analyses. Findings indicated suboptimal and variable provision of preventive care for modifiable chronic disease risk behaviours in mental health services, but should be considered with caution due to the very low quality of cumulative evidence. PROSPERO registration: CRD42016049889.

Estimation of a Relative Risk Effect Size when Using Continuous Outcomes Data: An Application of Methods in the Prevention of Major Depression and Eating Disorders.

INTRODUCTION: The raw mean difference (RMD) and standardized mean difference (SMD) are continuous effect size measures that are not readily usable in decision-analytic models of health care interventions. This study compared the predictive performance of 3 methods by which continuous outcomes data collected using psychiatric rating scales can be used to calculate a relative risk (RR) effect size. METHODS: Three methods to calculate RR effect sizes from continuous outcomes data are described: the RMD, SMD, and Cochrane conversion methods. Each conversion method was validated using data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the efficacy of interventions for the prevention of depression in youth (aged ≤17 years) and adults (aged ≥18 years) and the prevention of eating disorders in young women (aged ≤21 years). Validation analyses compared predicted RR effect sizes to actual RR effect sizes using scatterplots, correlation coefficients ( r), and simple linear regression. An applied analysis was also conducted to examine the impact of using each conversion method in a cost-effectiveness model. RESULTS: The predictive performances of the RMD and Cochrane conversion methods were strong relative to the SMD conversion method when analyzing RCTs involving depression in adults (RMD: r = 0.89-0.90; Cochrane: r = 0.73; SMD: r = 0.41-0.67) and eating disorders in young women (RMD: r = 0.89; Cochrane: r = 0.96). Moderate predictive performances were observed across the 3 methods when analyzing RCTs involving depression in youth (RMD: r = 0.50; Cochrane: r = 0.47; SMD: r = 0.46-0.46). Negligible differences were observed between the 3 methods when applied to a cost-effectiveness model. CONCLUSION: The RMD and Cochrane conversion methods are both valid methods for predicting RR effect sizes from continuous outcomes data. However, further validation and refinement are required before being applied more broadly.

The Methodological Quality and Effectiveness of Technology-Based Smoking Cessation Interventions for Disadvantaged Groups: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Aims: To assess the methodological quality and effectiveness of technology-based smoking cessation interventions in disadvantaged groups. Method: Four databases (EMBASE, Cochrane, Medline, and PsycInfo) were searched for studies conducted from 1980 to May 2016. Randomized controlled trials that compared a behavioral smoking cessation intervention delivered primarily through a technology-based platform (eg, mobile phone) with a no-intervention comparison group among disadvantaged smokers were included. Three reviewers assessed all relevant studies for inclusion, and one reviewer extracted study, participant and intervention-level data, with a subset crosschecked by a second reviewer. Results: Thirteen studies targeting disadvantaged smokers (n =4820) were included. Only one study scored highly in terms of methodological rigor on EPOC criteria for judging risk of bias. Of the 13 studies using a technology-based platform, most utilized websites (n = 5) or computer programs (n = 5), and seven additionally offered nicotine replacement therapy. Technology-based interventions increased the odds of smoking cessation for disadvantaged groups at 1 month (odds ratio [OR] 1.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10, 2.63), 3 months (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.07, 1.59), 6 months (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.03, 1.62), and 18 months post-intervention (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.11, 3.01). Conclusion: Few methodologically rigorous studies were identified. Mobile phone text-messaging, computer- and website-delivered quit support showed promise at increasing quit rates among Indigenous, psychiatric and inpatient substance use disorder patients. Further research is needed to address the role technology-based interventions have on overcoming health inequalities to meet the needs of disadvantaged groups. Implications: This review provides the first quantitative evidence of the effectiveness of a range of technology-based smoking cessation interventions among disadvantaged smokers, with separate estimates on the basis of intervention type, and cessation outcome measure. Providing cost-effective, easily accessible and real-time smoking cessation treatment is needed, and innovative technology-based platforms will help reach this endpoint. These interventions need to be tested in larger scale randomized controlled trial designs and target broader disadvantaged groups. Data collection beyond 6 months is also needed in order to establish the efficacy of these intervention approaches on long-term cessation rates among disadvantaged population groups.

