Behavioural Support For Smoking Cessation Research Articles

Smoking Cessation Counseling in Practice: A Qualitative Analysis of Quitline Conversations in Queensland, Australia.

Telephone-based services are a practical and effective behavioral support for smoking cessation, yet no in-depth analyses of this counseling have been conducted. Understanding the general content of Quitline conversations can help to improve current practices and may inform future interventions. Therefore, we aimed to independently explore conversation themes, topics, and client questions during Quitline counseling sessions with Quitline clients in Queensland, Australia. A purposive sample of 30 recorded counseling sessions, completed between January and March 2019, were de-identified, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. Seven themes, encompassing 35 topics, were derived from 26 initial calls and four follow-up calls: (1) Client details and building rapport; (2) Client history and motivation to quit; (3) Pharmacotherapy; (4) Behavioral aspects of quitting and relationship with smoking; (5) Understanding nicotine dependence and other important considerations; (6) Additional support and smoking cessation resources; and (7) Planning, goal setting and follow-up. Three themes emerged from 18 client questions including (1) Pharmacotherapy safety and contraindications; (2) Pharmacotherapy instructions and mechanism of action; and (3) Physiology of nicotine dependence. This is the first qualitative analysis of the content of Quitline counseling sessions in Australia. Counselors collect and deliver a breadth of information to provide tailored, evidence-based health care, while building rapport and trust. Findings may be translatable into personalized self-help interventions that are more accessible or appealing to people reluctant to contact Quitline. Harnessing educational opportunities regarding pharmacotherapy adherence and misconceptions can improve client confidence in the product and smoking cessation outcomes. Further research will map conversations to motivational interviewing and behavior change techniques.

Effect of a Tobacco Cessation Intervention Incorporating Weight Management for Adults With Serious Mental Illness

Tobacco smoking drives markedly elevated cardiovascular disease risk and preventable death in persons with serious mental illness, and these risks are compounded by the high prevalence of overweight/obesity that smoking cessation can exacerbate. Guideline-concordant combined pharmacotherapy and behavioral smoking cessation treatment improves abstinence but is not routinely offered in community settings, particularly to those not seeking to quit smoking immediately. To determine the effectiveness of an 18-month pharmacotherapy and behavioral smoking cessation intervention incorporating weight management and support for physical activity in adults with serious mental illness interested in quitting smoking within 1 or 6 months. This was a randomized clinical trial conducted from July 25, 2016, to March 20, 2020, at 4 community health programs. Adults with serious mental illness who smoked tobacco daily were included in the study. Participants were randomly assigned to intervention or control, stratified by willingness to try to quit immediately (within 1 month) or within 6 months. Assessors were masked to group assignment. Pharmacotherapy, primarily varenicline, dual-form nicotine replacement, or their combination; tailored individual and group counseling for motivational enhancement; smoking cessation and relapse prevention; weight management counseling; and support for physical activity. Controls received quitline referrals. The primary outcome was biochemically validated, 7-day point-prevalence tobacco abstinence at 18 months. Of the 298 individuals screened for study inclusion, 192 enrolled (mean [SD] age, 49.6 [11.7] years; 97 women [50.5%]) and were randomly assigned to intervention (97 [50.5%]) or control (95 [49.5%]) groups. Participants self-identified with the following race and ethnicity categories: 93 Black or African American (48.4%), 6 Hispanic or Latino (3.1%), 90 White (46.9%), and 9 other (4.7%). A total of 82 participants (42.7%) had a schizophrenia spectrum disorder, 62 (32.3%) had bipolar disorder, and 48 (25.0%) had major depressive disorder; 119 participants (62%) reported interest in quitting immediately (within 1 month). Primary outcome data were collected in 183 participants (95.3%). At 18 months, 26.4% of participants (observed count, 27 of 97 [27.8%]) in the intervention group and 5.7% of participants (observed count, 6 of 95 [6.3%]) in the control group achieved abstinence (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 5.9; 95% CI, 2.3-15.4; P < .001). Readiness to quit within 1 month did not statistically significantly modify the intervention's effect on abstinence. The intervention group did not have significantly greater weight gain than the control group (mean weight change difference, 1.6 kg; 95% CI, -1.5 to 4.7 kg). Findings of this randomized clinical trial showed that in persons with serious mental illness who are interested in quitting smoking within 6 months, an 18-month intervention with first-line pharmacotherapy and tailored behavioral support for smoking cessation and weight management increased tobacco abstinence without significant weight gain. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02424188.

Behavioural programmes for cigarette smoking cessation: investigating interactions between behavioural, motivational and delivery components in a systematic review and component network meta-analysis.

