The effectiveness of NHS smoking cessation services: a systematic review

Bauld, Linda; Bell, Kirsten; McCullough, Lucy; Richardson, Lindsay; Greaves, Lorraine

doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdp074

Cited by 148 publications

(127 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

118

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The NHS SSSs are effective in helping people to quit smoking, 129 and, although 74% of current smokers in 2007 reported that they wanted to quit, only a tiny proportion (< 5%) [130][131][132] made use of the free service provided by the NHS. A wide range of factors, such as lack of availability and accessibility, perceived inappropriateness of the service, a perception that help is not necessary, or a sense of a lack of empathy from health professionals, as well as a lack of readiness to quit, will bar smokers from seeking help.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Start2quit: a randomised clinical controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using personal tailored risk information and taster sessions to increase the uptake of the NHS Stop Smoking Services

Gilbert

Sutton

Morris

et al. 2017

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (www.publicationethics.org/).Editorial contact: nihredit@southampton.ac.ukThe full HTA archive is freely available to view online at www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hta. Print-on-demand copies can be purchased from the report pages of the NIHR Journals Library website: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk Criteria for inclusion in the Health Technology Assessment journalReports are published in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) if (1) they have resulted from work for the HTA programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the reviewers and editors.Reviews in Health Technology Assessment are termed 'systematic' when the account of the search appraisal and synthesis methods (to minimise biases and random errors) would, in theory, permit the replication of the review by others. HTA programmeThe HTA programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was set up in 1993. It produces high-quality research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS. 'Health technologies' are broadly defined as all interventions used to promote health, prevent and treat disease, and improve rehabilitation and long-term care.The journal is indexed in NHS Evidence via its abstracts included in MEDLINE and its Technology Assessment Reports inform National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance. HTA research is also an important source of evidence for National Screening Committee (NSC) policy decisions.For more information about the HTA programme please visit the website: http://www.nets.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hta This reportThe research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by the HTA programme as project number 08/58/02. The contractual start date was in June 2010. The draft report began editorial review in December 2015 and was accepted for publication in June 2016. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The HTA editors and publisher have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors' report and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the draft document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this report.This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HTA programme or the Department of Health. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the views and opinions expressed by the interviewees are those of the interviewees and do not necessarily reflect those of the authors, those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HTA programme or the Department of Health. © Queen's Printer a...

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Start2quit: a randomised clinical controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using personal tailored risk information and taster sessions to increase the uptake of the NHS Stop Smoking Services

Gilbert

Sutton

Morris

et al. 2017

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1 Primary care physicians or GPs and other members of the primary healthcare team are well placed to intervene with smokers, having at their disposal a range of cessation interventions proven effective and costeffective in helping smokers to quit, including offering brief cessation advice during the course of a consultation, 2 referring smokers to behavioural support programmes, 3 and prescribing nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), 4 bupropion, 5 and varenicline. 6 About one-third of the pay for GPs in the UK derives from the pay-for-performance scheme called the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF), introduced in 2004.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Provision of smoking cessation support in UK primary care: impact of the 2012 QOF revision

Szatkowski

Aveyard

2015

Br J Gen Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundBefore 2012, UK GPs were paid only to offer cessation advice to smokers and only to those with smoking-related disease, a minority of all smokers. From 2012, GPs are now paid to offer all smokers referral for behavioural support and medication to assist cessation at least once every 2 years. AimTo quantify the impact of this new recommendation and payment on indicators of smoking cessation activity. Design and settingInterrupted time series analysis of data from general practices in England contributing data to The Health Improvement Network (THIN). MethodData were extracted on monthly rates of recorded delivery of smoking cessation advice, referral to NHS Stop Smoking Services, and prescription of smoking cessation medications, among an average of 3.3 million patients aged >16 years registered each month in THIN. ARIMA models were used to quantify changes in rates of cessation activity after the 2012 Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) revision compared with beforehand.

show abstract

“…A recent review found the use of a non-smoking buddy when combined with individual counselling may more than double the short term smoking cessation/reduction in teenagers [20]. Prior to consent women in this study were asked if they could identify a selfnominated non-smoking buddy to assist with smoking cessation who they could chat with at least twice a week every two weeks from recruitment to six weeks post birth.…”

Section: Non-smoking Buddymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Multiple Component Intervention to Assist Young Pregnant Smokers to Cease Smoking: A Randomised Controlled Pilot Study

Lewis¹,

Hauck²,

Ronchi³

et al. 2016

J Addict Res Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Australian rates of cigarette smoking are the lowest in the world. Young pregnant smokers are a sub population where smoking remains high. This pilot study assessed the feasibility of a multi-component intervention (Carbon Monoxide testing, motivational interviewing and a non-smoking buddy) to assist young pregnant women to cease smoking. Methods:Between October 2013 and June 2015, this multi-centred West Australian study recruited pregnant smokers aged 16 to 24, attending their first antenatal visit. Women (n=80) were randomised to the intervention and standard smoking cessation advice (n=43) or standard smoking cessation advice alone (n=37). At 36 weeks gestation and six weeks post birth, cessation rates were compared between groups using repeated measures survival analysis and reduction in smoking was examined using repeated measures linear regression on the number of cigarettes smoked. Results:The majority (89%) of women were unemployed or not in education, used illicit drugs (43%) and had experienced sexual abuse (23%). Involvement with child protection services was common (38%). Cigarette initiation occurred at a mean age of 13 years, median number of cigarettes smoked at baseline was 10 in both groups. Smoking cessation in intervention and controls were 17% vs. 14% at 36 weeks and 23% vs. 7% 6 weeks post birth. No significant differences in cessation or smoking reduction between groups were found individually or in the repeated events analysis. Conclusion:Given the low number of participants our findings cannot conclusively rule out this multi-component intervention. We believe it remains possible this intervention may prove effective in a larger group of participants and in another setting. Monitoring trends in this vulnerable, difficult to engage group of pregnant young women is important if we are to continue to devise effective interventions.

show abstract

The effectiveness of NHS smoking cessation services: a systematic review

Cited by 148 publications

References 22 publications

Start2quit: a randomised clinical controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using personal tailored risk information and taster sessions to increase the uptake of the NHS Stop Smoking Services

Start2quit: a randomised clinical controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of using personal tailored risk information and taster sessions to increase the uptake of the NHS Stop Smoking Services

Provision of smoking cessation support in UK primary care: impact of the 2012 QOF revision

A Multiple Component Intervention to Assist Young Pregnant Smokers to Cease Smoking: A Randomised Controlled Pilot Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About