Content uploaded by Eduardo Olano Espinosa
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Eduardo Olano Espinosa on Aug 09, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Effectiveness of a Health Professional Training Program for Treatment of Tobacco Addiction
Abstract and Figures
Introduction:
Advice can have a small but clinically important effect in promoting smoking cessation. Where studied, the rate of delivery has been found to be low. Training has been found to increases this rates, but there is little research on effectiveness in terms of smoking cessation rates. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an health professionals educational program to increase long-term rates of nicotine abstinence in smoking outpatients.
Methods:
We conducted a pragmatic cluster-randomized, controlled trial in 35 primary health care centers in Spain. Participants were all 830 health professionals who attended 5,970 smokers during recruiting period. After that we measured continuous abstinence 6 months after the intervention and biochemically validated (saliva cotinine test) 1 year following intervention. Cost-effectiveness was measured in terms of cost per life year gained.
Results:
After 6 months, the rate of continuous abstinence was significantly higher in the intervention group (2.1% vs. 0.3%, p > .0001) with an odds ratio of 6.5 (95% CI = 3.3-12.7). After 1 year, biochemical validation was performed on 31 of the 67 patients previously registered as abstinent. All of them were abstinent and belonged to intervention group. The incremental cost per life year gained after 6 months was €969.
Conclusions:
A primary care training program on smoking cessation based on scientific evidence, behavioral theory, and active learning methods increases long-term continuous nicotine abstinence rate among outpatients in a significant way. These may be relevant for planning training of professionals, clinical assistance, and public health programs.
Figures - uploaded by Eduardo Olano Espinosa
Author content
All figure content in this area was uploaded by Eduardo Olano Espinosa
Content may be subject to copyright.
... The majority of smoking prevention and cessation training programs are only available in English and implemented in developed and high-income countries [13][14][15][16]. Only a few of these programs are specifically designed for providers caring for cancer patients. ...
... By contrast, the STOP Program reported an increase in the perceived positive attitude of the CCPs toward the importance of smoking prevention and cessation in cancer care. Like the previous reports [8,14,19,21], the practice domain in the STOP Program recorded one of the highest significant increases post-training. Our findings showed that the STOP Program significantly improved smoking prevention and cessation efforts and practices like the other reported smoking cessation training programs in the literature. ...
We designed and tested the feasibility of the Smoking Cessation Training Program for Oncology Practice (STOP), a hybrid (face-to-face plus web-based) educational intervention to enhance Spanish-speaking cancer care professionals' (CCPs') ability to provide brief smoking prevention and cessation counseling to cancer patients and survivors. Changes in the CCPs' competencies (knowledge, attitude, self-efficacy, and practices toward smoking and smoking cessation services) were assessed post-training. Sixty CCPs from one major cancer center in Colombia (n = 30) and Peru (n = 30) were invited to participate in a 4-module hybrid training program on smoking prevention and cessation. Demographic and pre- and post-test evaluation data were collected. The training's acceptability was measured after each module. Bivariate analysis was conducted using Wilcoxon signed-rank test to compare the CCPs' competencies before and after the delivery of the STOP Program. Effect sizes were computed over time to assess the sustainability of the acquired competencies. Twenty-nine CCPs in Colombia and 24 CCPs in Peru completed the STOP Program (96.6% and 80.0% retention rates, respectively). In both countries, 98.2% of the CCPs reported that the overall structure and organization of the program provided an excellent learning experience. The pre-post-test evaluations indicated that the CCPs significantly improved their knowledge, attitude, self-efficacy, and practices toward smoking, smoking prevention, and cessation services. We found that the CCPs' self-efficacy and practices increased over time (1-, 3-, and 6-month assessments after completing the 4 educational modules). The STOP Program was effective and well-received, demonstrating remarkable changes in CCPs' competencies in providing smoking prevention and cessation services to cancer patients.
... It fortifies healthcare providers to acquire new skills, strengthen their existing skills, increase productivity, as well as advance all healthcare providers to a higher level with similar skills and knowledge. Training programs around the world have been shown to have a significant impact on nicotine dependence treatment initiatives delivered by healthcare providers [2,7,8,32,[39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53]. Therefore, it is paramount to examine and evaluate the effectiveness of these programs. ...
... A flowchart of the validation process is presented in Figure 1. treatment initiatives delivered by healthcare providers [2,7,8,32,[39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53]. Therefore, it is paramount to examine and evaluate the effectiveness of these programs. ...