To investigate the comparative and combined effectiveness of four types of components of behavioural interventions for cigarette smoking cessation: behavioural (e.g. counselling), motivational (e.g. focus on reasons to quit), delivery mode (e.g. phone) and provider (e.g. nurse). Systematic review and component network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials identified from Cochrane reviews. Interventions included behavioural interventions for smoking cessation (including all non-pharmacological interventions, e.g. counselling, exercise, hypnotherapy, self-help materials), compared with another behavioural intervention or no support. Building on a 2021 review (CD013229), we conducted three analyses, investigating: comparative effectiveness of the components, whether models that allowed interactions between components gave different results to models assuming additivity, and predicted effect estimates for combined effects of components that had showed promise but where there were few trials. Community and health-care settings. Adults who smoke tobacco. Smoking cessation at ≥6months, preferring sustained, biochemically validated outcomes where available. Three hundred and twelve trials (250 563 participants) were included. Fifty were at high risk of bias using Cochrane risk of bias tool, V1 (ROB1); excluding these studies did not change findings. Head-to-head comparisons of components suggested that support via text message (SMS) compared with telephone (OR 1.48, 95% CrI 1.13-1.94) or print materials (OR 1.44, 95% CrI 1.14-1.83) was more effective, and individual delivery was less effective than delivery as part of a group (OR 0.78, 95% CrI 0.64-0.95). There was no conclusive evidence of synergistic or antagonistic interactions when combining components that were commonly used together. Adding multiple components that are commonly used in behavioural counselling suggested clinically relevant and statistically conclusive evidence of benefit. Components with the largest effects that could be combined, but rarely have been, were estimated to increase the odds of quitting between two and threefold. For example, financial incentives delivered via SMS, with tailoring and a focus on how to quit, had an estimated OR of 2.94 (95% CrI 1.91-4.52). Among the components of behavioural support for smoking cessation, behavioural counselling and guaranteed financial incentives are associated with the greatest success. Incorporating additional components associated with effectiveness may further increase benefit, with delivery via text message showing particular promise.

Identifying Behavior Change Techniques Used in Tobacco Cessation Interventions by Oral Health Professionals and Their Relation to Intervention Effects-A Review of the Scientific Literature.

This review aimed to identify the behavioral change techniques (BCTs) used in behavioral interventions for tobacco cessation at dental practices in relation to their effect on tobacco use. Six scientific databases were searched for behavior change interventions for tobacco cessation and were coded using the BCT taxonomy of behavioral support for smoking cessation (BCTTsm). Fifteen interventions were identified, and data related to intervention characteristics were abstracted. Sixteen BCTs were identified, mainly related to increased motivation and teaching regulatory skills. Goal setting was the most commonly used BCT. Ten out of fifteen interventions effectively impacted tobacco cessation outcomes (OR = 2 to 5.25). Effective interventions more frequently included goal setting, written materials, readiness to quit and ability assessment, tobacco-use assessment, self-efficacy boost, listing reasons for quitting, action planning and environment restructuring. Other BCTs were not clearly associated with an increased effect. Among the behavioral interventions, certain techniques were associated with successful tobacco quitting. Tobacco cessation interventions in a dental setting appear to benefit from using BCTs that increase motivation and teach regulatory skills. The identified BCTs in this review could provide a source to better inform researchers and dentists about the active ingredients in behavior change interventions for tobacco cessation in a dental setting.

Behavioural interventions for smoking cessation: an overview and network meta-analysis.

Smoking is a leading cause of disease and death worldwide. In people who smoke, quitting smoking can reverse much of the damage. Many people use behavioural interventions to help them quit smoking; these interventions can vary substantially in their content and effectiveness. To summarise the evidence from Cochrane Reviews that assessed the effect of behavioural interventions designed to support smoking cessation attempts and to conduct a network meta-analysis to determine how modes of delivery; person delivering the intervention; and the nature, focus, and intensity of behavioural interventions for smoking cessation influence the likelihood of achieving abstinence six months after attempting to stop smoking; and whether the effects of behavioural interventions depend upon other characteristics, including population, setting, and the provision of pharmacotherapy. To summarise the availability and principal findings of economic evaluations of behavioural interventions for smoking cessation, in terms of comparative costs and cost-effectiveness, in the form of a brief economic commentary. This work comprises two main elements. 1. We conducted a Cochrane Overview of reviews following standard Cochrane methods. We identified Cochrane Reviews of behavioural interventions (including all non-pharmacological interventions, e.g. counselling, exercise, hypnotherapy, self-help materials) for smoking cessation by searching the Cochrane Library in July 2020. We evaluated the methodological quality of reviews using AMSTAR 2 and synthesised data from the reviews narratively. 2. We used the included reviews to identify randomised controlled trials of behavioural interventions for smoking cessation compared with other behavioural interventions or no intervention for smoking cessation. To be included, studies had to include adult smokers and measure smoking abstinence at six months or longer. Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment followed standard Cochrane methods. We synthesised data using Bayesian component network meta-analysis (CNMA), examining the effects of 38 different components compared to minimal intervention. Components included behavioural and motivational elements, intervention providers, delivery modes, nature, focus, and intensity of the behavioural intervention. We used component network meta-regression (CNMR) to evaluate the influence of population characteristics, provision of pharmacotherapy, and intervention intensity on the component effects. We evaluated certainty of the evidence using GRADE domains. We assumed an additive effect for individual components. We included 33 Cochrane Reviews, from which 312 randomised controlled trials, representing 250,563 participants and 845 distinct study arms, met the criteria for inclusion in our component network meta-analysis. This represented 437 different combinations of components. Of the 33 reviews, confidence in review findings was high in four reviews and moderate in nine reviews, as measured by the AMSTAR 2 critical appraisal tool. The remaining 20 reviews were low or critically low due to one or more critical weaknesses, most commonly inadequate investigation or discussion (or both) of the impact of publication bias. Of note, the critical weaknesses identified did not affect the searching, screening, or data extraction elements of the review process, which have direct bearing on our CNMA. Of the included studies, 125/312 were at low risk of bias overall, 50 were at high risk of bias, and the remainder were at unclear risk. Analyses from the contributing reviews and from our CNMA showed behavioural interventions for smoking cessation can increase quit rates, but effectiveness varies on characteristics of the support provided. There was high-certainty evidence of benefit for the provision of counselling (odds ratio (OR) 1.44, 95% credibility interval (CrI) 1.22 to 1.70, 194 studies, n = 72,273) and guaranteed financial incentives (OR 1.46, 95% CrI 1.15 to 1.85, 19 studies, n = 8877). Evidence of benefit remained when removing studies at high risk of bias. These findings were consistent with pair-wise meta-analyses from contributing reviews. There was moderate-certainty evidence of benefit for interventions delivered via text message (downgraded due to unexplained statistical heterogeneity in pair-wise comparison), and for the following components where point estimates suggested benefit but CrIs incorporated no clinically significant difference: individual tailoring; intervention content including motivational components; intervention content focused on how to quit. The remaining intervention components had low-to very low-certainty evidence, with the main issues being imprecision and risk of bias. There was no evidence to suggest an increase in harms in groups receiving behavioural support for smoking cessation. Intervention effects were not changed by adjusting for population characteristics, but data were limited. Increasing intensity of behavioural support, as measured through the number of contacts, duration of each contact, and programme length, had point estimates associated with modestly increased chances of quitting, but CrIs included no difference. The effect of behavioural support for smoking cessation appeared slightly less pronounced when people were already receiving smoking cessation pharmacotherapies. Behavioural support for smoking cessation can increase quit rates at six months or longer, with no evidence that support increases harms. This is the case whether or not smoking cessation pharmacotherapy is also provided, but the effect is slightly more pronounced in the absence of pharmacotherapy. Evidence of benefit is strongest for the provision of any form of counselling, and guaranteed financial incentives. Evidence suggested possible benefit but the need of further studies to evaluate: individual tailoring; delivery via text message, email, and audio recording; delivery by lay health advisor; and intervention content with motivational components and a focus on how to quit. We identified 23 economic evaluations; evidence did not consistently suggest one type of behavioural intervention for smoking cessation was more cost-effective than another. Future reviews should fully consider publication bias. Tools to investigate publication bias and to evaluate certainty in CNMA are needed.

