WTS database

Title	Pub Year Sort descending	Author	SearchLink
Interventions for recruiting smokers into cessation programmes	2012	Global eHealth Unit, Department of Primary Care and Public Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.	Read more...
Source Type Print(0) Ref Type Journal Article Periodical, Full The Cochrane database of systematic reviews Periodical, Abbrev. Cochrane Database Syst.Rev. Pub Date Free Form 12-Dec Volume 12 Issue Start Page CD009187 Other Pages Notes LR: 20130628; GR: Department of Health/United Kingdom; JID: 100909747; epublish Place of Publication England ISSN/ISBN 1469-493X; 1361-6137 Accession Number PMID: 23235672 Language eng SubFile Journal Article; Meta-Analysis; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Review; IM DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD009187.pub2 [doi] Output Language Unknown(0) PMID 23235672 Abstract BACKGROUND: Tobacco control is a top public health priority around the globe due to the high prevalence of cigarette smoking and its associated morbidity and mortality. Much effort has been focused on establishing the effectiveness of different smoking cessation strategies. This review, however, aims to address the initial challenge faced by smoking cessation programmes: recruitment of smokers. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this review was to determine the effectiveness of different strategies for recruiting smokers into cessation programmes. The secondary objective was to determine the impact that these strategies had on smoking cessation rates at least six months after enrolment into a cessation programme. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the specialised register of the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group using a search strategy which included the terms ('recruit$', 'invit$', 'enter', 'entry', 'enrolment') combined with ('smok$', 'cigarette', 'smoking cessation', 'tobacco') in the title, abstract or keyword fields. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and registers of current and ongoing trials. We also searched the reference lists of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials and cluster randomised controlled trials that compared at least two different methods of recruiting current smokers into a smoking cessation programme. We also included those studies which focused on the effectiveness of a smoking cessation programme as long as the study involved multiple recruitment methods and reported results of the recruitment phase. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: From each included study, we extracted data on the type of participants, type of recruitment strategies (i.e., setting, mode of communication used, intensity and duration) and comparisons, and on randomisation, allocation concealment, and blinding procedures.Our primary outcome was the proportion of smokers successfully recruited to each cessation programme compared to alternative modalities of recruitment. Our secondary outcome was smoking cessation for at least six months. Given the substantial heterogeneity across recruitment interventions and participants, we adopted a narrative synthesis approach for summarising results. MAIN RESULTS: This review includes 19 studies with a total of 14,890 participants. We categorised the included studies according to the modes used to deliver the recruitment strategy: head to head comparison of individual recruitment strategies; comparison of the same delivery mode but with different content or intensity; and the addition of another mode to an existing recruitment method.We identified three studies that made head-to-head comparisons of different types of recruitment strategies. Of these, only one study detected a significant effect, finding that a personal phone call was more effective than a generic invitation letter (RR 40.73, 95% CI 2.53 to 654.74). Five studies compared interventions using the same delivery modes but different content. Results showed that tailored messages through an interactive voice response system resulted in a higher recruitment rate than assessment of smoking status alone using the same system (RR 8.64, 95% CI 4.41 to 16.93), and that text messages indicating scarcity of places available were more effective than generic text message reminders (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.96). One study compared interventions using the same delivery mode but different intensity and found that allowing for more phone call attempts to reach potential participants can result in better recruitment (RR 1.87, 95% CI 1.61 to 2.18). Finally, 10 studies investigated the effect of adding a recruitment mode to existing recruitment strategies. Findings showed that: adding a text message reminder or real quotes from participants to a personal phone call improved recruitment of participants (RR 3.38, 95% CI 1.26 to 9.08 and RR 29.07, 95% CI 1.74 to 485.70 Descriptors Links Book Title Database Publisher Data Source Authors Marcano Belisario,J.S., Bruggeling,M.N., Gunn,L.H., Brusamento,S., Car,J. Original/Translated Title URL Date of Electronic 20121212 PMCID Editors
Biomedical risk assessment as an aid for smoking cessation	2012	Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland. raphael.bize@chuv.ch.	Read more...
