Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 27.449
Filtrar
2.
Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi ; 40(9): 1095-1098, 2019 Sep 10.
Artigo em Chinês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31594152

RESUMO

Objective: To understand the status quo of smoking and change pattern of smoking related behaviors in the past 20 years in the urban adults in Tianjin. Methods: Data was from the study of Chinese Chronic Disease and Risk Factors (2015). Multi stage stratified random sampling method was used to conduct a questionnaire survey in 7 surveillance sites in Tianjin. Results: in the urban residents aged>20 years were compared with those in surveys in 1996 and 2010. Results In 2015, the smoking rate in men and women aged>20 years in Tianjin were 41.1% and 4.5% respectively. The average age of starting smoking was (19.2±4.7) years for men and (24.8±10.9) years for women, showing a younger age trend. Compared with the data from 1996 and 2010, the smoking rate in the urban residents was in decrease, but the rate of successful smoking cessation was in increase in 2015, the differences were significant. Conclusions: Since 1996, the rate of smoking in the urban residents of Tianjin has been in decline, however it is still at a high level, especially in women. The average age of starting smoking remains to be younger. It is necessary to strengthen the health education about harm of smoking in adolescents.


Assuntos
Abandono do Hábito de Fumar , Fumar Tabaco/epidemiologia , Adolescente , Adulto , China/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Fatores de Risco , Fumar , Inquéritos e Questionários , Adulto Jovem
3.
Rev Prat ; 69(4): 444-448, 2019 Apr.
Artigo em Francês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31626504

RESUMO

Tobacco use is responsible for around 30% of cancer deaths in France. Over two thirds of smoker patients continue despite the therapeutic management of their cancer, especially when cancer is not associated with tobacco. The impact of smoking on quality of care for patients is actually not enough considered. The French National Cancer Institute has developed tools that highlight the importance of tobacco cessation to improve the quality of patient care and could help them in their practices to apprehend smoking cessation with their patients. It is important that a communication with the patient takes place at the beginning of the treatment to impact the smoking behavior. All oncology health professionals should deliver a clearly and personalized cessation advice in the light of scientific data and ensure that smoking cessation help will be offered to the patient.


Assuntos
Neoplasias , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar , Fumar , França , Humanos , Neoplasias/epidemiologia , Fumar/epidemiologia , Prevenção do Hábito de Fumar
6.
Pan Afr Med J ; 33: 136, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31565115

RESUMO

Introduction: Shisha consumption is a growing public health issue all over the globe and public health awareness about its deleterious health consequences is still not sufficiently raised. Methods: In this location-based study of nightclubs in Ibadan, Nigeria, 633 patrons of selected nightclubs were interviewed in order to obtain information on prevalence, correlates and predictors of shisha smoking. Results: The overall prevalence of shisha smoking was 7.1%. The age of initiation into shisha smoking was lower among women, p = 0.03, but men were significantly more likely to be more frequent users, daily or weekly users, p < 0.001 and also to be current cigarette smokers, p = 0.03. There was no significant gender variability in the stage of readiness to quit. Regression analysis showed that after adjusting for age, the predictors of shisha smoking were: cigarette smoking, OR = 4.83, 95% CI (1.49-15.70) and more than 12 years of education, OR = 7.55, 95% CI (1.88 - 30.37), while being a rural dweller was a protective factor, OR = 0.05, 95% CI (0.01-0.20). Conclusion: Shisha smoking has emerged as a prevalent public health issue in Nigeria. There is a need for an immediate response from policy providers towards shisha smoking intervention in Nigeria.


Assuntos
Fumar Cigarros/epidemiologia , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar/psicologia , Cachimbos de Água/estatística & dados numéricos , Fumar/epidemiologia , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Nigéria/epidemiologia , Prevalência , Fatores de Proteção , Análise de Regressão , Fatores de Risco , Fatores Sexuais
7.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 98(40): e17375, 2019 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31577741

