A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of School-Based Preventive Interventions Targeting E-Cigarette Use Among Adolescents.

IF 3 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Prevention Science Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-26 DOI:10.1007/s11121-024-01730-6
Lauren A Gardner, Amy-Leigh Rowe, Nicola C Newton, Lyra Egan, Emily Hunter, Emma K Devine, Tess Aitken, Louise Thornton, Maree Teesson, Emily Stockings, Katrina E Champion
{"title":"A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of School-Based Preventive Interventions Targeting E-Cigarette Use Among Adolescents.","authors":"Lauren A Gardner, Amy-Leigh Rowe, Nicola C Newton, Lyra Egan, Emily Hunter, Emma K Devine, Tess Aitken, Louise Thornton, Maree Teesson, Emily Stockings, Katrina E Champion","doi":"10.1007/s11121-024-01730-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to examine the efficacy of school-based e-cigarette preventive interventions via a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane, and clinical trial registries for studies published between January 2000 and June 2023 using keywords for e-cigarettes, adolescents, and school. Of 1566 double-screened records, 11 met the criteria of targeting adolescents, evaluating an e-cigarette preventive intervention, being conducted in a secondary school, using a randomized controlled trial (RCT), cluster RCT, or quasi-experimental design, and comparing an intervention to a control. Pre-specified data pertaining to the study design, outcomes, and quality were extracted by one reviewer and confirmed by a second, and where necessary, a third reviewer. Meta-analyses found no evidence that school-based interventions prevented e-cigarette use at the longest follow-up, which ranged between 6 and 36 months post-intervention (OR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.16, 1.12; p = 0.09). However, subgroup analyses identified significant effects at post-test and when studies with < 12-month follow-up were omitted. No effect was found for tobacco use at the longest follow-up (OR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.65, 1.59, p = 0.95); however, reductions in past 30-day tobacco use (OR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.39, 0.89, p = 0.01) which encompassed e-cigarettes in some studies were identified. Narrative synthesis supported these mixed results and found some school-based interventions prevented or reduced e-cigarette and/or tobacco use; however, some increased use. School-based interventions were also associated with improved knowledge (SMD =  - 0.38, 95% CI =  - 0.68, - 0.08, p = 0.01), intentions (SMD =  - 0.15, 95% CI =  - 0.22, - 0.07, p = 0.0001), and attitudes (SMD =  - 0.14, 95% CI =  - 0.22, - 0.06; p = 0.0007) in the short term. Overall, the quality of evidence was low-to-moderate. School-based interventions hold the potential for addressing e-cigarette use, however, can have null or iatrogenic effects. More high-quality research is needed to develop efficacious interventions, and schools must be supported to adopt evidence-based programs. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the efficacy of school-based preventive interventions for e-cigarette use. It provides crucial new knowledge about the efficacy of such interventions in preventing e-cigarette use and improving other outcomes (e.g., tobacco use, knowledge, intentions, attitudes, and mental health) among adolescents and the key characteristics associated with efficacious interventions. Our findings have important practical implications, highlighting future research directions for the development and evaluation of e-cigarette preventive interventions, along with the need to provide support to schools to help them identify and adopt evidence-based programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":48268,"journal":{"name":"Prevention Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11519311/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prevention Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-024-01730-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aimed to examine the efficacy of school-based e-cigarette preventive interventions via a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane, and clinical trial registries for studies published between January 2000 and June 2023 using keywords for e-cigarettes, adolescents, and school. Of 1566 double-screened records, 11 met the criteria of targeting adolescents, evaluating an e-cigarette preventive intervention, being conducted in a secondary school, using a randomized controlled trial (RCT), cluster RCT, or quasi-experimental design, and comparing an intervention to a control. Pre-specified data pertaining to the study design, outcomes, and quality were extracted by one reviewer and confirmed by a second, and where necessary, a third reviewer. Meta-analyses found no evidence that school-based interventions prevented e-cigarette use at the longest follow-up, which ranged between 6 and 36 months post-intervention (OR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.16, 1.12; p = 0.09). However, subgroup analyses identified significant effects at post-test and when studies with < 12-month follow-up were omitted. No effect was found for tobacco use at the longest follow-up (OR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.65, 1.59, p = 0.95); however, reductions in past 30-day tobacco use (OR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.39, 0.89, p = 0.01) which encompassed e-cigarettes in some studies were identified. Narrative synthesis supported these mixed results and found some school-based interventions prevented or reduced e-cigarette and/or tobacco use; however, some increased use. School-based interventions were also associated with improved knowledge (SMD =  - 0.38, 95% CI =  - 0.68, - 0.08, p = 0.01), intentions (SMD =  - 0.15, 95% CI =  - 0.22, - 0.07, p = 0.0001), and attitudes (SMD =  - 0.14, 95% CI =  - 0.22, - 0.06; p = 0.0007) in the short term. Overall, the quality of evidence was low-to-moderate. School-based interventions hold the potential for addressing e-cigarette use, however, can have null or iatrogenic effects. More high-quality research is needed to develop efficacious interventions, and schools must be supported to adopt evidence-based programs. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the efficacy of school-based preventive interventions for e-cigarette use. It provides crucial new knowledge about the efficacy of such interventions in preventing e-cigarette use and improving other outcomes (e.g., tobacco use, knowledge, intentions, attitudes, and mental health) among adolescents and the key characteristics associated with efficacious interventions. Our findings have important practical implications, highlighting future research directions for the development and evaluation of e-cigarette preventive interventions, along with the need to provide support to schools to help them identify and adopt evidence-based programs.

针对青少年使用电子烟的校本预防干预措施的系统回顾和元分析。
本研究旨在通过系统综述和荟萃分析来研究校内电子烟预防干预措施的有效性。我们在 Medline、Embase、PsycINFO、Scopus、CINAHL、Cochrane 和临床试验登记处检索了 2000 年 1 月至 2023 年 6 月间发表的研究,检索时使用了电子烟、青少年和学校等关键词。在经过双重筛选的 1566 条记录中,有 11 条符合以下标准:针对青少年、评估电子烟预防干预措施、在中学进行、采用随机对照试验 (RCT)、群组 RCT 或准实验设计、将干预措施与对照进行比较。有关研究设计、结果和质量的预设数据由一名评审员提取,并由第二名评审员和必要时由第三名评审员确认。Meta 分析发现,没有证据表明校本干预能在最长的随访期(干预后 6 至 36 个月)预防电子烟的使用(OR = 0.43,95% CI = 0.16,1.12;P = 0.09)。然而,亚组分析发现,在测试后以及在有以下情况的研究中,效果显著
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Prevention Science
Prevention Science PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
11.40%
发文量
128
期刊介绍: Prevention Science is the official publication of the Society for Prevention Research. The Journal serves as an interdisciplinary forum designed to disseminate new developments in the theory, research and practice of prevention. Prevention sciences encompassing etiology, epidemiology and intervention are represented through peer-reviewed original research articles on a variety of health and social problems, including but not limited to substance abuse, mental health, HIV/AIDS, violence, accidents, teenage pregnancy, suicide, delinquency, STD''s, obesity, diet/nutrition, exercise, and chronic illness. The journal also publishes literature reviews, theoretical articles, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, brief reports, replication studies, and papers concerning new developments in methodology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信