Source Type Print(0) Ref Type Journal Article Periodical, Full The Cochrane database of systematic reviews Periodical, Abbrev. Cochrane Database Syst.Rev. Pub Date Free Form 12-Dec Volume 12 Issue Start Page CD004705 Other Pages Notes LR: 20131121; JID: 100909747; 7U1EE4V452 (Carbon Monoxide); epublish Place of Publication England ISSN/ISBN 1469-493X; 1361-6137 Accession Number PMID: 23235615 Language eng SubFile Journal Article; Meta-Analysis; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Review; IM DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD004705.pub4 [doi] Output Language Unknown(0) PMID 23235615 Abstract BACKGROUND: A possible strategy for increasing smoking cessation rates could be to provide smokers who have contact with healthcare systems with feedback on the biomedical or potential future effects of smoking, e.g. measurement of exhaled carbon monoxide (CO), lung function, or genetic susceptibility to lung cancer. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of biomedical risk assessment provided in addition to various levels of counselling, as a contributing aid to smoking cessation. SEARCH METHODS: For the most recent update, we searched the Cochrane Collaboration Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register in July 2012 for studies added since the last update in 2009. SELECTION CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria were: a randomized controlled trial design; subjects participating in smoking cessation interventions; interventions based on a biomedical test to increase motivation to quit; control groups receiving all other components of intervention; an outcome of smoking cessation rate at least six months after the start of the intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two assessors independently conducted data extraction on each paper, with disagreements resolved by consensus. Results were expressed as a relative risk (RR) for smoking cessation with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where appropriate, a pooled effect was estimated using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect method. MAIN RESULTS: We included 15 trials using a variety of biomedical tests. Two pairs of trials had sufficiently similar recruitment, setting and interventions to calculate a pooled effect; there was no evidence that carbon monoxide (CO) measurement in primary care (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.32) or spirometry in primary care (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.81) increased cessation rates. We did not pool the other 11 trials due to the presence of substantial clinical heterogeneity. Of the remaining 11 trials, two trials detected statistically significant benefits: one trial in primary care detected a significant benefit of lung age feedback after spirometry (RR 2.12, 95% CI 1.24 to 3.62) and one trial that used ultrasonography of carotid and femoral arteries and photographs of plaques detected a benefit (RR 2.77, 95% CI 1.04 to 7.41) but enrolled a population of light smokers and was judged to be at unclear risk of bias in two domains. Nine further trials did not detect significant effects. One of these tested CO feedback alone and CO combined with genetic susceptibility as two different interventions; none of the three possible comparisons detected significant effects. One trial used CO measurement, one used ultrasonography of carotid arteries and two tested for genetic markers. The four remaining trials used a combination of CO and spirometry feedback in different settings. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is little evidence about the effects of most types of biomedical tests for risk assessment on smoking cessation. Of the fifteen included studies, only two detected a significant effect of the intervention. Spirometry combined with an interpretation of the results in terms of 'lung age' had a significant effect in a single good quality trial but the evidence is not optimal. A trial of carotid plaque screening using ultrasound also detected a significant effect, but a second larger study of a similar feedback mechanism did not detect evidence of an effect. Only two pairs of studies were similar enough in terms of recruitment, setting, and intervention to allow meta-analyses; neither of these found evidence of an effect. Mixed quality evidence does not support the hypothesis that other types of biomedical risk assessment increase smoking cessation in comparison to standard treatment. There is insufficient evidence with which to evaluate the hypothesis that multiple types of assessment are more effective than single forms of assessment. Descriptors Links Book Title Database Publisher Data Source Authors Bize,R., Burnand,B., Mueller,Y., Rege-Walther,M., Camain,J.Y., Cornuz,J. Original/Translated Title URL Date of Electronic 20121212 PMCID Editors
Reduction versus abrupt cessation in smokers who want to quit	2012	Primary Care Clinical Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK. n.l.lindson@bham.ac.uk	Read more...