RESUMO

Achieving abstinence in schizophrenic smokers using a combination of medications and cognitive behavioral therapy is feasible; however, abstinence rates are significantly lower compared to the general population and studies are scanty. Additionally, maintaining sustained abstinence and preventing relapse is a major limiting factor and represents key tasks in managing tobacco dependence in schizophrenic patients. Several theories have been postulated to explain the higher tendency of tobacco use among schizophrenic individuals. Schizophrenic patients may use nicotine as a "self-medication" strategy to improve negative symptoms of schizophrenia. However, studies suggest that although nicotine may act as an anxiolytic acutely, chronic use of nicotine may lead to increased anxiety with the possibility of increased catecholamines, which is confirmed with the prevalence of tachycardia and hypertension in smokers in general. On this basis, the main objective of our present study was to assess anxiety in schizophrenic smoking and nonsmoking patients by comparing the number of anxiety and agitation episodes and evaluating the amount of antianxiety/antiagitation medication used by each group. A separate objective was to document the unmet needs of smoking cessation programs in treating schizophrenic patients. Consequently, in the present retrospective cohort study, it was observed that schizophrenic smokers tend to have higher anxiety episodes and utilize as-needed medications at a higher frequency compared to nonsmokers for the relief of anxiety and agitation symptoms. Further research is warranted to examine these results on a larger scale.


Assuntos
Ansiedade/epidemiologia , Fumar Cigarros/epidemiologia , Esquizofrenia/epidemiologia , Ansiolíticos/uso terapêutico , Antipsicóticos/uso terapêutico , Ansiedade/tratamento farmacológico , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Esquizofrenia/tratamento farmacológico , Fumantes , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar/métodos
8.
BMJ ; 366: l5275, 2019 09 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31570493

RESUMO

Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are alternative, non-combustible tobacco products that generate an inhalable aerosol containing nicotine, flavors, propylene glycol, and vegetable glycerin. Vaping is now a multibillion dollar industry that appeals to current smokers, former smokers, and young people who have never smoked. E-cigarettes reached the market without either extensive preclinical toxicology testing or long term safety trials that would be required of conventional therapeutics or medical devices. Their effectiveness as a smoking cessation intervention, their impact at a population level, and whether they are less harmful than combustible tobacco products are highly controversial. Here, we review the evidence on the effects of e-cigarettes on respiratory health. Studies show measurable adverse biologic effects on organ and cellular health in humans, in animals, and in vitro. The effects of e-cigarettes have similarities to and important differences from those of cigarettes. Decades of chronic smoking are needed for development of lung diseases such as lung cancer or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, so the population effects of e-cigarette use may not be apparent until the middle of this century. We conclude that current knowledge of these effects is insufficient to determine whether the respiratory health effects of e-cigarette are less than those of combustible tobacco products.


Assuntos
Sistemas Eletrônicos de Liberação de Nicotina/estatística & dados numéricos , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar/métodos , Prevenção do Hábito de Fumar/métodos , Dispositivos para o Abandono do Uso de Tabaco/efeitos adversos , Humanos
9.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 9: CD013183, 2019 09 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31565800