Background: In line with Article 14 of the Framework Convention for Tobacco Control, we have witnessed vast developments in smoking cessation training for healthcare providers, offering help for smokers. However, there is no specific evaluation tool to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of these programs for future enhancement and sustainability. Objective: To develop and validate a new tool for evaluating smoking cessation training programs for healthcare providers called the Providers' Smoking Cessation Training Evaluation (ProSCiTE). Methods: The 74-item ProSCiTE tool was developed based on a review of the literature and an expert panel review. The tool was validated in a sample of 403 healthcare providers using a cross-sectional study design from July to December 2016. Content validity was assessed by the Scale-Content Validity Index (S-CVI). The construct validity of the ProSCiTE was analyzed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to confirm psychometric properties. Internal consistency reliability was determined using Cronbach's alpha. Results: The content validity showed that the S-CVI ranged from 0.82 to 1.00 for consistency, representativeness, relevancy, and the clarity of each construct, resulting in 67 items for the questionnaire. The construct validity of the ProSCiTE (based on eigenvalues and factor loadings to confirm the four-factor structure (attitude, self-efficacy, behavior, and barriers) with 54.74% total variance) was acceptable (Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin = 0.923; Bartlett's test of sphericity was significant, p < 0.001). The internal consistency reliability of the four-factor structure was very good, with Cronbach's alpha values at 0.89, 0.94, 0.95, and 0.90, respectively. Conclusions: This study showed that 67 items of the ProSCiTE demonstrated good content and construct validity, as well as a high internal consistency reliability for the measurement of knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy, behavior, and barriers to smoking cessation interventions among healthcare providers. Therefore, the ProSCiTE is a valid and reliable research tool with which to evaluate the effectiveness of smoking cessation training programs.
... Evidence shows that health professionals can effectively intervene in order to prevent and stop tobacco smoking in their patients [14][15][16]. Individuals who smoke are more likely to quit when advised to do so by a healthcare professional [17]. The lack of knowledge and skill has been identified by health professionals as a barrier which can only be overcome by adequate training [18][19][20]. ...
Quitting smoking is a powerful way for patients to improve their own wellbeing and to significantly reduce the risk of health problems. Evidence shows that health professionals can effectively intervene in order to prevent and stop tobacco smoking in their patients. Online learning modules have proved to be effective in terms of transferring knowledge and skills. In an urban community hospital setting in Germany, a novel e-learning course for staff on the treatment of tobacco dependence was implemented in 2021. In this study, we analyzed free-text feedback of participants completing this online module in order to examine the feasibility and acceptance of this new format. We were able to reach a reasonable proportion of staff. Our qualitative analysis showed that most feedback was positive and described the module as well-designed and helpful. Some staff, however, expressed extremely negative views and did not see smoking cessation support as essential to their role in healthcare. We argue that in order to achieve a shift in attitude in healthcare staff, a change in German policy is required which includes the creation of smoke-free environments and the adherence to smoke-free policies on hospital sites. Furthermore, the provision of smoking cessation support in line with the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and a true understanding of the role of all healthcare professionals in promoting health of patients and staff will be essential.
... сложности 5970 курильщиков в течение 6 мес. В результате шансы отказа от курения были значительно выше среди пациентов, чьи лечащие врачи прошли активное обучение (ОШ =6,5, 95% ДИ 3,3-12,7, p>0,0001) [13]. Другое исследование немецких авторов продемонстрировало отличный эффект короткого 2 ч семинара для врачей пульмонологического отделения по оказанию помощи курящим пациентам: через 6 мес. ...
Aim . To evaluate the impact of training primary care physicians about the principles of smoking treatment on the rate of successful quitting among their patients.
Material and methods. Within the regional program on cardiovascular prevention among men aged 45-55 years, a study was made on the effectiveness of an educational seminar for primary care physicians (clustered quasi-experimental study). The main group consisted of 70 physicians (subjects of intervention) who underwent face-to-face training at a 3-hour interactive seminar on the principles of behavioral and drug treatment of smoking patients. In the following year, they consulted 423 smokers (subjects of analysis). The comparison group was represented by 174 doctors trained with extramural program who consulted 654 smokers. The doctors of both groups were provided with methodological and informational support in the form of short guides and brochures for patients. The main outcome studied was smoking cessation in patients one year after physician training. The comparison of outcomes was carried out taking into account the cluster structure of data using hierarchical regression. The initial imbalance of comparison groups in history of smoking, quit attempts, as well as level of alcohol consumption was corrected at the analysis stage.