Source Type Print(0) Ref Type Journal Article Periodical, Full The Cochrane database of systematic reviews Periodical, Abbrev. Cochrane Database Syst.Rev. Pub Date Free Form 14-Nov Volume 11 Issue Start Page CD008033 Other Pages Notes LR: 20130703; JID: 100909747; CIN: JAMA. 2013 Jul 3;310(1):91-2. PMID: 23821093; epublish Place of Publication England ISSN/ISBN 1469-493X; 1361-6137 Accession Number PMID: 23152252 Language eng SubFile Journal Article; Meta-Analysis; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Review; IM DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD008033.pub3 [doi] Output Language Unknown(0) PMID 23152252 Abstract BACKGROUND: The standard way to stop smoking is to quit abruptly on a designated quit day. A number of smokers have tried unsuccessfully to quit this way. Reducing smoking before quitting could be an alternative approach to cessation. Before this method is adopted it is important to determine whether it is at least as successful as abrupt quitting. OBJECTIVES: 1. To compare the success of reducing smoking to quit and abrupt quitting interventions. 2. To compare adverse events between arms in studies that used pharmacotherapy to aid reduction. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Review Group specialised register using topic specific terms. The register contains reports of trials of tobacco addiction interventions identified from searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycInfo. We also searched reference lists of relevant papers and contacted authors of ongoing trials. Date of most recent search: July 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited adults who wanted to quit smoking. Studies included at least one condition which instructed participants to reduce their smoking and then quit and one condition which instructed participants to quit abruptly. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up. We pooled the included trials using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model. Trials were split for two sub-group analyses: pharmacotherapy vs no pharmacotherapy, self help therapy vs behavioural support. Adverse events were summarised as a narrative. It was not possible to compare them quantitatively as there was variation in the nature and depth of reporting across studies. MAIN RESULTS: Ten studies were relevant for inclusion, with a total of 3760 participants included in the meta-analysis. Three of these studies used pharmacotherapy as part of the interventions. Five studies included behavioural support in the intervention, four included self-help therapy, and the remaining study had arms which included behavioural support and arms which included self-help therapy. Neither reduction or abrupt quitting had superior abstinence rates when all the studies were combined in the main analysis (RR= 0.94, 95% CI= 0.79 to 1.13), whether pharmacotherapy was used (RR= 0.87, 95% CI= 0.65 to 1.22), or not (RR= 0.97, 95% CI= 0.78 to 1.21), whether studies included behavioural support (RR= 0.87, 95% CI= 0.64 to 1.17) or self-help therapy (RR= 0.98, 95% CI= 0.78 to1.23). We were unable to draw conclusions about the difference in adverse events between interventions, however recent studies suggest that pre-quit NRT does not increase adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Reducing cigarettes smoked before quit day and quitting abruptly, with no prior reduction, produced comparable quit rates, therefore patients can be given the choice to quit in either of these ways. Reduction interventions can be carried out using self-help materials or aided by behavioural support, and can be carried out with the aid of pre-quit NRT. Further research needs to investigate which method of reduction before quitting is the most effective, and which categories of smokers benefit the most from each method, to inform future policy and intervention development. Descriptors Links Book Title Database Publisher Data Source Authors Lindson-Hawley,N., Aveyard,P., Hughes,J.R. Original/Translated Title URL Date of Electronic 20121114 PMCID Editors
Pharmacological interventions for promoting smoking cessation during pregnancy	2012	Division of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. tim.coleman@nottingham.ac.uk.	Read more...
Source Type Print(0) Ref Type Journal Article Periodical, Full The Cochrane database of systematic reviews Periodical, Abbrev. Cochrane Database Syst.Rev. Pub Date Free Form 12-Sep Volume (9):CD010078. doi Issue 9 Start Page CD010078 Other Pages Notes LR: 20160602; GR: Department of Health/United Kingdom; JID: 100909747; UIN: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(12):CD010078. PMID: 26690977; epublish Place of Publication England ISSN/ISBN 1469-493X; 1361-6137 Accession Number PMID: 22972148 Language eng SubFile Journal Article; Meta-Analysis; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Review; IM DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD010078 [doi] Output Language Unknown(0) PMID 22972148 Abstract BACKGROUND: Smoking in pregnancy is a substantial public health problem. When used by non-pregnant smokers, pharmacotherapies [nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion and varenicline] are effective treatments for smoking cessation, however, their efficacy and safety in pregnancy remains unknown. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of smoking cessation pharmacotherapies, including NRT, varenicline and bupropion (or any other medications) when used to support smoking cessation in pregnancy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (5 March 2012), checked references of retrieved studies and contacted authors in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with designs that permit the independent effects of any type of NRT (e.g. patch, gum etc.) or any other pharmacotherapy on smoking cessation to be ascertained were eligible for inclusion. Trials must provide very similar (ideally identical) levels of behavioural support or cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) to participants in active drug and comparator trial arms.The following RCT designs are considered acceptable.Placebo RCTs: any form of NRT or other pharmacotherapy, with or without behavioural support/CBT, or brief advice compared with placebo NRT and additional support of similar intensity.RCTs providing a comparison between i) behavioural support/CBT or brief advice and ii) any form of NRT or other pharmacotherapy added to behavioural support of similar (ideally identical) intensity.Parallel- or cluster-randomised design trials are eligible for inclusion. However, quasi-randomised, cross-over and within-participant designs are not eligible for inclusion due to the potential biases associated with these designs. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias and extracted data. Two assessors independently extracted data and cross checked individual outcomes of this process to ensure accuracy. The primary efficacy outcome was smoking cessation in later pregnancy (in all but one trial, at or around delivery); safety was assessed by seven birth outcomes that indicated neonatal well being and we also collated data on adherence. MAIN RESULTS: Six trials of NRT enrolling 1745 pregnant smokers were included; we found no trials of varenicline or bupropion. No statistically significant difference was seen for smoking cessation in later pregnancy after using NRT as compared to control (risk ratio (RR) 1.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.91, six studies, 1745 women). Subgroup analysis comparing placebo-RCTs with those which did not use placebos found that efficacy estimates for cessation varied with trial design (placebo RCTs, RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.56, four studies, 1524 women; non-placebo RCTs, RR 7.81, 95% CI 1.51 to 40.35, two studies, 221 women; P value for random-effects subgroup interaction test = 0.03). There were no statistically significant differences in rates of miscarriage, stillbirth, premature birth, birthweight, low birthweight, admissions to neonatal intensive care or neonatal death between NRT or control groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Nicotine replacement therapy is the only pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation that has been tested in RCTs conducted in pregnancy. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether or not NRT is effective or safe when used to promote smoking cessation in pregnancy or to determine whether or not using NRT has positive or negative impacts on birth outcomes. Further research evidence of efficacy and safety is needed, ideally from placebo-controlled RCTs that investigate higher doses of NRT than were tested in the included studies. Descriptors Links Book Title Database Publisher Data Source Authors Coleman,T., Chamberlain,C., Davey,M.A., Cooper,S.E., Leonardi-Bee,J. Original/Translated Title URL Date of Electronic 20120912 PMCID Editors
Enhancing partner support to improve smoking cessation	2012	Department of FamilyMedicine,Medical College of Dankook University, Cheonan, Korea, South. ewpark@kornet.net.	Read more...
Source Type Print(0) Ref Type Journal Article Periodical, Full The Cochrane database of systematic reviews Periodical, Abbrev. Cochrane Database Syst.Rev. Pub Date Free Form 11-Jul Volume (7):CD002928. doi Issue 7 Start Page CD002928 Other Pages Notes LR: 20160602; JID: 100909747; epublish Place of Publication England ISSN/ISBN 1469-493X; 1361-6137 Accession Number PMID: 22786483 Language eng SubFile Journal Article; Meta-Analysis; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Review; IM DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD002928.pub3 [doi] Output Language Unknown(0) PMID 22786483 Abstract BACKGROUND: While many cessation programmes are available to assist smokers in quitting, research suggests that partner involvement may encourage long-term abstinence. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this review was to determine if an intervention to enhance partner support helps smoking cessation when added as an adjunct to a smoking cessation programme, and to estimate the size of any effect. SEARCH METHODS: For the most recent update, the search was limited to the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register. This was searched in December 2011. The Specialized Register includes reports of controlled trials of smoking cessation identified from electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) to Issue 4, 2011, MEDLINE to update 20110826, EMBASE to 2011 week 33, PsycINFO to 20110822 and Web of Science. The search terms used were smoking (prevention, control, therapy), smoking cessation, and support (family, marriage, spouse, partner, sexual partner, buddy, friend, co-habitees and co-worker). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials of smoking cessation interventions that compared an intervention that included a partner support component with an otherwise identical intervention and reported follow-up of six months or longer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently identified the included studies and extracted data using a structured form. A third author was consulted to aid in the resolution of discrepancies. Abstinence, biochemically validated if possible, was the primary outcome measure and was extracted at two post-treatment intervals: six to nine months and 12 months or greater. Partner Interaction Questionnaire and Support Provided Measure scores were also analysed to assess partner support. A fixed-effect model was used to pool relative risks from each study and estimate a summary effect. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 57 articles were identified for this review. Twelve articles (13 studies, > 2000 participants) met the inclusion criteria. The definition of partner varied between studies. All studies gave self-reported smoking cessation rates, but there was limited biochemical validation of abstinence. The pooled risk ratio for self-reported abstinence was 0.99 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.15) at six to nine months and 1.04 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.24) at 12 months or more post-treatment. Of the eight studies that measured partner support at follow-up, only two studies reported a significant increase in partner support in the intervention groups. One study reported a significant increase in partner support in the intervention group, but smokers' reports of partner support received did not differ significantly in this study. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In this review of randomized controlled trials of interventions designed to enhance partner support for smokers in cessation programmes, we failed to detect an increase in quit rates. Limited data from several of the trials suggest that these interventions also did not increase partner support. No conclusions can be made about the impact of partner support on smoking cessation. Additional studies with larger samples are needed to adequately explore the effects of partner support interventions for smoking cessation. Descriptors Links Book Title Database Publisher Data Source Authors Park,E.W., Tudiver,F.G., Campbell,T. Original/Translated Title URL Date of Electronic 20120711 PMCID Editors
Microbiological and physicochemical characterisation of caxiri, an alcoholic beverage produced by the indigenous Juruna people of Brazil	2012	Department of Biology, Federal University of Lavras (UFLA), CP 3037 - Campus Universitario, CEP 37.200-000 Lavras, MG, Brazil.	Read more...
Source Type Print(0) Ref Type Journal Article Periodical, Full International journal of food microbiology Periodical, Abbrev. Int.J.Food Microbiol. Pub Date Free Form 15-May Volume 156 Issue 2 Start Page 112 Other Pages 121 Notes LR: 20131121; CI: Copyright (c) 2012; JID: 8412849; 0 (DNA, Ribosomal); 33X04XA5AT (Lactic Acid); 3K9958V90M (Ethanol); 2011/11/25 [received]; 2012/02/11 [revised]; 2012/03/11 [accepted]; 2012/03/20 [aheadofprint]; ppublish Place of Publication Netherlands ISSN/ISBN 1879-3460; 0168-1605 Accession Number PMID: 22497838 Language eng SubFile Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; IM DOI 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2012.03.010 [doi] Output Language Unknown(0) PMID 22497838 Abstract Caxiri is a traditional fermented alcoholic beverage produced from cassava and sweet potatoes by the indigenous Juruna or Yudja people in Brazil. Our results showed that caxiri fermentation is invariably associated with the following: (i) an increase in the total microbial population, with yeast being the largest group detected; (ii) a decrease in reducing sugars, malic, tartaric, succinic, oxalic and propionic acid; and (iii) a final product characterised by a high content of ethanol and a high concentration of lactic acid. The microbial community dynamics were investigated by culture-based and culture-independent approaches. Fermentation was assisted by a complex microbial community that changed in structure and composition during the fermentative process. The bacterial population ranged from 3.05 to 5.33 log/mL, and the yeast population varied from 3.27 log CFU/mL to 7.34 log CFU/mL, showing that yeasts dominated the fermentation process after 48 h. A total of 343 colonies of bacteria and 205 colonies of yeasts were isolated and initially grouped by Amplified Ribosomal DNA Restriction Analysis (ARDRA) and by biochemical features. Phylogenetic analysis of the 16S rRNA gene sequences of representative isolates showed that the bacteria were mainly represented by endospore-forming low-G+C content Gram-positive bacilli (Bacillus spp.; 61.5% of the isolates), with Bacillus pumilus, Bacillus spp. (Bacillus cereus group), and Bacillus subtilis being the main species identified. The species Sphingomonas sp. and Pediococcus acidilactici were also found. The dominant yeast identified was Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Rhodotorula mucilaginosa, Pichia membranifaciens, Pichia guilliermondii and Cryptococcus luteolus were also found. According to the Polymerase Chain Reaction and Denaturing Gradient Gel Electrophoresis (PCR-DGGE) analysis, the microbial communities present during fermentation were probably from the raw materials, ambient or present on the utensils used during beverage preparation. The results indicated the necessity to combine both culture-dependent and culture-independent methods for a better description of the microbial communities in indigenous starch fermentations. Also, pH values decreased from 4.76 to 3.15 during fermentation. The ethanol concentration was 83.9 g/L and lactic acid reached 27.89 g/L by the end of the fermentation process. Descriptors Links Book Title Database Publisher Elsevier B.V Data Source Authors Santos,C.C., Almeida,E.G., Melo,G.V., Schwan,R.F. Original/Translated Title URL Date of Electronic 20120320 PMCID Editors
Healthcare financing systems for increasing the use of tobacco dependence treatment	2012	Department of General Practice, School of Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Center,Maastricht, Netherlands.	Read more...