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The standard way most people are advised to stop smoking is by quitting abruptly on a designated quit day. However, many people who smoke have tried to quit many times and may like to try an alternative method. Reducing smoking behaviour before quitting could be an alternative approach to cessation. However, before this method can be recommended it is important to ensure that abrupt quitting is not more effective than reducing to quit, and to determine whether there are ways to optimise reduction methods to increase the chances of cessation. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of reduction-to-quit interventions on long-term smoking cessation. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO for studies, using the terms: cold turkey, schedul*, cut* down, cut-down, gradual*, abrupt*, fading, reduc*, taper*, controlled smoking and smoking reduction. We also searched trial registries to identify unpublished studies. Date of the most recent search: 29 October 2018. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials in which people who smoked were advised to reduce their smoking consumption before quitting smoking altogether in at least one trial arm. This advice could be delivered using self-help materials or behavioural support, and provided alongside smoking cessation pharmacotherapies or not. We excluded trials that did not assess cessation as an outcome, with follow-up of less than six months, where participants spontaneously reduced without being advised to do so, where the goal of reduction was not to quit altogether, or where participants were advised to switch to cigarettes with lower nicotine levels without reducing the amount of cigarettes smoked or the length of time spent smoking. We also excluded trials carried out in pregnant women. 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 (no smoking cessation treatment, abrupt quitting interventions, and other reduction-to-quit interventions) and carried out meta-analyses where appropriate, using a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model. We also extracted data on quit attempts, pre-quit smoking reduction, adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs) and nicotine withdrawal symptoms, and meta-analysed these where sufficient data were available. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 51 trials with 22,509 participants. Most recruited adults from the community using media or local advertising. People enrolled in the studies typically smoked an average of 23 cigarettes a day. We judged 18 of the studies to be at high risk of bias, but restricting the analysis only to the five studies at low or to the 28 studies at unclear risk of bias did not significantly alter results.We identified very low-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision, comparing the effect of reduction-to-quit interventions with no treatment on cessation rates (RR 1.74, 95% CI 0.90 to 3.38; I2 = 45%; 6 studies, 1599 participants). However, when comparing reduction-to-quit interventions with abrupt quitting (standard care) we found evidence that neither approach resulted in superior quit rates (RR 1. 01, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.17; I2 = 29%; 22 studies, 9219 participants). We judged this estimate to be of moderate certainty, due to imprecision. Subgroup analysis provided some evidence (P = 0.01, I2 = 77%) that reduction-to-quit interventions may result in more favourable quit rates than abrupt quitting if varenicline is used as a reduction aid. Our analysis comparing reduction using pharmacotherapy with reduction alone found low-certainty evidence, limited by inconsistency and imprecision, that reduction aided by pharmacotherapy resulted in higher quit rates (RR 1. 68, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.58; I2 = 78%; 11 studies, 8636 participants). However, a significant subgroup analysis (P < 0.001, I2 = 80% for subgroup differences) suggests that this may only be true when fast-acting NRT or varenicline are used (both moderate-certainty evidence) and not when nicotine patch, combination NRT or bupropion are used as an aid (all low- or very low-quality evidence). More evidence is likely to change the interpretation of the latter effects.Although there was some evidence from within-study comparisons that behavioural support for reduction to quit resulted in higher quit rates than self-help resources alone, the relative efficacy of various other characteristics of reduction-to-quit interventions investigated through within- and between-study comparisons did not provide any evidence that they enhanced the success of reduction-to-quit interventions. Pre-quit AEs, SAEs and nicotine withdrawal symptoms were measured variably and infrequently across studies. There was some evidence that AEs occurred more frequently in studies that compared reduction using pharmacotherapy versus no pharmacotherapy; however, the AEs reported were mild and usual symptoms associated with NRT use. There was no clear evidence that the number of people reporting SAEs, or changes in withdrawal symptoms, differed between trial arms. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate-certainty evidence that neither reduction-to-quit nor abrupt quitting interventions result in superior long-term quit rates when compared with one another. Evidence comparing the efficacy of reduction-to-quit interventions with no treatment was inconclusive and of low certainty. There is also low-certainty evidence to suggest that reduction-to-quit interventions may be more effective when pharmacotherapy is used as an aid, particularly fast-acting NRT or varenicline (moderate-certainty evidence). Evidence for any adverse effects of reduction-to-quit interventions was sparse, but available data suggested no excess of pre-quit SAEs or withdrawal symptoms. We downgraded the evidence across comparisons due to risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision. Future research should aim to match any additional components of multicomponent reduction-to-quit interventions across study arms, so that the effect of reduction can be isolated. In particular, well-conducted, adequately-powered studies should focus on investigating the most effective features of reduction-to-quit interventions to maximise cessation rates.


Assuntos
Abandono do Hábito de Fumar/métodos , Redução do Consumo de Tabaco , Síndrome de Abstinência a Substâncias/prevenção & controle , Bupropiona/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Nicotina/administração & dosagem , Agonistas Nicotínicos/uso terapêutico , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar/psicologia , Síndrome de Abstinência a Substâncias/tratamento farmacológico , Dispositivos para o Abandono do Uso de Tabaco
13.
Adv Mind Body Med ; 33(2): 12-17, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31476134

RESUMO

Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine whether the Life-Change Stop Smoking Program (tobacco dependence treatment program with Stress Management/Mindfulness Training) was more effective in achieving 6 mo of smoking abstinence among a high-risk group, such as US veterans at the Loma Linda Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center, compared with the VA's conventional stop smoking program. The effects of participants' initial stress level and depression risk on achieving abstinence were also assessed. Methods: Through examination of medical records and confirmation of exhaled air carbon monoxide level, abstinence status from smoking was determined at the 6-mo follow-up of the Life-Change Stop Smoking program (study group) participants and the Break the Chains program (comparison group, age and gender matched) participants. The 6-mo abstinence rates of the study group and comparison group were analzyed. Results: The statistically significant level of difference (χ2 [P < .001], regression [P = .0000]) in 6-mo abstinence rates between groups was observed. Conclusion: The stop smoking program with Stress Management/Mindfulness Training was effective (64.6% in study group, 40.1% in comparison group, P < .001) in achieving 6 mo of smoking abstinence for the high-risk group.