Results . In total, 12,6% of patients in the observed cohort quit smoking after one year, which was significantly higher than the common successful self-quit rate (3-5%). The likelihood of quitting smoking was strongly influenced by a particular doctor (ICC=0,326). Face-to-face interactive training of physicians significantly increased the probability of successful refusal in patients compared with distance learning (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) =4,8; odds ratio (OR) =5,3, 95% confidence interval (CI), 2,7-10,6, p<0,001). The likelihood of successful withdrawals among patients among primary care physicians was much higher than among health center patients (adjusted HR=4,5; adjusted OR, 5, 95% CI, 1,2-20,6, p=0,027).
Conclusion . Education of primary care physicians in the principles of smoking treatment, combined with the provision of information materials for patients, significantly increases the success rate among motivated smokers. At the same time, a face-to-face interactive seminar is much more effective than distance learning. General practitioners demonstrate the best professional productivity, regardless of the training form.
... Reflecting the challenges surrounding the effective implementation of smoking cessation treatment in primary care, much research has been carried out investigating how to improve both the implementation and success of these interventions. Some have focused on practice-level interventions (such as electronic medical record prompts or outreach facilitation (Cummings 1989a; Verbiest 2014); some have focused on https://archie.cochrane.org/popups/view.jsp?url=%2Fsections%2Fdocuments%2Fview%3Fversion%3Dz2109011657583723388513564440975%2… 11/200 provider-level interventions, such as provider training and incentives (Lennox 1998;Olano Espinosa 2013;Roski 2003), and some have focused on patient-level interventions (over and above the standard advice delivered by primary care physicians; such as adjunctive counseling, cost-free medications, biomedical feedback, and tailored printed materials ;Meyer 2008;Ronaldson 2018). Others have tested a combination of these approaches in multicomponent interventions (e.g. ...
Background:
Primary care is an important setting in which to treat tobacco addiction. However, the rates at which providers address smoking cessation and the success of that support vary. Strategies can be implemented to improve and increase the delivery of smoking cessation support (e.g. through provider training), and to increase the amount and breadth of support given to people who smoke (e.g. through additional counseling or tailored printed materials).
Objectives:
To assess the effectiveness of strategies intended to increase the success of smoking cessation interventions in primary care settings. To assess whether any effect that these interventions have on smoking cessation may be due to increased implementation by healthcare providers.
Search methods:
We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and trial registries to 10 September 2020.
Selection criteria:
We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs (cRCTs) carried out in primary care, including non-pregnant adults. Studies investigated a strategy or strategies to improve the implementation or success of smoking cessation treatment in primary care. These strategies could include interventions designed to increase or enhance the quality of existing support, or smoking cessation interventions offered in addition to standard care (adjunctive interventions). Intervention strategies had to be tested in addition to and in comparison with standard care, or in addition to other active intervention strategies if the effect of an individual strategy could be isolated. Standard care typically incorporates physician-delivered brief behavioral support, and an offer of smoking cessation medication, but differs across studies. Studies had to measure smoking abstinence at six months' follow-up or longer.