Measuring fidelity to behavioural support delivery for smoking cessation and its association with outcomes.

Background and aimsBehavioural support increases smoking cessation in clinical settings, but effect sizes differ among providers, due possibly to variations in delivery. This study evaluates a measure (‘fidelity index’) intended to capture fidelity to delivery of content‐ and interaction‐based items of a behavioural support (BS) for smoking cessation and the association of fidelity with quit rates.MethodsA fidelity index for scoring the adherence and quality domains of a specific BS intervention, ‘5As for quit’, was developed by classifying the intervention components using the taxonomy of behaviour change techniques. The index was applied to code 154 BS sessions audiotaped among 18 chest clinics in Pakistan to assess their fidelity and explore reliability of coding. The association between intervention fidelity and successful quit achieved by the same providers in a previous study was explored using regression analysis.ResultsThe index represented two domains: adherence to delivery of content‐based activities of 5As (37 items) and quality of interaction‐based activities (eight items). The intercoder reliability was good for content‐based (average Krippendorff's α = 0.80) and moderate for interaction‐based (average Krippendorff's α = 0.66) items. Approximately 70% (intraclass correlation coefficient: adherence scores = 0.72, quality scores = 0.71) of variation in BS delivery was contributed by providers, which increased to 97% (g‐coefficient: adherence scores = 0.973, quality scores = 0.974) after accounting for other sources of variation. Higher quit rates were positively associated with average quality scores [risk ratio = 2.15; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.43–3.24], but negatively associated with average adherence scores (risk ratio = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.40–0.77) within services.ConclusionsThe fidelity index is a reliable measure for quantifying intervention fidelity of delivering smoking cessation behavioural support. Recommended revisions of the fidelity index include incorporation of additional interaction‐based items, such as the relational techniques used in motivational interviewing.

Community pharmacy personnel interventions for smoking cessation.

Community pharmacists could provide effective smoking cessation treatment because they offer easy access to members of the community. They are well placed to provide both advice on the correct use of smoking cessation products and behavioural support to aid smoking cessation. To assess the effectiveness of interventions delivered by community pharmacy personnel to assist people to stop smoking, with or without concurrent use of pharmacotherapy. We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, along with clinicaltrials.gov and the ICTRP, for smoking cessation studies conducted in a community pharmacy setting, using the search terms pharmacist* or pharmacy or pharmacies. Date of the most recent search: January 2019. Randomised controlled trials of interventions delivered by community pharmacy personnel to promote smoking cessation amongst their clients who were smokers, compared with usual pharmacy support or any less intensive programme. The main outcome measure was smoking cessation rates at six months or more after the start of the intervention. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane for study screening, data extraction and management. We conducted a meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model to generate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We identified seven studies including 1774 participants. We judged three studies to be at high risk of bias and four to be at unclear risk. Each study provided face-to-face behavioural support delivered by pharmacy staff, and required pharmacy personnel training. Typically such programmes comprised support starting before quit day and continuing with weekly appointments for several weeks afterwards. Comparators were either minimal or less intensive behavioural support for smoking cessation, typically comprising a few minutes of one-off advice on how to quit. Participants in both intervention and control arms received equivalent smoking cessation pharmacotherapy in all but one study. All studies took place in high-income countries, and recruited participants visiting pharmacies. We pooled six studies of 1614 participants and detected a benefit of more intensive behavioural smoking cessation interventions delivered by community pharmacy personnel compared with less intensive cessation interventions at longest follow-up (RR 2.30, 95% CI 1.33 to 3.97; I2 = 54%; low-certainty evidence). Community pharmacists can provide effective behavioural support to people trying to stop smoking. However, this conclusion is based on low-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias and imprecision. Further research could change this conclusion.