Assuntos
Atenção Plena , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar , Tabagismo , Veteranos , Humanos , Fumar , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar/métodos , Tabagismo/terapia , Veteranos/psicologia
14.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 9: CD012958, 2019 09 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31476270

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Chronic inflammatory joint diseases (IJDs) affect 1% to 2% of the population in developed countries. IJDs include rheumatoid arthritis (RA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), and other forms of spondyloarthritis (SpA). Tobacco smoking is considered a significant environmental risk factor for developing IJDs. There are indications that smoking exacerbates the symptoms and worsens disease outcomes. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to investigate the evidence for effects of smoking cessation interventions on smoking cessation and disease activity in smokers with IJD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Library; PubMed/MEDLINE; Embase; PsycINFO; the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL); and three trials registers to October 2018. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials testing any form of smoking cessation intervention for adult daily smokers with a diagnosis of IJD, and measuring smoking cessation at least six months after baseline. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included two studies with 57 smokers with a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). We identified no studies including other IJDs. One pilot study compared a smoking cessation intervention specifically for people with RA with a less intensive, generic smoking cessation intervention. People included in the study had a mean age of 56.5 years and a disease duration of 7.7 years (mean). The second study tested effects of an eight-week cognitive-behavioural patient education intervention on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk for people with RA and compared this with information on CVD risk only. The intervention encouraged participants to address multiple behaviours impacting CVD risk, including smoking cessation, but did not target smoking cessation alone. People included in the study had a mean age of 62.2 years (intervention group) and 60.8 years (control group), and disease duration of 11.6 years (intervention group) and 14.1 years (control group). It was not appropriate to perform a meta-analysis of abstinence data from the two studies due to clinical heterogeneity between interventions. Neither of the studies individually provided evidence to show benefit of the interventions tested. Only one study reported on adverse effects. These effects were non-serious, and numbers were comparable between trial arms. Neither of the studies assessed or reported disease activity or any of the predefined secondary outcomes. We assessed the overall certainty of evidence as very low due to indirectness, imprecision, and high risk of detection bias based on GRADE. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found very little research investigating the efficacy of smoking cessation intervention specifically in people with IJD. Included studies are limited by imprecision, risk of bias, and indirectness. Neither of the included studies investigated whether smoking cessation intervention reduced disease activity among people with IJD. High-quality, adequately powered studies are warranted. In particular, researchers should ensure that they measure disease markers and quality of life, in addition to long-term smoking cessation.


Assuntos
Artrite Infecciosa/patologia , Artrite Reumatoide/patologia , Artropatias/patologia , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar/métodos , Fumar/efeitos adversos , Terapia Cognitivo-Comportamental , Humanos , Osteoartrite/patologia , Qualidade de Vida , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Espondilartrite/patologia
17.
Vasc Health Risk Manag ; 15: 159-174, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31417268

RESUMO

While tobacco cigarette (TC) smoking has continued to drop to all-time lows, the use of electronic cigarettes (ECs), introduced in the US in 2007, has been rising dramatically, especially among youth. In EC emissions, nicotine is the major biologically active element, while levels of carcinogens and harmful combustion products that typify TC smoke are very low or even undetectable. TCs cause cardiovascular harm by activation of inflammatory pathways and oxidative damage, leading to atherogenesis and thrombosis, as well as through sympathetic activation triggering ischemia and arrhythmia. While ECs are generally believed to be safer than TCs, there remain many uncertainties regarding the overall cardiovascular health effects of EC usage. In this review, we discuss the various components of EC smoke and review the potential mechanisms of cardiovascular injury caused by EC use. We also discuss the controversy regarding the increasing epidemic of youth EC use weighed against the use of ECs as a smoking-cessation aid.


Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares/induzido quimicamente , Sistemas Eletrônicos de Liberação de Nicotina , Nicotina/administração & dosagem , Agonistas Nicotínicos/administração & dosagem , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar/métodos , Fumar/efeitos adversos , Vaping , Administração por Inalação , Fatores Etários , Animais , Doenças Cardiovasculares/diagnóstico , Doenças Cardiovasculares/epidemiologia , Humanos , Nicotina/efeitos adversos , Agonistas Nicotínicos/efeitos adversos , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Fumar/epidemiologia , Resultado do Tratamento , Vaping/efeitos adversos
18.
BMC Public Health ; 19(1): 1083, 2019 Aug 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31399047

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The recent development of smoking cessation interventions for smokers with chronic diseases has focused heavily on brief interventions. However, these interventions are too brief to make an impact on these smokers, especially when most of them are without any intention to quit. Previous studies showed that smokers who did not want to quit might be interested in changing other health behaviours. Also, once people engage in a health behaviour, they are found more likely to change other unhealthy habits. Hence, a general health promotion approach could be a feasible approach to motivate smokers who do not want to quit to first engage in any desirable health behaviour, and later quit smoking when they intend to do so. This study aims to determine the potential efficacy and effect size of such intervention approach in promoting smoking cessation for smokers with chronic diseases. METHODS: This is a randomized controlled trial. A convenience sample of 60 smokers with chronic diseases will be randomly assigned into either experimental (n = 30) or control group (n = 30). Smokers in the experimental group will receive an individual face-to-face brief motivational interviewing (MI) with generic advice on selected health behaviour. More brief MI messages will be delivered to them via WhatsApp/WeChat for 6 months. For subject in the control group, they will be asked to indicate their desirable health-related practice. However, no MI and booster interventions will be given. All subjects will complete a questionnaire at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Subjects abstinent from cigarettes at 12 months will perform a biochemical validation. The primary outcome is biochemically validated smoking abstinence at 12 months. Effect size of the intervention will be estimated by the odd ratios using intention-to-treat. DISCUSSION: This is the first study to determine the potential efficacy for the use of a personalized general health promotion approach in promoting smoking cessation for smokers with chronic diseases. If our proposed intervention is effective, we will able to assist smokers with chronic disease to quit smoking and change their health behaviour simultaneously. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CinicalTrials.gov NCT03983330 (Prospectively registered), registered on June 12, 2019.


Assuntos
Doença Crônica/epidemiologia , Comunicação , Tecnologia da Informação , Aplicativos Móveis , Entrevista Motivacional/métodos , Fumantes/psicologia , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar/métodos , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Projetos de Pesquisa , Fumantes/estatística & dados numéricos
19.
Community Dent Health ; 36(3): 187-189, 2019 Aug 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31436924

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of collecting and analyzing saliva samples from dental practices and patients' homes for biochemical verification of tobacco use status. BASIC RESEARCH DESIGN: Sub-study within single-arm, multi-center, longitudinal clinical study. CLINICAL SETTING: Dental practices in the South Central region of the United States National Dental Practice-Based Research Network and patients' homes. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-five patients recruited from 30 dental practices. INTERVENTIONS: Participants in the sub-study were instructed on saliva collection for cotinine analysis in dental practices where they enrolled in the primary study. Saliva was collected at the practices and then from patients' homes. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility for dental practice collection was define as 80% of enrolled participants having analyzable samples. For patients' home collection, feasibility was defined as 70%. RESULTS: Forty-seven samples (i.e., 86% of those enrolled) collected in dental practices were analyzable. Twenty-one samples (i.e. 38% of those enrolled) collected in patients' homes were analyzable. CONCLUSIONS: Collecting saliva samples for cotinine analysis from dental practices, but not from patients' homes, was feasible. Dental practices may provide an advantageous setting for biochemically verifying tobacco use status as part of clinical trials for tobacco cessation.


Assuntos
Cotinina , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar , Uso de Tabaco , Cotinina/análise , Assistência Odontológica , Estudos de Viabilidade , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Saliva/química
20.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 8: CD009164, 2019 08 16.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31425618