Data collection and analysis:
We followed standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome - smoking abstinence - was measured using the most rigorous intention-to-treat definition available. We also extracted outcome data for quit attempts, and the following markers of healthcare provider performance: asking about smoking status; advising on cessation; assessment of participant readiness to quit; assisting with cessation; arranging follow-up for smoking participants. Where more than one study investigated the same strategy or set of strategies, and measured the same outcome, we conducted meta-analyses using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects methods to generate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Main results:
We included 81 RCTs and cRCTs, involving 112,159 participants. Fourteen were rated at low risk of bias, 44 at high risk, and the remainder at unclear risk. We identified moderate-certainty evidence, limited by inconsistency, that the provision of adjunctive counseling by a health professional other than the physician (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.55; I2 = 44%; 22 studies, 18,150 participants), and provision of cost-free medications (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.76; I2 = 63%; 10 studies,7560 participants) increased smoking quit rates in primary care. There was also moderate-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias, that the addition of tailored print materials to standard smoking cessation treatment increased the number of people who had successfully stopped smoking at six months' follow-up or more (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.59; I2 = 37%; 6 studies, 15,978 participants). There was no clear evidence that providing participants who smoked with biomedical risk feedback increased their likelihood of quitting (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.41; I2 = 40%; 7 studies, 3491 participants), or that provider smoking cessation training (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.41; I2 = 66%; 7 studies, 13,685 participants) or provider incentives (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.34; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 2454 participants) increased smoking abstinence rates. However, in assessing the former two strategies we judged the evidence to be of low certainty and in assessing the latter strategies it was of very low certainty. We downgraded the evidence due to imprecision, inconsistency and risk of bias across these comparisons. There was some indication that provider training increased the delivery of smoking cessation support, along with the provision of adjunctive counseling and cost-free medications. However, our secondary outcomes were not measured consistently, and in many cases analyses were subject to substantial statistical heterogeneity, imprecision, or both, making it difficult to draw conclusions. Thirty-four studies investigated multicomponent interventions to improve smoking cessation rates. There was substantial variation in the combinations of strategies tested, and the resulting individual study effect estimates, precluding meta-analyses in most cases. Meta-analyses provided some evidence that adjunctive counseling combined with either cost-free medications or provider training enhanced quit rates when compared with standard care alone. However, analyses were limited by small numbers of events, high statistical heterogeneity, and studies at high risk of bias. Analyses looking at the effects of combining provider training with flow sheets to aid physician decision-making, and with outreach facilitation, found no clear evidence that these combinations increased quit rates; however, analyses were limited by imprecision, and there was some indication that these approaches did improve some forms of provider implementation.
Authors' conclusions:
There is moderate-certainty evidence that providing adjunctive counseling by an allied health professional, cost-free smoking cessation medications, and tailored printed materials as part of smoking cessation support in primary care can increase the number of people who achieve smoking cessation. There is no clear evidence that providing participants with biomedical risk feedback, or primary care providers with training or incentives to provide smoking cessation support enhance quit rates. However, we rated this evidence as of low or very low certainty, and so conclusions are likely to change as further evidence becomes available. Most of the studies in this review evaluated smoking cessation interventions that had already been extensively tested in the general population. Further studies should assess strategies designed to optimize the delivery of those interventions already known to be effective within the primary care setting. Such studies should be cluster-randomized to account for the implications of implementation in this particular setting. Due to substantial variation between studies in this review, identifying optimal characteristics of multicomponent interventions to improve the delivery of smoking cessation treatment was challenging. Future research could use component network meta-analysis to investigate this further.
... In addition, due to lack of knowledge, low motivation, perceived low self-efficacy and concerns about inadequate time and workload, many healthcare professionals do not provide effective cessation services 17,18 . However, implementation of tobacco dependence treatment for healthcare professionals has been shown to increase their cessation efforts significantly with their patients and quit attempts 19,20 , as well as improve trainees' attitudes and perceived behavioral control in providing tobacco dependence services 21 . The importance of continuing medical education training programs to address this gap in knowledge and skills has also been acknowledged and can significantly impact healthcare professional competence, future clinical practice and patient outcomes if embedded into the healthcare system [22][23][24][25][26] . ...
INTRODUCTION In 2018, the European Network for Smoking Cessation and Prevention (ENSP) released an update to its Tobacco Treatment Guidelines for healthcare professionals, which was the scientific base for the development of an accredited eLearning curriculum to train healthcare professionals, available in 14 languages. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of ENSP eLearning curriculum in increasing healthcare professionals’ knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy (perceived behavioral control) and intentions in delivering tobacco treatment interventions in their daily clinical routines.
METHODS We conducted a quasi-experimental pre-post design study with 444 healthcare professionals, invited by 20 collaborating institutions from 15 countries (Albania, Armenia, Belgium, Italy, France, Georgia, Greece, Kosovo, Romania, North Macedonia, Russia, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain, Ukraine), which completed the eLearning course between December 2018 and July 2019.
RESULTS Healthcare professionals’ self-reported knowledge improved after the completion of each module of the eLearning program. Increases in healthcare professionals’ self-efficacy in delivering tobacco treatment interventions (p<0.001) were also documented. Significant improvements were documented in intentions to address tobacco use as a priority, document tobacco use, offer support, provide brief counselling, give written material, discuss available medication, prescribe medication, schedule dedicated appointment to develop a quit plan, and be persistent in addressing tobacco use with the patients (all p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS An evidence-based digital intervention can be effective in improving knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy and intentions on future delivery of tobacco-treatment interventions.