Motivational interviewing for smoking cessation.

Motivational Interviewing (MI) is a directive patient-centred style of counselling, designed to help people to explore and resolve ambivalence about behaviour change. It was developed as a treatment for alcohol abuse, but may help people to a make a successful attempt to stop smoking. To evaluate the efficacy of MI for smoking cessation compared with no treatment, in addition to another form of smoking cessation treatment, and compared with other types of smoking cessation treatment. We also investigated whether more intensive MI is more effective than less intensive MI for smoking cessation. We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register for studies using the term motivat* NEAR2 (interview* OR enhanc* OR session* OR counsel* OR practi* OR behav*) in the title or abstract, or motivation* as a keyword. We also searched trial registries to identify unpublished studies. Date of the most recent search: August 2018. Randomised controlled trials in which MI or its variants were offered to smokers to assist smoking cessation. We excluded trials that did not assess cessation as an outcome, with follow-up less than six months, and with additional non-MI intervention components not matched between arms. We excluded trials in pregnant women as these are covered elsewhere. 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 (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for smoking cessation for each study, where possible. We grouped eligible studies according to the type of comparison. We carried out meta-analyses where appropriate, using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models. We extracted data on mental health outcomes and quality of life and summarised these narratively. We identified 37 eligible studies involving over 15,000 participants who smoked tobacco. The majority of studies recruited participants with particular characteristics, often from groups of people who are less likely to seek support to stop smoking than the general population. Although a few studies recruited participants who intended to stop smoking soon or had no intentions to quit, most recruited a population without regard to their intention to quit. MI was conducted in one to 12 sessions, with the total duration of MI ranging from five to 315 minutes across studies. We judged four of the 37 studies to be at low risk of bias, and 11 to be at high risk, but restricting the analysis only to those studies at low or unclear risk did not significantly alter results, apart from in one case - our analysis comparing higher to lower intensity MI.We found low-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias and imprecision, comparing the effect of MI to no treatment for smoking cessation (RR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.12; I2 = 0%; adjusted N = 684). One study was excluded from this analysis as the participants recruited (incarcerated men) were not comparable to the other participants included in the analysis, resulting in substantial statistical heterogeneity when all studies were pooled (I2 = 87%). Enhancing existing smoking cessation support with additional MI, compared with existing support alone, gave an RR of 1.07 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.36; adjusted N = 4167; I2 = 47%), and MI compared with other forms of smoking cessation support gave an RR of 1.24 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.69; I2 = 54%; N = 5192). We judged both of these estimates to be of low certainty due to heterogeneity and imprecision. Low-certainty evidence detected a benefit of higher intensity MI when compared with lower intensity MI (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.37; adjusted N = 5620; I2 = 0%). The evidence was limited because three of the five studies in this comparison were at risk of bias. Excluding them gave an RR of 1.00 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.54; I2 = n/a; N = 482), changing the interpretation of the results.Mental health and quality of life outcomes were reported in only one study, providing little evidence on whether MI improves mental well-being. There is insufficient evidence to show whether or not MI helps people to stop smoking compared with no intervention, as an addition to other types of behavioural support for smoking cessation, or compared with other types of behavioural support for smoking cessation. It is also unclear whether more intensive MI is more effective than less intensive MI. All estimates of treatment effect were of low certainty because of concerns about bias in the trials, imprecision and inconsistency. Consequently, future trials are likely to change these conclusions. There is almost no evidence on whether MI for smoking cessation improves mental well-being.

Use of dynamic systems methods to characterize dyadic interactions in smoking cessation behavioural support sessions: A feasibility study

Understanding how behaviour change techniques (BCTs) operate in practice requires a method for characterizing the reciprocal, dynamic, and real-time nature of behavioural support interactions between practitioners and clients. State space grids (SSGs) are an observational, dynamic systems methodology used to map the trajectory of dyadic interactions in real time. By mapping the flow of events in terms of practitioner and client actions, SSGs are potentially well suited to characterize behavioural support sessions. To develop reliable methods and examine the feasibility of using the SSG methodology for characterizing practitioners' delivery of and clients' response to BCTs in smoking cessation behavioural support sessions. Smoking cessation behavioural support sessions were video-recorded and transcribed verbatim (n=6 recordings; 2,916 statements). All speech was coded independently by two researchers for content and duration using published frameworks for specifying practitioner-delivered and client-received BCTs in smoking cessation interactions. Inter-rater reliability was assessed. Indices of practitioner-client interaction dynamics were derived: (1) reciprocity (i.e., attractor states, content congruence, conditional pairing) and (2) temporal patterning (i.e., variability, inter-grid distance, combinatory micro-patterning, sessional macropatterning). The extent to which indices can describe differences between sessions involving different practitioners and clients was examined. Inter-rater reliability was moderate at 72% agreement. Indices of reciprocity and temporal patterning characterized differences between sessions involving different practitioners and clients. State space grids provide a method for characterizing the complexity and variability of practitioner-delivered and client-received BCTs in behavioural support sessions. This method has potential to add explanatory value to smoking cessation intervention outcomes. Statement of Contribution What is already known on this subject? Frameworks exist for characterizing practitioner-delivered and client-received behaviour change techniques (BCTs). Methods are still needed to investigate which BCTs are effective under what conditions. State space grids (SSGs) are a dynamic systems method that may better characterize behavioural support interactions. What does this study add? First reliable, dynamic systems, SSG coding procedures, methods, and measures to characterize behavioural support. A method for examining reciprocality and temporal patterning of BCT delivery and receipt. Establishes a dynamic systems method that adds explanatory value to the outcomes of interventions.