Effectiveness of a clinical practice change intervention in increasing the provision of nicotine dependence treatment in inpatient psychiatric facilities: an implementation trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite clinical practice guidelines recommending the routine provision of nicotine dependence treatment to smokers in inpatient psychiatric facilities, the prevalence of such treatment provision is low. The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of a clinical practice change intervention in increasing clinician recorded provision of nicotine dependence treatment to patients in inpatient psychiatric facilities. METHODS: We undertook an interrupted time series analysis of nicotine dependence treatment provision before, during and after a clinical practice change intervention to increase clinician recorded provision of nicotine dependence treatment for all hospital discharges (aged >18 years, N = 4175) over a 19 month period in two inpatient adult psychiatric facilities in New South Wales, Australia. The clinical practice change intervention comprised six key strategies: leadership and consensus, enabling systems and procedures, training and education, information and resources, audit and feedback and an on-site practice change support officer. Systematic medical record audit and segmented logistic regression was used to determine differences in proportions for each nicotine dependence treatment outcome measure between the 'pre', 'during' and 'post-intervention' periods. RESULTS: The prevalence of all five outcome measures increased significantly between the pre and post-intervention periods, including clinician recorded: assessment of patient smoking status (36.43 to 51.95%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.39, 99% Confidence Interval [CI]: 1.23 to 4.66); assessment of patient nicotine dependence status (4.74 to 11.04%; AOR = 109.67, 99% CI: 35.35 to 340.22); provision of brief advice to quit (0.85 to 8.81%; AOR = 97.43, 99% CI: 31.03 to 306.30); provision of nicotine replacement therapy (8.06 to 26.25%; AOR = 19.59, 99% CI: 8.17 to 46.94); and provision of nicotine dependence treatment on discharge (8.82 to 13.45%, AOR = 12.36; 99% CI: 6.08 to 25.14). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to provide evidence that a clinical practice change intervention may increase clinician recorded provision of nicotine dependence treatment in inpatient psychiatric settings. The intervention offers a mechanism for psychiatric facilities to increase the provision of nicotine dependence treatment in accordance with clinical guidelines.

Smoking and Mental Illness: A Bibliometric Analysis of Research Output Over Time.

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence of smoking among persons with a mental illness has remained unchanged, being 2-3 times higher than the general population in high-income countries. Assessment of the volume and characteristics of research output over time can assist in identifying research priorities to promote progress within a field. The aim of this study was to undertake such an assessment in the field of smoking and mental illness. METHODS: A descriptive repeat cross-sectional study was conducted of peer-reviewed publications in Medline and PsycINFO for the periods 1993-1995, 2003-2005, and 2013-2015. Publications were classified as data- or non-data-based; data-based publications were further categorized by study type, population, setting, and for intervention-focused publications by level of evidence and research translation phase. RESULTS: Included were 547 articles published in 1993-1995 (n = 65), 2003-2005 (n = 153), and 2013-2015 (n = 329). The number and proportion of data-based publications significantly increased over time, although their focus remained predominantly descriptive (≥83%); less than 14% of publications in any period had an intervention focus. The proportion of publications reporting on study populations with multiple diagnostic categories and recruiting from nonmental health settings, significantly increased from 1993-1995 to 2003-2005, however then plateaued by 2013-2015. The level of evidence provided by intervention-focused publications was suggested to increase over time, however there was no evident variation in translation phase. CONCLUSIONS: Research has increased over time to characterize smoking among those with a mental illness; however more is needed to inform the development and implementation of effective cessation interventions for this group. IMPLICATIONS: This is the first study to examine the volume and characteristics of research publications in the field of smoking and mental illness over time. The number of publications increased fivefold between 1993-1995 and 2013-2015. Between 1993-1995 and 2003-2005, progression was also indicated by increased: data-based publications, diagnostic diversity of samples, and variation in study settings; however further increases in such measures were not evident in 2013-2015. Notably, it continues to be the case that few intervention studies are undertaken. To achieve meaningful changes in the smoking prevalence of this group, a greater focus on research that assesses the effectiveness and implementation of tailored cessation interventions is required.