Background:
Health care providers' (HCP) advice on tobacco prevention and cessation is critical in addressing the tobacco use epidemic among adolescents. However, examination of whether receiving advice from HCPs differs by adolescent sociodemographic characteristics and tobacco use is limited.
Methods:
HCP advice to abstain from using tobacco was examined using the 2020 National Youth Tobacco Survey (N = 12,483). Sociodemographic (age, sex, sexual orientation, race/ethnicity, and region) and tobacco use (non-current, sole, dual/poly) differences by HCP advice were evaluated using adjusted logistic regression models.
Results:
Among the sample, 37.26% of adolescents received HCP advice to abstain from using tobacco products, and 31.35% received HCP advice to abstain from using e-cigarettes specifically. Adolescents who were non-Hispanic Black (vs. non-Hispanic White) were more likely not to receive HCP advice to abstain from all tobacco products (OR = 1.31, 95% CI: 1.08-1.59). Adolescents who were non-Hispanic Black (vs. non-Hispanic White) (OR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.16-1.73) or sexual minority (vs. heterosexual) (OR = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.02-1.33) were more likely not to receive HCP advice to abstain from e-cigarettes. Adolescents who were aged 16-18 (vs. aged 9-12) (OR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.56-0.83) or currently use dual/poly tobacco products (vs. adolescents who do not currently use tobacco) (OR = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.43-0.74) were more likely to receive HCP advice to abstain from using e-cigarettes).
Conclusions:
Many U.S. adolescents do not receive HCP advice to abstain from using tobacco. HCPs should increase tobacco prevention and cessation advice across adolescent groups, particularly racial/ethnic and sexual minorities. HCP training and public health policies that improve delivery of e-cigarette advice to adolescents are essential.
Background:
Educational meetings are used widely by health personnel to provide continuing medical education and to promote implementation of innovations or translate new knowledge to change practice within healthcare systems. Previous reviews have concluded that educational meetings can result in small changes in behaviour, but that effects vary considerably. Investigations into which characteristics of educational meetings might lead to greater impact have yielded varying results, and factors that might explain heterogeneity in effects remain unclear. This is the second update of this Cochrane Review.
Objectives:
• To assess the effects of educational meetings on professional practice and healthcare outcomes • To investigate factors that might explain the heterogeneity of these effects SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ERIC, Science Citation Index Expanded (ISI Web of Knowledge), and Social Sciences Citation Index (last search in November 2016).
Selection criteria:
We sought randomised trials examining the effects of educational meetings on professional practice and patient outcomes.
Data collection and analysis:
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. One review author assessed the certainty of evidence (GRADE) and discussed with a second review author. We included studies in the primary analysis that reported baseline data and that we judged to be at low or unclear risk of bias. For each comparison of dichotomous outcomes, we measured treatment effect as risk difference adjusted for baseline compliance. We expressed adjusted risk difference values as percentages, and we noted that values greater than zero favour educational meetings. For continuous outcomes, we measured treatment effect as per cent change relative to the control group mean post test, adjusted for baseline performance; we expressed values as percentages and noted that values greater than zero favour educational meetings. We report means and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and, when appropriate, medians and interquartile ranges to facilitate comparisons to previous versions of this review. We analysed professional and patient outcomes separately and analysed 22 variables that were hypothesised a priori to explain heterogeneity. We explored heterogeneity by using univariate meta-regression and by inspecting violin plots.