Source Type Print(0) Ref Type Journal Article Periodical, Full The Cochrane database of systematic reviews Periodical, Abbrev. Cochrane Database Syst.Rev. Pub Date Free Form 13-Jun Volume (6):CD004305. doi Issue 6 Start Page CD004305 Other Pages Notes LR: 20160602; JID: 100909747; epublish Place of Publication England ISSN/ISBN 1469-493X; 1361-6137 Accession Number PMID: 22696341 Language eng SubFile Journal Article; Meta-Analysis; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Review; IM DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD004305.pub4 [doi] Output Language Unknown(0) PMID 22696341 Abstract BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that provision of financial assistance for smokers trying to quit, or reimbursement of their care providers, could lead to an increased rate of successful quit attempts. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this review was to assess the impact of reducing the costs of providing or using smoking cessation treatment through healthcare financing interventions on abstinence from smoking. The secondary objectives were to examine the effects of different levels of financial support on the use and/or prescription of smoking cessation treatment and on the number of smokers making a quit attempt. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register in April 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled trials and interrupted time series studies involving financial benefit interventions to smokers or their healthcare providers or both. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the quality of the included studies. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated for individual studies on an intention-to-treat basis and meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. We included economic evaluations when a study presented the costs and effects of two or more alternatives. MAIN RESULTS: We found eleven trials involving financial interventions directed at smokers and healthcare providers.Full financial interventions directed at smokers had a statistically significant favourable effect on abstinence at six months or greater when compared to no intervention (RR 2.45, 95% CI 1.17 to 5.12, I(2) = 59%, 4 studies). There was also a significant effect of full financial interventions when compared to no interventions on the number of participants making a quit attempt (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.32, I(2) = 15%) and use of smoking cessation treatment (NRT: RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.55 to 2.15, I(2) = 43%; bupropion: RR 3.22, 95% CI 1.41 to 7.34, I(2) = 71%; behavioural therapy: RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.65). There was no evidence of an effect on smoking cessation when we pooled two trials of financial incentives directed at healthcare providers (RR 1.16, CI 0.98 to 1.37, I(2) = 0%). Comparisons of full coverage with partial coverage, partial coverage with no coverage, and partial coverage with another partial coverage intervention did not detect significant effects. Comparison of full coverage with partial or no coverage resulted in costs per additional quitter ranging from $119 to $6450. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Full financial interventions directed at smokers when compared to no financial interventions increase the proportion of smokers who attempt to quit, use smoking cessation treatments, and succeed in quitting. The absolute differences are small but the costs per additional quitter are low to moderate. We did not detect an effect on smoking cessation from financial incentives directed at healthcare providers. The methodological qualities of the included studies need to be taken into consideration when interpreting the results. Descriptors Links Book Title Database Publisher Data Source Authors Reda,A.A., Kotz,D., Evers,S.M., van Schayck,C.P. Original/Translated Title URL Date of Electronic 20120613 PMCID Editors
Mobile phone-based interventions for smoking cessation	2012	National Institute forHealth Innovation, University of Auckland, Auckland,New Zealand. r.whittaker@nihi.auckland.ac.nz	Read more...
