Smoking cessation intervention delivered by social service organisations for a diverse population of Australian disadvantaged smokers: A pragmatic randomised controlled trial

Bonevski, Billie; Twyman, Laura; Paul, Christine; DʼEste, Catherine; West, Robert; Siahpush, Mohammad; Oldmeadow, Christopher; Palazzi, Kerrin

doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2018.04.005

Cited by 15 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One hundred full text articles were screened, of which 95 articles were excluded for following reasons: interventions were not given by CHWs (73 studies), study designs were non controlled trials (17 studies) and outcomes were not smoking cessation (5 studies). Finally, five studies were included in this review [28][29][30][31][32].…”

Section: Search Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The studies were conducted between the year of 2011 and 2018. Two studies were conducted in United States of America (USA) [28,29] while the other studies were conducted in Hong Kong [30], Australia [32] and Vietnam [31]. The duration of the studies conducted ranged from 6 weeks to 30 months.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The usual care intervention given to both intervention groups and control group were mainly brief advice, and some of the studies provided self-help material. Four studies used brief advice; one study used AWARD model (Ask, Warn, Advise, Refer and Do-it-again) [30], one study used 4A's model (Ask for tobacco use, Advise to quit, Assess readiness to quit, and Assist) [31], one study used automated Smokefree TXT [29] and one study used on-screen advice [32]. Self-help materials in the form of leaflet or brochure were provided to the participants in three studies [28,30,31].…”

Section: Characteristic Of Interventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The interventions given by CHWs in the studies were behavioral intervention, active referral and pharmacological therapy. Two studies used motivational interviewing (MI), and provided pharmacological treatment (nicotine replacement therapy (NRT)) to the participants [28,32]. One study had active referral to the existing smoking cessation intervention in clinics…”

Section: Characteristic Of Interventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All studies used intention to treat analysis, except for the study by Bonevski et al [32]. The outcomes of the smoking abstinence rate were measured by either self-reporting or chemically verified using CO level.…”

Section: Smoking Abstinence Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Effectiveness of community health workers involvement in smoking cessation programme: A systematic review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) has set the target to reduce premature mortalities from non-communicable diseases (NCDs) by one-third. One of the ways to achieve this is through strengthening the countries’ implementation of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC). Community health workers (CHWs) involvement has shown promising results in the prevention of NCDs. This systematic review is aimed at critically evaluating the available evidence on the effectiveness of involving CHWs in smoking cessation. Materials and methods We systemically searched PubMed and CENTRAL up to September 2019. We searched for published interventional studies on smoking cessation interventions using the usual care that complemented with CHWs as compared to the usual or standard care alone. Our primary outcome was abstinence of smoking. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study risks of bias. Result We identified 2794 articles, of which only five studies were included. A total of 3513 smokers with 41 CHWs were included in the studies. The intervention duration range from 6 weeks to 30 months. The studies used behavioral intervention or a combination of behavioral intervention and pharmacological treatment. Overall, the smoking cessation intervention that incorporated involvement of CHWs had higher smoking cessation rates [OR 1.95, 95% CI (1.35, 2.83)]. Significant smoking cessation rates were seen in two studies. Conclusion Higher smoking cessation rates were seen in the interventions that combined the usual care with interventions by CHWs as compared to the usual care alone. However, there were insufficient studies to prove the effectiveness. In addition, there was high heterogeneity in terms of interventions and participants in the current studies.

show abstract

Section: Search Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Characteristics Of Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Characteristic Of Interventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Characteristic Of Interventionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Smoking Abstinence Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Effectiveness of community health workers involvement in smoking cessation programme: A systematic review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Motivational interviewing for smoking cessation

Lindson

Thompson

Ferrey

et al. 2019

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Additional behavioural support as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation

Hartmann‐Boyce

Hong

Livingstone‐Banks

et al. 2019

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Main results Eighty-three studies, 36 of which were new to this update, met the inclusion criteria, representing 29,536 participants. Overall, we judged 16 studies to be at low risk of bias and 21 studies to be at high risk of bias. All other studies were judged to be at unclear risk of bias. Results were not sensitive to the exclusion of studies at high risk of bias. We pooled all studies comparing more versus less support in the main analysis. Findings demonstrated a benefit of behavioural support in addition to pharmacotherapy. When all studies of additional behavioural therapy were pooled, there was evidence of a statistically significant benefit from additional support (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.22, I = 8%, 65 studies, n = 23,331) for abstinence at longest follow-up, and this e ect was not di erent when we compared subgroups by type of pharmacotherapy or intensity of contact. This e ect was similar in the subgroup of eight studies in which the control group received no behavioural support (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.43, I = 20%, n = 4,018). Seventeen studies compared interventions matched for contact time but that di ered in terms of the behavioural components or approaches employed. Of the 15 comparisons, all had small numbers of participants and events. Only one detected a statistically significant e ect, favouring a health education approach (which the authors described as standard counselling containing information and advice) over motivational interviewing approach (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.94, n = 378).

show abstract

Smoking cessation intervention delivered by social service organisations for a diverse population of Australian disadvantaged smokers: A pragmatic randomised controlled trial

Cited by 15 publications

References 28 publications

Effectiveness of community health workers involvement in smoking cessation programme: A systematic review

Effectiveness of community health workers involvement in smoking cessation programme: A systematic review

Motivational interviewing for smoking cessation

Additional behavioural support as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About