Main results:
We included 215 studies involving more than 28,167 health professionals, including 142 new studies for this update. Educational meetings as the single intervention or the main component of a multi-faceted intervention compared with no intervention • Probably slightly improve compliance with desired practice when compared with no intervention (65 comparisons, 7868 health professionals for dichotomous outcomes (adjusted risk difference 6.79%, 95% CI 6.62% to 6.97%; median 4.00%; interquartile range 0.29% to 13.00%); 28 comparisons, 2577 health professionals for continuous outcomes (adjusted relative percentage change 44.36%, 95% CI 41.98% to 46.75%; median 20.00%; interquartile range 6.00% to 65.00%)) • Probably slightly improve patient outcomes compared with no intervention (15 comparisons, 2530 health professionals for dichotomous outcomes (adjusted risk difference 3.30%, 95% CI 3.10% to 3.51%; median 0.10%; interquartile range 0.00% to 4.00%); 28 comparisons, 2294 health professionals for continuous outcomes (adjusted relative percentage change 8.35%, 95% CI 7.46% to 9.24%; median 2.00%; interquartile range -1.00% to 21.00%)) The certainty of evidence for this comparison is moderate. Educational meetings alone compared with other interventions • May improve compliance with desired practice when compared with other interventions (6 studies, 1402 health professionals for dichotomous outcomes (adjusted risk difference 9.99%, 95% CI 9.47% to 10.52%; median 16.5%; interquartile range 0.80% to 16.50%); 2 studies, 72 health professionals for continuous outcomes (adjusted relative percentage change 12.00%, 95% CI 9.16% to 14.84%; median 12.00%; interquartile range 0.00% to 24.00%)) No studies met the inclusion criteria for patient outcome measurements. The certainty of evidence for this comparison is low. Interactive educational meetings compared with didactic (lecture-based) educational meetings • We are uncertain of effects on compliance with desired practice (3 studies, 370 health professionals for dichotomous outcomes; 1 study, 192 health professionals for continuous outcomes) or on patient outcomes (1 study, 54 health professionals for continuous outcomes), as the certainty of evidence is very low Any other comparison of different formats and durations of educational meetings • We are uncertain of effects on compliance with desired practice (1 study, 19 health professionals for dichotomous outcomes; 1 study, 20 health professionals for continuous outcomes) or on patient outcomes (1 study, 113 health professionals for continuous outcomes), as the certainty of evidence is very low. Factors that might explain heterogeneity of effects Meta-regression suggests that larger estimates of effect are associated with studies judged to be at high risk of bias, with studies that had unit of analysis errors, and with studies in which the unit of analysis was the provider rather than the patient. Improved compliance with desired practice may be associated with: shorter meetings; poor baseline compliance; better attendance; shorter follow-up; professionals provided with additional take-home material; explicit building of educational meetings on theory; targeting of low- versus high-complexity behaviours; targeting of outcomes with high versus low importance; goal of increasing rather than decreasing behaviour; teaching by opinion leaders; and use of didactic versus interactive teaching methods. Pre-specified exploratory analyses of behaviour change techniques suggest that improved compliance with desired practice may be associated with use of a greater number of behaviour change techniques; goal-setting; provision of feedback; provision for social comparison; and provision for social support. Compliance may be decreased by the use of follow-up prompts, skills training, and barrier identification techniques.
Authors' conclusions:
Compared with no intervention, educational meetings as the main component of an intervention probably slightly improve professional practice and, to a lesser extent, patient outcomes. Educational meetings may improve compliance with desired practice to a greater extent than other kinds of behaviour change interventions, such as text messages, fees, or office systems. Our findings suggest that multi-strategy approaches might positively influence the effects of educational meetings. Additional trials of educational meetings compared with no intervention are unlikely to change the review findings; therefore we will not further update this review comparison in the future. However, we note that randomised trials comparing different types of education are needed.
Introduction:
Tobacco is the leading cause of death and disease in India. This study examines the effect of training intervention in behavioral counseling on intention to quit tobacco in primary healthcare settings in India. The intervention included training to improve behavioral counseling practices of primary care physicians (PCPs) based on the 5As approach to increase patients' motivation to quit tobacco.
Methods:
A quasi-experimental design was used for the study. The intervention consists of training of primary care physicians in the behavioral intervention in tobacco cessation. The intervention was conducted in twelve districts of two states in India (Rajasthan and Odisha) in 2016-2017. Four districts were randomly sampled for the study. A total of 1314 participants (intervention and control) were recruited for the study in the baseline and end-line surveys, respectively. Intention to quit in 30 days was the primary outcome measure. Difference-in-difference (DiD) logistic regression models were used separately for smokers and smokeless tobacco users to estimate the odds of intention to quit. Analysis was done in STATA Version 14.
Results:
The intervention and time variable had a significantly positive influence on the intention to quit tobacco among smokers. Smokers in the intervention districts had higher odds of intention to quit (OR=9.82; 95% CI: 1.67-57.72) compared to smokers in the control districts. Smokeless tobacco (SLT) users had higher odds of intention to quit (OR=3.06; 95% CI: 1.35-6.98) in the end-line survey compared to baseline survey.