Physical activity for antenatal and postnatal depression in women attempting to quit smoking: randomised controlled trial

BackgroundAntenatal depression is associated with harmful consequences for both the mother and child. One intervention that might be effective is participation in regular physical activity although data on this question in pregnant smokers is currently lacking.MethodsWomen were randomised to six-weekly sessions of smoking cessation behavioural-support, or to the same support plus 14 sessions combining treadmill exercise and physical activity consultations.ResultsAmong 784 participants (mean gestation 16-weeks), EPDS was significantly higher in the physical activity group versus usual care at end-of-pregnancy (mean group difference (95% confidence intervals (CIs)): 0.95 (0.08 to 1.83). There was no significant difference at six-months postpartum.ConclusionA pragmatic intervention to increase physical activity in pregnant smokers did not prevent depression at end-of-pregnancy or at six-months postpartum. More effective physical activity interventions are needed in this population.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN48600346. The trial was prospectively registered on 21/07/2008.

Seeing New Opportunities to Help Smokers Quit: A UK National Survey of Optometrist-Delivered Smoking Cessation Behavioral Support Interventions.

Smoking is a risk factor for various eye conditions. Brief smoking cessation interventions have demonstrated effectiveness when delivered by a range of health care professionals. Optometrists are well placed in the community to advise otherwise healthy smokers to quit, yet remain relatively neglected in smoking cessation research and policy. In a national survey, this study investigated self-reported practices of UK optometrists for delivering brief tobacco smoking cessation interventions to patients. A randomly selected sample of 1200 optometrists out of the 9000 optometrists registered on the UK College of Optometrists database were invited to complete a 40-item, web-based survey assessing: training related to smoking cessation, current practice (ie, the proportion of patients to which components of very brief advice [Ask, Advise, Assist] and other evidence-based smoking cessation behavior change techniques were delivered), and barriers/enablers to intervention delivery. In total, 408 (34%) responses were received. Most (83%) optometrists received no training in practical skills for delivering smoking cessation support. A third (34%) routinely assessed smoking status. Fewer self-reported advising smokers to quit (22%), offering assistance (via referral to dedicated services) (3%), or advice on smoking cessation medications (2%). Perceived barriers included insufficient knowledge/training (81%) and time (65%). Optometrists were more likely to assess and advise on smoking cessation if they practiced in Scotland, χ2(2) = 32.95, p < .001; an independent optometry practice, χ2(1) = 4.27, p = .39; or had received smoking cessation training, χ2(1) = 13.1, p < .001. Substantial gaps exist in UK optometrists' current smoking cessation training and practice. Evidence-based training resources are needed to support the implementation of smoking cessation interventions into routine optometry practice. Optometrists are well placed in the community to deliver brief advice interventions to a large population of smokers. This survey provides a comprehensive description of current UK optometry practice related to the provision of evidence-based brief tobacco smoking cessation interventions to patients. Although optometrists perceive advising on smoking cessation as part of their role, numerous substantial gaps in current practice and training remain, which need to be addressed through targeted interventions to increase implementation.

Associations between Practitioner Personality and Client Quit Rates in Smoking Cessation Behavioural Support Interventions.

Introduction: There is wide variation in the success rates of practitioners employed to help smokers to stop, even once a range of potential confounding factors has been taken into account. Aim: This paper examined whether personality characteristics of practitioners might play a role success rates. Methods: Data from 1,958 stop-smoking treatment episodes in two stop-smoking services (SSS) involving 19 stop-smoking practitioners were used in the analysis. The outcome measure was clients' biochemically verified quit status 4 weeks after the target quit date. The five dimensions of personality, as assessed by the Ten-Item Personality Inventory, were included as predictor variables: openness, conscientiousness, agreeableness, extraversion, and neuroticism. A range of client and other practitioner characteristics were used as covariates. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine if managers' ratings of practitioner personality were also associated with clients' quit status. Results: Multi-level random intercept models indicated that clients of practitioners with a higher extraversion score had greater odds of being abstinent at four weeks (self-assessed: OR = 1.10, 95% CI = 1.01-1.19; manager-assessed: OR = 1.32, 95% CI = 1.21-1.44). Conclusions: More extraverted stop smoking practitioners appear to have greater success in advising their clients to quit smoking. Findings need to be confirmed in larger practitioner populations, other SSS, and in different smoking cessation contexts. If confirmed, specific training may be needed to assist more introverted stop smoking practitioners.