Source Type Print(0) Ref Type Journal Article Periodical, Full The Cochrane database of systematic reviews Periodical, Abbrev. Cochrane Database Syst.Rev. Pub Date Free Form 14-Nov Volume 11 Issue Start Page CD006611 Other Pages Notes LR: 20160510; JID: 100909747; CIN: Evid Based Nurs. 2013 Oct;16(4):108-9. PMID: 23389384; UIN: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;4:CD006611. PMID: 27060875; epublish Place of Publication England ISSN/ISBN 1469-493X; 1361-6137 Accession Number PMID: 23152238 Language eng SubFile Journal Article; Meta-Analysis; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Review; IM DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD006611.pub3 [doi] Output Language Unknown(0) PMID 23152238 Abstract BACKGROUND: Innovative and effective smoking cessation interventions are required to appeal to those who are not accessing traditional cessation services. Mobile phones are widely used and are now well-integrated into the daily lives of many, particularly young adults. Mobile phones are a potential medium for the delivery of health programmes such as smoking cessation. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether mobile phone-based interventions are effective at helping people who smoke, to quit. SEARCH METHODS: For the most recent update, we searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register in May 2012. We also searched UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio for current projects in the UK and the ClinicalTrials register for on-going or recently completed studies. We searched through the reference lists of identified studies and attempted to contact the authors of ongoing studies, with no restrictions placed on language or publication date. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized or quasi-randomized trials. Participants were smokers of any age who wanted to quit. Studies were those examining any type of mobile phone-based intervention. This included any intervention aimed at mobile phone users, based around delivery via mobile phone, and using any functions or applications that can be used or sent via a mobile phone. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Information on risk of bias and methodological details was extracted using a standardised form. Participants who dropped out of the trials or were lost to follow-up were considered to be smoking. We calculated risk ratios (RR) for each included study. Meta-analysis of the included studies was undertaken using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect method. Where meta-analysis was not possible, summary and descriptive statistics are presented. MAIN RESULTS: Five studies with at least six month cessation outcomes were included in this review. Three studies involve a purely text messaging intervention that has been adapted over the course of these three studies for different populations and contexts. One study is a multi-arm study of a text messaging intervention and an internet QuitCoach separately and in combination. The final study involves a video messaging intervention delivered via the mobile phone. When all five studies were pooled, mobile phone interventions were shown to increase the long term quit rates compared with control programmes (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.47 to 1.99, over 9000 participants), using a definition of abstinence of no smoking at six months since quit day but allowing up to three lapses or up to five cigarettes. Statistical heterogeneity was substantial as indicated by the I(2) statistic (I(2) = 79%), but as all included studies were similar in design, intervention and primary outcome measure, we have presented the meta-analysis in this review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence shows a benefit of mobile phone-based smoking cessation interventions on long-term outcomes, though results were heterogenous with findings from three of five included studies crossing the line of no effect. The studies included were predominantly of text messaging interventions. More research is required into other forms of mobile phone-based interventions for smoking cessation, other contexts such as low income countries, and cost-effectiveness. Descriptors Links Book Title Database Publisher Data Source Authors Whittaker,R., McRobbie,H., Bullen,C., Borland,R., Rodgers,A., Gu,Y. Original/Translated Title URL Date of Electronic 20121114 PMCID Editors
Interventions for smoking cessation in Indigenous populations	2012	Clinical Practice Unit, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, Australia. kristin.carson@health.sa.gov.au.	Read more...
Source Type Print(0) Ref Type Journal Article Periodical, Full The Cochrane database of systematic reviews Periodical, Abbrev. Cochrane Database Syst.Rev. Pub Date Free Form 18-Jan Volume 1 Issue Start Page CD009046 Other Pages Notes LR: 20131121; JID: 100909747; 0 (Dopamine Uptake Inhibitors); 01ZG3TPX31 (Bupropion); epublish Place of Publication England ISSN/ISBN 1469-493X; 1361-6137 Accession Number PMID: 22258998 Language eng SubFile Journal Article; Meta-Analysis; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Review; IM DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD009046.pub2 [doi] Output Language Unknown(0) PMID 22258998 Abstract BACKGROUND: Tobacco use in Indigenous populations (people who have inhabited a country for thousands of years) is often double that of the non-Indigenous population. A disproportionate burden of substance-related morbidity and mortality exists as a result. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in Indigenous populations and to summarise these approaches for future cessation programmes and research. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register of Trials was searched (April 2011), with additional searches of MEDLINE (May 2011). Online clinical trial databases and publication references were also searched for potential studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized and non-randomized controlled trials for smoking cessation interventions in Indigenous populations. Interventions could include pharmacotherapies, cognitive and behavioural therapies, alternative therapies, public policy and combination therapies. No attempts were made to re-define Indigenous status for the purpose of including a study in this review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data pertaining to methodology, participants, interventions and outcomes were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second, whilst methodological quality was extracted independently by two reviewers. Studies were assessed by qualitative narrative synthesis and where possible meta-analysis. The review process was examined by an Indigenous (Aboriginal) Australian for applicability, acceptability and content. MAIN RESULTS: Four studies met all of the eligibility criteria for inclusion within the review. Two used combination therapies consisting of a pharmacotherapy combined with cognitive and behavioural therapies, whilst the remaining two used cognitive and behavioural therapy through counselling, one via text message support and the other delivered via clinic doctors trained in smoking cessation techniques. Smoking cessation data were pooled across all studies producing a statistically and clinically significant effect in favour of the intervention (risk ratio 1.43, 95%CI 1.03 to 1.98, p=0.032), however following sensitivity analysis a statistically non-significant but clinically significant effect was observed in favour of the intervention (risk ratio 1.33, 95%CI 0.95 to 1.85, p=NS) . AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: A significant health disparity exists, whereby Indigenous populations, a minority, are over-represented in the burden of smoking-related morbidity and mortality. This review highlights the paucity of evidence available to evaluate the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions, despite the known success of these interventions in non-Indigenous populations. Due to this lack of published investigations, the external validity of this review is limited, as is the ability to draw reliable conclusions from the results. The limited but available evidence reported does indicate that smoking cessation interventions specifically targeted at Indigenous populations can produce smoking abstinence. However this evidence base is not strong with a small number of methodologically sound trials investigating these interventions. More rigorous trials are now required to assist in bridging the gap between tobacco related health disparities in Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations. Descriptors Links Book Title Database Publisher Data Source Authors Carson,K.V., Brinn,M.P., Peters,M., Veale,A., Esterman,A.J., Smith,B.J. Original/Translated Title URL Date of Electronic 20120118 PMCID Editors
Indoor fine particle (PM2.5) pollution exposure due to secondhand smoke in selected public places of Sri Lanka	2012	Evaluation and Research Unit, National Institute of Health Sciences, Ministry of Health, Kalutara, Sri Lanka. sumalnandasena@gmail.com	Read more...
Source Type Print(0) Ref Type Journal Article Periodical, Full American Journal of Industrial Medicine Periodical, Abbrev. Am.J.Ind.Med. Pub Date Free Form Dec Volume 55 Issue 12 Start Page 1129 Other Pages 1136 Notes LR: 20150225; CI: Copyright (c) 2012; GR: 5 D43 TW05750/TW/FIC NIH HHS/United States; GR: D43 TW005750/TW/FIC NIH HHS/United States; GR: D43 TW005750-10/TW/FIC NIH HHS/United States; JID: 8101110; 0 (Particulate Matter); 0 (Tobacco Smoke Pollution); NIHMS Place of Publication United States ISSN/ISBN 1097-0274; 0271-3586 Accession Number PMID: 22473526 Language eng SubFile Journal Article; Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural; IM DOI 10.1002/ajim.22040 [doi] Output Language Unknown(0) PMID 22473526 Abstract BACKGROUND: Secondhand smoke accounts for a considerable proportion of deaths due to tobacco smoke. Although the existing laws ban indoor smoking in public places in Sri Lanka, the level of compliance is unknown. METHODS: Fine particulate matter (PM(2.5)) levels in 20 public places in Colombo, Sri Lanka were measured by a PM monitor (Model AM510-SIDEPAK Personal Aerosol Monitor). Different types of businesses (restaurants, bars, cafes, and entertainment venues) were selected by purposive sampling. Only the places where smoking was permitted were considered. RESULTS: The average indoor PM(2.5) ranged from 33 to 299 microg/m(3). The average outdoor PM(2.5) ranged from 18 to 83 microg/m(3). The indoor to outdoor PM(2.5) ratio ranged from 1.05 to 14.93. In all venues, indoor PM(2.5) levels were higher than the Sri Lankan ambient PM(2.5) standard of 50 microg/m(3). All indoor locations had higher PM(2.5) levels as compared to their immediate outdoor surroundings. CONCLUSION: The study highlights the importance of improving ventilation and enforcing laws to stop smoking in public places. Descriptors Links Book Title Database Publisher Wiley Periodicals, Inc Data Source Authors Nandasena,S., Wickremasinghe,A.R., Lee,K., Sathiakumar,N. Original/Translated Title URL Date of Electronic 20120402 PMCID PMC3432657 Editors

E-mail