Conclusions:
Our findings indicate that building capacity in behavioral intervention in primary care settings can help increase the intention to quit among smokers. The observed difference in intention to quit between smokers and SLT users suggests the need of tailored counseling interventions for SLT users. There is a need for further research to design and evaluate training and behavioral interventions for SLT and dual (smoking and SLT) users in primary care settings in low- and middle-income countries.
Objectives
Smoking remains a leading public health issue and health care practitioners (HCPs), who play an important role in supporting and promoting patients’ cessation efforts, need educational initiatives that improve their ability to provide effective clinical care. The objective of this study was to compare patient-reported abstinence from smoking following treatment by HCPs trained in an intensive tobacco cessation program and those trained in less intensive programs.MethodsA secondary data analysis of two overlapping samples of patients who received most of their treatment from one identifiable HCP (n = 26,590) or all of their treatment from one identifiable HCP (n = 20,986) was assessed. Patients were residents of Ontario, Canada, who enrolled in a publicly funded smoking cessation treatment program between 01 May 2014 and 31 October 2016 and completed the 7-day point prevalence of smoking question at 6-month follow-up. Treatment was provided by HCPs who engaged in the intensive Training Enhancement in Applied Counselling and Health (TEACH) Core course, or those who engaged in one or more other training programs. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) logistic regression was used to compare smoking abstinence between groups.ResultsAfter adjustment for both patient- and practice-level covariates, a significant association was found between being treated by a TEACH-trained HCP and the likelihood of smoking abstinence at 6-month follow-up in both analytic samples (most care sample: OR = 1.10, 95% CI = 1.01, 1.20; all care sample: OR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.02, 1.24).Conclusion
Implementation of comprehensive cessation training to support HCP delivery of smoking cessation treatment should be considered to improve patient outcomes.
The process of smoking cessation involves progression through five stages of change: precontemplation, contemplation, preparation, action, and maintenance. Most patients are not prepared to take action on their smoking, yet most smoking cessation programs are designed for smokers who are so prepared. Small percentages of smokers register for action-oriented cessation programs.
How much progress patients make after an intervention is directly related to what stage they are in prior to intervention. The stages of change can be quickly assessed with four questions. Physicians can then be more effective with a broader range of patients by matching their interventions to the patients’ stage of change. Helping patients progress just one stage can double their chances of not smoking 6 months later.
Providing personalized information about the cons of smoking, asking affect-arousing questions, and encouraging patients to re-evaluate themselves as smokers are interventions physicians can use to help patients who are not prepared to quit smoking. Behavioral interventions, such as providing substitutes like nicotine gum and removing or altering cues for smoking, are most helpful for patients who are ready to take action. The use of a stage-matched, patient-centered counseling intervention can help physicians to feel less frustrated and more effective in their efforts to help a broad range of their patients.
BACKGROUND: Health care professionals frequently advise patients to improve their health by stopping smoking. Such advice may be brief, or part of more intensive interventions. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this review were to assess the effectiveness of advice from physicians in promoting smoking cessation; to compare minimal interventions by physicians with more intensive interventions; to assess the effectiveness of various aids to advice in promoting smoking cessation and to determine the effect of anti-smoking advice on disease specific and all cause mortality. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. Date of the most recent searches: October 1998. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of smoking cessation advice from a medical practitioner in which abstinence was assessed at least six months after advice was first provided. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data in duplicate on the setting in which advice was given, type of advice given (minimal or intensive), and whether aids to advice were used, the outcome measures, method of randomisation and completeness of followup. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each trial, and biochemically validated rates where available. Subjects lost to follow-up were counted as smokers. Where possible, meta-analysis was performed using a fixed effects model. MAIN RESULTS: We identified thirty-one trials, conducted between 1972 and 1997, including over 26,000 smokers. In some trials, subjects were at risk of specified diseases (chest disease, diabetes, ischaemic heart disease), but most were from unselected populations. The most common setting for delivery of advice was primary care. Other settings included hospital wards and outpatient clinics, and industrial clinics. Pooled data from 16 trials of brief advice versus no advice (or usual care) revealed a small but significant increase in the odds of quitting (odds ratio 1.69, 95% confidence interval 1.45 to 1.98). This equates to an absolute difference in the cessation rate of about 2.5%. There was insufficient evidence, from indirect comparisons, to establish a significant difference in the effectiveness of physician advice according to the intensity of the intervention, the amount of follow-up provided, and whether or not various aids were used at the time of the consultation in addition to providing advice. However, direct comparison of intensive versus minimal advice showed a small advantage of intensive advice (odds ratio 1.44, 95% confidence interval 1.23 to 1.68). In one study which determined the effect of smoking advice on mortality at twenty years, there were no statistically significant differences in death rates in the group receiving advice. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Simple advice has a small effect on cessation rates. Additional manoeuvres appear to have only a small effect, though more intensive interventions are marginally more effective than minimal interventions.