Are digital interventions for smoking cessation in pregnancy effective? A systematic review protocol.

BackgroundBehavioural support for smoking cessation in pregnancy can be effective; however, many pregnant women face barriers to seeking support to stop smoking. Some digital interventions have been found to be effective for smoking cessation in the general population and may be effective for supporting cessation in pregnancy due to their flexibility and the potential for personalisation. To date, there is limited evidence of the effectiveness of digital interventions for smoking cessation in pregnancy. This review aims to assess the following: (1) whether digital interventions are effective at promoting smoking cessation among pregnant women; (2) which behaviour change techniques (BCTs) or combinations of BCTs are associated with the effectiveness of digital interventions for smoking cessation in pregnancy; and (3) whether the number of BCTs used is associated with the effectiveness of digital interventions for smoking cessation in pregnancy.MethodsThis review will include digital interventions delivered largely through computer (PC or laptop), video/DVD, mobile phone (including smartphones) or portable handheld device (e.g. tablet, iPad) and include websites, mobile or tablet applications and SMS text messages. Interventions must be randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials aimed at women who smoke in pregnancy, with smoking cessation as a measured outcome (preferably the latest available point prevalence smoking status measure taken during pregnancy, biochemically verified if available). Electronic bibliographic databases will be searched to identify suitable studies indexed in the following: Academic Search Complete, ASSIA, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science. The search strategy will include key words and database-specific subject headings relating to ‘pregnancy’ and ‘smoking’ and synonyms for the terms ‘digital’ and ‘randomised controlled trial’. Where required and where possible, the first and second authors will independently code interventions and control groups for BCTs. If data allows, meta-analyses will be used to assess intervention effectiveness and the effectiveness of BCTs.DiscussionThis systematic review will provide a detailed synthesis of the effectiveness of current research using digital interventions for smoking cessation in pregnancy, to build on the evidence base and guide the development of future research in this area.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42016036201 Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13643-016-0390-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Characterizing clients' verbal statements in behavioural support interventions: The case of smoking cessation.

Reliable methods have been developed for characterizing behavioural interventions in terms of component practitioner-delivered behaviour change techniques (BCTs). As yet, no corresponding methods have been developed for characterizing client responses. To develop a method for characterizing clients' verbal statements in audio-recordings of smoking cessation behavioural support consultations. An established framework for specifying practitioner-delivered BCTs was adapted to account for corresponding BCTs in clients' verbal statements. A total of 1,429 client statements within 15 transcripts of audio-recorded consultations were independently coded using the framework. Of the 58 BCT categories in the practitioner framework, 53 corresponding client BCTs were included and five codes unrelated to smoking cessation were added. Forty client BCTs were reliably identified at least once across sessions (75.1% agreement; PABAK=.77). It is possible to reliably categorize clients' verbal statements in smoking cessation consultations in terms of responses to BCTs delivered by the practitioner. When used alongside the taxonomy of practitioner-delivered BCTs, this method could provide a basis for investigating the dyadic interaction between the practitioner and client. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Taxonomies exist for characterizing practitioner-delivered behaviour change techniques (BCTs) in interventions. Client responses and contributions are an important part of the behaviour change process. Examining clients' receipt of BCTs can add explanatory value to the outcomes of interventions. Current taxonomies and methods do not characterize client responses in terms of BCTs. What does this study add? First method to characterize clients' statements corresponding to a practitioner BCT taxonomy. Provides a method for investigating the dyadic practitioner-client interaction using BCTs. A method that has potential to add explanatory value to the outcomes of interventions.

Combined pharmacotherapy and behavioural interventions for smoking cessation.

Both behavioural support (including brief advice and counselling) and pharmacotherapies (including nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), varenicline and bupropion) are effective in helping people to stop smoking. Combining both treatment approaches is recommended where possible, but the size of the treatment effect with different combinations and in different settings and populations is unclear. To assess the effect of combining behavioural support and medication to aid smoking cessation, compared to a minimal intervention or usual care, and to identify whether there are different effects depending on characteristics of the treatment setting, intervention, population treated, or take-up of treatment. We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register in July 2015 for records with any mention of pharmacotherapy, including any type of NRT, bupropion, nortriptyline or varenicline. Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials evaluating combinations of pharmacotherapy and behavioural support for smoking cessation, compared to a control receiving usual care or brief advice or less intensive behavioural support. We excluded trials recruiting only pregnant women, trials recruiting only adolescents, and trials with less than six months follow-up. Search results were prescreened by one author and inclusion or exclusion of potentially relevant trials was agreed by two authors. Data was extracted by one author and checked by another.The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model. Fifty-three studies with a total of more than 25,000 participants met the inclusion criteria. A large proportion of studies recruited people in healthcare settings or with specific health needs. Most studies provided NRT. Behavioural support was typically provided by specialists in cessation counselling, who offered between four and eight contact sessions. The planned maximum duration of contact was typically more than 30 minutes but less than 300 minutes. Overall, studies were at low or unclear risk of bias, and findings were not sensitive to the exclusion of any of the six studies rated at high risk of bias in one domain. One large study (the Lung Health Study) contributed heterogeneity due to a substantially larger treatment effect than seen in other studies (RR 3.88, 95% CI 3.35 to 4.50). Since this study used a particularly intensive intervention which included extended availability of nicotine gum, multiple group sessions and long term maintenance and recycling contacts, the results may not be comparable with the interventions used in other studies, and hence it was not pooled in other analyses. Based on the remaining 52 studies (19,488 participants) there was high quality evidence (using GRADE) for a benefit of combined pharmacotherapy and behavioural treatment compared to usual care, brief advice or less intensive behavioural support (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.68 to 1.98) with moderate statistical heterogeneity (I² = 36%).The pooled estimate for 43 trials that recruited participants in healthcare settings (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.18) was higher than for eight trials with community-based recruitment (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.76). Compared to the first version of the review, previous weak evidence of differences in other subgroup analyses has disappeared. We did not detect differences between subgroups defined by motivation to quit, treatment provider, number or duration of support sessions, or take-up of treatment. Interventions that combine pharmacotherapy and behavioural support increase smoking cessation success compared to a minimal intervention or usual care. Updating this review with an additional 12 studies (5,000 participants) did not materially change the effect estimate. Although trials differed in the details of their populations and interventions, we did not detect any factors that modified treatment effects apart from the recruitment setting. We did not find evidence from indirect comparisons that offering more intensive behavioural support was associated with larger treatment effects.