Implementation of a smoke-free policy in an inpatient psychiatric facility: Patient-reported adherence, support, and receipt of nicotine-dependence treatment.

The implementation of smoke-free policies in inpatient psychiatric facilities, including patient adherence, mental health nursing staff support, and provision of nicotine-dependence treatment to patients, has been reported to be poor. The extent to which the quality of smoke-free policy implementation is associated with patient views of a policy is unknown. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of 181 patients (53.6%, n = 97 smokers; and 46.4%, n = 84 non-smokers) in an Australian inpatient psychiatric facility with a total smoke-free policy. Smokers' adherence to the policy was poor (83.5% smoked). Only half (53.6%) perceived staff to be supportive of the policy. Most smokers used nicotine-replacement therapy (75.3%); although few received optimal nicotine-dependence treatment (19.6%). Overall, 45.9% of patients viewed the smoke-free policy in the unit as positive (29.9% smokers; 64.3% non-smokers). For smokers, adhering to the ban, perceiving staff to be supportive, and reporting that the nicotine-replacement therapy reduced cravings to smoke were associated with a more positive view towards the smoke-free policy. These findings support the importance of patient adherence, mental health nursing staff support, and adequate provision of nicotine-dependence treatment in strengthening smoke-free policy implementation in inpatient psychiatric settings.

Impact of a postdischarge smoking cessation intervention for smokers admitted to an inpatient psychiatric facility: a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Persons with a mental disorder smoke at higher rates and suffer disproportionate tobacco-related burden compared with the general population. The aim of this study was to determine if a smoking cessation intervention initiated during a psychiatric hospitalization and continued postdischarge was effective in reducing smoking behaviors among persons with a mental disorder. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted at an Australian inpatient psychiatric facility. Participants were 205 patient smokers allocated to a treatment as usual control (n = 101) or a smoking cessation intervention (n = 104) incorporating psychosocial and pharmacological support for 4 months postdischarge. Follow-up assessments were conducted at 1 week, 2, 4, and 6 months postdischarge and included abstinence from cigarettes, quit attempts, daily cigarette consumption, and nicotine dependence. RESULTS: Rates of continuous and 7-day point prevalence abstinence did not differ between treatment conditions at the 6-month follow-up; however, point prevalence abstinence was significantly higher for intervention (11.5%) compared with control (2%) participants at 4 months (OR = 6.46, p = .01). Participants in the intervention condition reported significantly more quit attempts (F[1, 202.5] = 15.23, p = .0001), lower daily cigarette consumption (F[4, 586] = 6.5, p < .001), and lower levels of nicotine dependence (F[3, 406] = 8.5, p < .0001) compared with controls at all follow-up assessments. CONCLUSIONS: Postdischarge cessation support was effective in encouraging quit attempts and reducing cigarette consumption up to 6 months postdischarge. Additional support strategies are required to facilitate longer-term cessation benefits for smokers with a mental disorder.

The impact of a smoke-free psychiatric hospitalization on patient smoking outcomes: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Smoke-free policies have been introduced in inpatient psychiatric facilities in most developed nations. Such a period of supported abstinence during hospitalization may impact smoking behaviours post discharge, yet little quantitative evidence exists. The aim of this review was to provide the first synthesis of the research evidence examining the impact of a smoke-free psychiatric hospitalization on patients' smoking-related behaviours, motivation, and beliefs. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and EMBASE from inception to June 2013. Studies were included if they were conducted in an inpatient psychiatric facility with a smoke-free policy and if they examined any change in patients' smoking-related behaviours, motivation, or beliefs either during admission, post discharge, or both. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool. RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included in the review. Of the four studies that assessed change in smoking from admission to post discharge, two indicated a significant decline in cigarette consumption up to 3 months post discharge. Positive changes in motivation to quit and beliefs about quitting ability were identified in two studies. One study reported an increase in the rate of quit attempts and one reported a decline in nicotine dependence levels. CONCLUSIONS: A smoke-free psychiatric hospitalization may have a positive impact on patients' smoking-related behaviours, motivation, and beliefs, both during admission and up to 3 months post discharge. Further controlled studies with more rigorous designs are required to confirm this potential.