scholarly journals Effect of Smoking Reduction Therapy on Smoking Cessation for Smokers without an Intention to Quit: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 10235-10253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lei Wu ◽  
Samio Sun ◽  
Yao He ◽  
Jing Zeng
2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (9) ◽  
pp. 68-82
Author(s):  
Do Thi Thanh Toan ◽  
Chun Huang- Erick Wan ◽  
Nguyen Thu Anh ◽  
Pham Ngoc Yen ◽  
Luu Ngoc Minh ◽  
...  

The level of smoking cessation support in hospitals are low, especially in resource limited settings. Current healthcare systems are not well organized to address the issue. This review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions initiated in health facilities in resource-limited settings. A systematic review using meta-analysis techniques was applied. Bibliographic databases included PubMed, Medline, LILACS, the United States Clinical Trials and the Cochrane Collaboration Library. Eligibility criteria included smoking cessation intervention studies were published in English or Vietnamese, from the year 1990 to 2018. Study designs were randomized controlled trials, quasi-randomized controlled trials, cohort studies and before and after studies. Populations were limited to those in low and middle-income countries. Interventions were limited smoking cessation programs conducted in health facilities. 17 studies had included for the reviewing. 12 studies had been assessed to the meta-analysis. The proportion of successful smoking cessation in 6 months follow-up were range from 11.7% to 62.2% for the intervention group. In 12 months, follow-up, the abstinence rate ranges from 13.6% to 73%. The popularly of medical staff support the intervention was the physicians (8/17, 47.1%) and doctor (5/17, 29.4%). The evidence from our study suggests that the abstinence rate can be affected by the supporting of medical staff follow the smoking cessation (SC) program.


2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (14) ◽  
pp. 1841-1850 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Theodora Oikonomou ◽  
Marios Arvanitis ◽  
Robert L Sokolove

Recent studies have shown that mindfulness training has a promising potential for smoking treatment. In order to examine the efficacy of mindfulness training in smoking cessation, we performed a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Four randomized controlled trials with 474 patients were included in our analysis. The results showed that 25.2 percent of participants remained abstinent for more than 4 months in the mindfulness group compared to 13.6 percent of those who received usual care therapy (relative risk, 1.88; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.04–3.40). Our results suggest that mindfulness training may have an important role to play in efforts to lower cigarette smoking rates.


2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (June) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jian-Hua Wang ◽  
Robbert Haselen ◽  
Mei Wang ◽  
Guan-Lin Yang ◽  
Zhe Zhang ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 106912
Author(s):  
Gary C.K. Chan ◽  
Daniel Stjepanović ◽  
Carmen Lim ◽  
Tianze Sun ◽  
Aathavan Shanmuga Anandan ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e044222
Author(s):  
Catherine M Pound ◽  
Jennifer Zhe Zhang ◽  
Ama Tweneboa Kodua ◽  
Margaret Sampson

ObjectivesDespite the aggressive marketing of electronic nicotine device systems (ENDS) as smoking cessation tools, the evidence of their effectiveness is mixed. We conducted a systematic review of randomised controlled trials to determine the effect of ENDS on cigarette smoking cessation, as compared with other types of nicotine replacement therapies (NRT).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, the CENTRAL Trials Registry of the Cochrane Collaboration using the Ovid interface, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform trials registries were searched through 17 June 2020.Eligibility criteria for studiesRandomised controlled trials in which any type of ENDS was compared with any type of NRT, in traditional cigarette users.Data extraction and synthesisThe primary outcome was smoking cessation, defined as abstinence from traditional cigarette smoking for any time period, as reported in each included study, regardless of whether abstinence is self-reported or biochemically validated. Secondary outcomes included smoking reduction, harms, withdrawal and acceptance of therapy. A random-effect model was used, and data were pooled in meta-analyses where appropriate.ResultsSix studies were retained from 270. Most outcomes were judged to be at high risk of bias. The overall quality of evidence was graded as ‘low’ or ‘very low’. Pooled results showed no difference in smoking cessation (rate ratio (RR) 1.42, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.09), proportion of participants reducing smoking consumption (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.98), mean reduction in cigarettes smoked per day (mean difference 1.11, 95% CI −0.41 to 2.63), or harms (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.20), between groups.ConclusionWe found no difference in smoking cessation, harms and smoking reduction between e-cigarette and NRT users. However, the quality of the evidence was low. Further research is needed before widespread recommendations are made with regard to the use of ENDS.PROSPERO registration numberSystematic review registration number: protocol registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on February 27th, 2020; CRD42020169416.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document