Assessing the Quality of Goal Setting in Behavioural Support for Smoking Cessation and its Association with Outcomes.

BackgroundSmoking cessation behavioural support can be effective but practitioners differ markedly in effectiveness, possibly due to variation in the quality of delivery of key behaviour change techniques, such as goal setting (i.e. setting a quit date).ObjectivesThis study aimed to (i) develop a reliable method for assessing the quality of practitioners’ support in setting quit dates and (ii) assess whether quality predicts initiation of abstinence as a first step to quitting.MethodsA scale for scoring the quality of goal setting was developed from national guidance documents and applied to 85 transcribed behavioural support sessions. Inter-rater reliability was assessed. Associations between quality scores and quit attempts were assessed.ResultsThe 10-item scale produced had good inter-rater reliability (Kappa = 0.68). Higher quality goal setting was associated with increased self-reported quit attempts (p < .001; OR = 2.60, 95 % CI 1.54–4.40). The scale components ‘set a clear quit date’ (χ2 (2, N = 85) = 22.3, p < .001) and ‘within an appropriate timeframe’ (χ2 (2, N = 85) = 15.5, p < .001) were independently associated with quit attempts.ConclusionsIt is possible to reliably assess the quality of goal setting in smoking cessation behavioural support. Higher quality of goal setting is associated with greater likelihood of initiating quit attempts.

The London Exercise And Pregnant smokers (LEAP) trial: a randomised controlled trial of physical activity for smoking cessation in pregnancy with an economic evaluation.

Smoking during pregnancy is the main preventable cause of poor birth outcomes. Improved methods are needed to help women to stop smoking during pregnancy. Pregnancy provides a compelling rationale for physical activity (PA) interventions as cessation medication is contraindicated or ineffective, and an effective PA intervention could be highly cost-effective. To examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a PA intervention plus standard behavioural support for smoking cessation relative to behavioural support alone for achieving smoking cessation at the end of pregnancy. Multicentre, two-group, pragmatic randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation with follow-up at the end of pregnancy and 6 months postnatally. Randomisation was stratified by centre and a computer-generated sequence was used to allocate participants using a 1 : 1 ratio. 13 hospitals offering antenatal care in the UK. Women between 10 and 24 weeks' gestation smoking five or more cigarettes a day before pregnancy and one or more during pregnancy. Participants were randomised to behavioural support for smoking cessation (control) or behavioural support plus a PA intervention consisting of supervised treadmill exercise plus PA consultations. Neither participants nor researchers were blinded to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was self-reported, continuous smoking abstinence between a quit date and end of pregnancy, validated by expired carbon monoxide and/or salivary cotinine. Secondary outcomes were maternal weight, depression, birth outcomes, withdrawal symptoms and urges to smoke. The economic evaluation investigated the costs of the PA intervention compared with the control intervention. In total, 789 women were randomised (n = 394 PA, n = 395 control). Four were excluded post randomisation (two had been enrolled twice in sequential pregnancies and two were ineligible and randomised erroneously). The intention-to-treat analysis comprised 785 participants (n = 392 PA, n = 393 control). There was no significant difference in the rate of abstinence at the end of pregnancy between the PA group (7.7%) and the control group (6.4%) [odds ratio for PA group abstinence 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 2.10]. For the PA group compared with the control group, there was a 33% (95% CI 14% to 56%), 28% (95% CI 7% to 52%) and 36% (95% CI 12% to 65%) significantly greater increase in self-reported minutes of moderate- and vigorous-intensity PA from baseline to 1 week, 4 weeks and 6 weeks respectively. Accelerometer data showed that there was no significant difference in PA levels between the groups. There were no significant differences between the groups for change in maternal weight, depression, withdrawal symptoms or urges to smoke. Adverse events and birth outcomes were similar between the groups except for there being significantly more caesarean births in the control group than in the PA group (28.7% vs. 21.3%; p < 0.023). The PA intervention was less costly than the control intervention by £35 per participant. This was mainly attributable to increased health-care usage in the control group. However, there was considerable statistical uncertainty around this estimate. During pregnancy, offering an intervention combining supervised exercise and PA counselling does not add to the effectiveness of behavioural support for smoking cessation. Only 10% of participants had PA levels accessed by accelerometer and it is, therefore, unclear whether or not the lack of an effect on the primary outcome is the result of insufficient increases in PA. Research is needed to identify the smoking populations most suitable for PA interventions and methods for increasing PA adherence. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN48600346. This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 19, No. 84. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Physical activity for smoking cessation in pregnancy: randomised controlled trial

Objective To determine the effectiveness of a physical activity intervention for smoking cessation during pregnancy.Design Parallel group, randomised controlled, multicentre trial.Setting 13 hospitals in England, April 2009 to January 2014.Participants...

Rewarding smoking cessation in pregnancy-will women cheat to gain incentives?

There is a growing body of research that suggests that financial incentives can encourage health behaviour change, but they remain controversial 1. Some of the most consistently positive evidence is for incentives for smoking cessation in pregnancy, where a recent Cochrane Review found incentives to be the most effective intervention 2. This is to address a harmful health behaviour that is challenging for women to change, and where some approaches that seem to work with other adult smokers have not yet been shown to be effective. The Cochrane Review contained just four small trials conducted in the United States, involving approximately 1200 women. More evidence is needed, particularly in countries such as the United Kingdom, where national targets to reduce smoking in pregnancy have not been met 3. Ierfino and colleagues test incentives in a ‘real world’ setting, offering them alongside existing smoking cessation services in one part of England 4. They found reasonable levels of uptake; most women who signed up to the programme made a quit attempt and 8% were validated as abstinent from smoking at delivery. This is a similar proportion of women who stopped smoking by the end of pregnancy in one recent trial of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) 5 and higher than a second, similar trial of NRT 6. Unlike some previous studies of incentives for cessation in pregnancy, women in this study were eligible to continue receiving incentives during the postpartum period. Half of those recorded as non-smokers at delivery were not using tobacco at 6 months after the birth, a similar rate of relapse to that observed in population surveys of pregnant smokers who are not engaged in cessation programmes 7, 8. This suggests that incentives did not reduce relapse rates significantly, although the numbers here are very small. Perhaps the key contribution of this study, however, particularly given the authors’ acknowledgement of the limitations of the research design (observational data which cannot tell us a great deal about efficacy) is the careful assessment of ‘gaming’. That participants will cheat to enter or remain in incentive schemes is a common conception. It is cited frequently as a reason not to support incentives for health behaviour change. Ierfino and colleagues found that no women pretended to be smokers to enter the scheme. Voluntarily taking up or restarting smoking to a level that can be detected seems unlikely in pregnancy. Some evidence of cheating during the programme was detected, perhaps once women identified the limitations (smoking in the past day) of the carbon monoxide (CO) breath test. However, here the numbers were still low—with 4% of women (10 participants) managing to ‘game’ the CO breath test. These women were identified when the more robust biochemical validation measure of salivary cotinine was used. Widespread cheating was not observed. This is consistent with the findings of qualitative research, with women and health professionals involved in another recent study of incentives for cessation in pregnancy that we have just completed in Glasgow 9, 10. In our study there were also few reports of gaming. Instead, interviewees emphasized the importance of behavioural support for smoking cessation alongside incentives that was part of our programme, as it was in the Ierfino study. Stopping smoking in pregnancy is not easy for many women 11, and support and trust—rather than blame and questioning—needs to be a part of any cessation programme. The Ierfino study adds to existing evidence that suggests rewarding women for engaging with smoking cessation programmes and for maintaining a quit attempt is a promising strategy. Further research is needed to confirm efficacy in a UK context. A greater challenge may be to address policy makers and public scepticism about such schemes, but monitoring and reporting on gaming can contribute to that. None.

Smoking cessation in primary care: Exploration of barriers and solutions in current daily practice from the perspective of smokers and healthcare professionals

Background: Evidence based recommendations for smoking cessation are not followed in routine primary care. A better understanding is needed why smoking cessation treatment is still underutilized.Objectives: To explore barriers and solutions of smoking cessation treatment, from the perspective of smokers and healthcare professionals in Dutch primary care.Methods: Focus groups were conducted with 14 smokers (smokers and ex-smokers) and semi-structured individual interviews with nine healthcare professionals (general practitioners and practice nurses). Data was analysed using the Constant Comparative Method.Results: Barriers that prevented successful smoking cessation treatment were the lack of awareness regarding the available smoking cessation treatments at the healthcare centre among smokers and the resistance against preventive tasks among healthcare professionals. Nonetheless, general practitioners (GPs) did not fear jeopardizing the doctor–patient relationship by discussing smoking. Quitting was regarded as the smokers’ own responsibility and GPs felt that merely using medication was no guarantee for successful quitting. Even so, practice nurses and smokers preferred medication use. Proposed solutions were that GPs should advise smokers to quit, whereas someone else should deliver intensive behavioural support, preferably the practice nurse.Conclusion: Smokers and healthcare professionals seem to wait for each other to start smoking cessation. GPs should know that they could discuss smoking cessation with every patient without jeopardizing the doctor–patient relationship, preferably followed by referral to a practice nurse for intensive behavioural support. Furthermore, more patients should know that they could receive pharmacological treatment as well as behavioural support for smoking cessation in their healthcare centre.