The objective of this study was to determine the epidemiology of smoking among health care givers in our setting and to describe their characteristics. We gave an anonymous questionnaire to 566 health care workers in the Valencian Community (248 physicians, 212 nurses and 106 aides). The results were as follows. Physicians: 46.4% were smokers, 25.4% were non smokers and 28.2% were ex-smokers. Most (69.3%) smoked 11 to 20 cigarettes/day. Low scores on Fagerström's test were recorded for 93%, and 57.3% have tried to quit smoking more than 5 times. The likelihood of being and ex-smoker increased with age (r = 0.158; p = 0.012) and with the number of attempts to quit (r = 0.170; p = 0.021). Nurses: 34.4% were smokers, 36. 3% were non smokers and 29.2% were ex-smokers. The degree of nicotine addiction was low for 91.8% and 83% of the smokers and ex-smokers had tried at least once to quit smoking. Aides: 32% were smokers, 42.5% were non smokers and 25.5% were ex-smokers. The degree of addiction was low for 79.4% and 78.7% had tried to quit smoking at least once. The likelihood of being an ex-smoker increased with the number of attempts at quitting (r = 0.448; p = 0.000). In conclusion, we found that rate of smoking was higher than expected for persons who understand the related problems. The low level of physical addiction and the high number of times the subjects had tried to stop smoking suggest the need to create a program specifically to help health care workers in this respect.
We assessed the impact of three conditions on one-year smoking cessation rates. Physicians in 70 community general practices were randomly allocated by practice to one of three groups: In the usual care group, smoking patients were to receive the care they normally would receive. In the gum only group, physicians were asked to speak to patients about smoking cessation and offer nicotine gum. In the gum plus group, physicians were trained in the experimental intervention. This intervention involved advice to stop smoking, the setting of a quit date, the offer of nicotine gum, and four follow-up visits. Smoking cessation was measured by self-report after one year and validated using saliva cotinine measures. Using a criterion of at least three months of abstinence, 8.8% of the patients of the trained physicians had stopped smoking at the one-year follow-up compared with 4.4% and 6.1% of the patients in the usual care and gum only groups, respectively.
(JAMA 1988;260:1570-1574)
Background: New educational programs must be developed to improve physicians' skills and effectiveness in counseling patients about smoking cessation. Objective: To assess the efficacy of an educational program based on behavioral theory, active learning methods, and practice with standardized patients in helping patients abstain from smoking and changing physicians' counseling practices. Design: Cluster randomized, controlled trial. Setting: Two general internal medicine clinics in Switzerland. Participants: 35 residents and 251 consecutive smoking patients. Intervention: A training program administered over two half-days, during which physicians learned to provide counseling that matched smokers' motivation to quit and practiced these skills with standardized patients acting as smokers at different stages of change. The control intervention was a didactic session on management of dyslipidemia. Measurements: Self-reported abstinence from smoking at 1 year of follow-up, which was validated by exhaled carbon monoxide testing at one clinic; score of overall quality of counseling based on use of 14 counseling strategies; patient willingness to quit; and daily cigarette consumption. Results: At 1 year of follow-up, abstinence from smoking was significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group (13% vs. 5%; P = 0.005); this corresponded to a cluster-adjusted odds ratio of 2.8 (95% Cl, 1.4 to 5.5). Residents who received the study training provided better counseling than did those who received the control training (mean score, 4.0 vs. 2.7; P = 0.002). Smokers' willingness to quit was also higher in the intervention group (94% vs. 80%; P = 0.007). A nonsignificant trend toward lower daily cigarette consumption in the intervention group was observed. Conclusion: A training program in smoking cessation administered to physicians that was based on behavioral theory and practice with standardized patients significantly increased the quality of physicians' counseling, smokers' motivation to quit, and rates of abstinence from smoking at 1 year.