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Pharmacological treatments for tobacco dependence, such as nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), have been shown to be safe and effective interventions for smoking cessation. Higher levels of adherence to these medications increase the likelihood of sustained smoking cessation, but many smokers use them at a lower dose and for less time than is optimal. It is important to determine the effectiveness of interventions designed specifically to increase medication adherence. Such interventions may address motivation to use medication, such as influencing beliefs about the value of taking medications, or provide support to overcome problems with maintaining adherence. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of interventions aiming to increase adherence to medications for smoking cessation on medication adherence and smoking abstinence compared with a control group typically receiving standard care. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register, and clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) to the 3 September 2018. We also conducted forward and backward citation searches. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised, cluster-randomised or quasi-randomised studies in which adults using active pharmacological treatment for smoking cessation were allocated to an intervention arm where there was a principal focus on increasing adherence to medications for tobacco dependence, or a control arm providing standard care. Dependent on setting, standard care may have comprised minimal support or varying degrees of behavioural support. Included studies used a measure that allowed assessment of the degree of medication adherence. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data for included studies and assessed risk of bias. For continuous outcome measures, we calculated effect sizes as standardised mean differences (SMDs). For dichotomous outcome measures, we calculated effect sizes as risk ratios (RRs). In meta-analyses for adherence outcomes, we combined dichotomous and continuous data using the generic inverse variance method and reported pooled effect sizes as SMDs; for abstinence outcomes, we reported and pooled dichotomous outcomes. We obtained pooled effect sizes with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random-effects models. We conducted subgroup analyses to assess whether the primary focus of the adherence treatment ('practicalities' versus 'perceptions' versus both), the delivery approach (participant versus clinician-centred) or the medication type were associated with effectiveness. MAIN RESULTS: We identified two new studies, giving a total of 10 studies, involving 3655 participants. The medication adherence interventions studied were all provided in addition to standard behavioural support.They typically provided further information on the rationale for, and emphasised the importance of, adherence to medication or supported the development of strategies to overcome problems with maintaining adherence (or both). Seven studies targeted adherence to NRT, two to bupropion and one to varenicline. Most studies were judged to be at high or unclear risk of bias, with four of these studies judged at high risk of attrition or detection bias. Only one study was judged to be at low risk of bias.Meta-analysis of all 10 included studies (12 comparisons) provided moderate-certainty evidence that adherence interventions led to small improvements in adherence (i.e. the mean amount of medication consumed; SMD 0.10, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.18; I² = 6%; n = 3655), limited by risk of bias. Subgroup analyses for the primary outcome identified no significant subgroup effects, with effect sizes for subgroups imprecisely estimated. However, there was a very weak indication that interventions focused on the 'practicalities' of adhering to treatment (i.e. capabilities, resources, levels of support or skills) may be effective (SMD 0.21, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.38; I² = 39%; n = 1752), whereas interventions focused on treatment 'perceptions' (i.e. beliefs, cognitions, concerns and preferences; SMD 0.10, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.24; I² = 0%; n = 839) or on both (SMD 0.04, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.16; I² = 0%; n = 1064), may not be effective. Participant-centred interventions may be effective (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.23; I² = 20%; n = 2791), whereas those that are clinician-centred may not (SMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.23; I² = 0%; n = 864).Five studies assessed short-term smoking abstinence (five comparisons), while an overlapping set of five studies (seven comparisons) assessed long-term smoking abstinence of six months or more. Meta-analyses resulted in low-certainty evidence that adherence interventions may slightly increase short-term smoking cessation rates (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.21; I² = 0%; n = 1795) and long-term smoking cessation rates (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.40; I² = 48%; n = 3593). In both cases, the evidence was limited by risk of bias and imprecision, with CIs encompassing minimal harm as well as moderate benefit, and a high likelihood that further evidence will change the estimate of the effect. There was no evidence that interventions to increase adherence to medication led to any adverse events. Studies did not report on factors plausibly associated with increases in adherence, such as self-efficacy, understanding of and attitudes toward treatment, and motivation and intentions to quit. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In people who are stopping smoking and receiving behavioural support, there is moderate-certainty evidence that enhanced behavioural support focusing on adherence to smoking cessation medications can modestly improve adherence. There is only low-certainty evidence that this may slightly improve the likelihood of cessation in the shorter or longer-term. Interventions to increase adherence can aim to address the practicalities of taking medication, change perceptions about medication, such as reasons to take it or concerns about doing so, or both. However, there is currently insufficient evidence to confirm which approach is more effective. There is no evidence on whether such interventions are effective for people who are stopping smoking without standard behavioural support.


Assuntos
Adesão à Medicação/estatística & dados numéricos , Agonistas Nicotínicos/uso terapêutico , Abandono do Hábito de Fumar/métodos , Dispositivos para o Abandono do Uso de Tabaco , Tabagismo/tratamento farmacológico , Benzazepinas/uso terapêutico , Bupropiona/uso terapêutico , Quimioterapia Combinada/métodos , Humanos , Nortriptilina/uso terapêutico , Quinoxalinas/uso terapêutico , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Prevenção do Hábito de Fumar
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA