Interventions for smoking cessation: An overview of Cochrane reviews.

IF 2.2 4区医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

Tobacco Induced Diseases Pub Date : 2024-11-28 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.18332/tid/195302

Chun-Li Lu, Jia-Xuan Li, Qian-Yun Wang, Rui-Ting Wang, Xing-Ru Pan, Xiao-Ying Chen, Chao-Jie Wang, Rui-Lin Chen, Si-Hong Yang, Zhi-Hui Zhao, Jing-Jing Jiang, Xue-Han Liu, Jian-Hua Wang, Xue Xue, Li-Rong Liang, Nicola Robinson, Jian-Ping Liu

{"title":"Interventions for smoking cessation: An overview of Cochrane reviews.","authors":"Chun-Li Lu, Jia-Xuan Li, Qian-Yun Wang, Rui-Ting Wang, Xing-Ru Pan, Xiao-Ying Chen, Chao-Jie Wang, Rui-Lin Chen, Si-Hong Yang, Zhi-Hui Zhao, Jing-Jing Jiang, Xue-Han Liu, Jian-Hua Wang, Xue Xue, Li-Rong Liang, Nicola Robinson, Jian-Ping Liu","doi":"10.18332/tid/195302","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Evidence of different smoking cessation interventions varies and has been assessed in many Cochrane reviews. We conducted an overview of these Cochrane reviews to summarize the effects of current interventions for smoking cessation.Methods: Nine databases were searched from their inception to October 2024, with no restrictions on language. Two authors independently extracted data from the same studies simultaneously, double checking after extraction. A second round of examination was conducted on all the extracted contents by another author. We employed a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR-2) to evaluate the methodological rigor of the included systematic reviews (SRs), synthesized the GRADE results as reported, and conducted a narrative synthesis. The research protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023388884).Results: Seventy-one Cochrane reviews involving 3022 trials were included in this comprehensive analysis. The two predominant smoking cessation interventions were pharmacotherapy (24 SRs) and non-pharmacological therapy (31SRs). Overall, the methodological quality of all the reviews was good. Compared with placebo, the point effect size for each Cochrane review on relative risk (RR) regarding pharmacotherapies for prolonged abstinence rate ranged from 1.11 to 3.34, demonstrating high- or moderate-certainty evidence; whereas for non-pharmacological therapies, it varied from 0.79 to 25.38, but substantial heterogeneity was observed in most meta-analysis (I2>50%). Four studies investigating pharmacotherapies as interventions, adverse events were reported but no significant differences in outcomes were observed.Conclusions: Pharmacotherapy demonstrated some efficacy in promoting prolonged abstinence rate, while the effectiveness of different non-pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation varied widely, highlighting the need for further research on the integration of pharmacotherapy and non-pharmacological therapies.","PeriodicalId":23202,"journal":{"name":"Tobacco Induced Diseases","volume":"22 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11603414/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tobacco Induced Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18332/tid/195302","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Evidence of different smoking cessation interventions varies and has been assessed in many Cochrane reviews. We conducted an overview of these Cochrane reviews to summarize the effects of current interventions for smoking cessation.

Methods: Nine databases were searched from their inception to October 2024, with no restrictions on language. Two authors independently extracted data from the same studies simultaneously, double checking after extraction. A second round of examination was conducted on all the extracted contents by another author. We employed a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR-2) to evaluate the methodological rigor of the included systematic reviews (SRs), synthesized the GRADE results as reported, and conducted a narrative synthesis. The research protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023388884).

Results: Seventy-one Cochrane reviews involving 3022 trials were included in this comprehensive analysis. The two predominant smoking cessation interventions were pharmacotherapy (24 SRs) and non-pharmacological therapy (31SRs). Overall, the methodological quality of all the reviews was good. Compared with placebo, the point effect size for each Cochrane review on relative risk (RR) regarding pharmacotherapies for prolonged abstinence rate ranged from 1.11 to 3.34, demonstrating high- or moderate-certainty evidence; whereas for non-pharmacological therapies, it varied from 0.79 to 25.38, but substantial heterogeneity was observed in most meta-analysis (I2>50%). Four studies investigating pharmacotherapies as interventions, adverse events were reported but no significant differences in outcomes were observed.

Conclusions: Pharmacotherapy demonstrated some efficacy in promoting prolonged abstinence rate, while the effectiveness of different non-pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation varied widely, highlighting the need for further research on the integration of pharmacotherapy and non-pharmacological therapies.

查看原文本刊更多论文

戒烟干预：Cochrane综述。

不同的戒烟干预措施的证据各不相同，并且在许多Cochrane综述中进行了评估。我们对这些Cochrane综述进行了综述，以总结当前干预措施对戒烟的影响。方法：检索自建库至2024年10月的9个数据库，无语言限制。两位作者同时独立地从同一研究中提取数据，提取后进行双重检查。所有提取的内容由另一位作者进行第二轮检查。我们采用测量工具评估系统评价（AMSTAR-2）来评估纳入的系统评价（SRs）的方法学严谨性，综合报告的GRADE结果，并进行叙述性综合。研究方案已在PROSPERO上注册（CRD42023388884）。结果：这项综合分析纳入了71篇Cochrane综述，涉及3022项试验。两种主要的戒烟干预措施是药物治疗（24个SRs）和非药物治疗（31个SRs）。总的来说，所有综述的方法学质量都很好。与安慰剂相比，药物治疗延长戒断率的相对风险（RR）的每项Cochrane综述的点效应大小范围为1.11至3.34，显示出高或中等确定性证据；而对于非药物治疗，它从0.79到25.38不等，但在大多数荟萃分析中观察到实质性的异质性（I2 bb0 50%）。四项研究调查了药物治疗作为干预措施，报告了不良事件，但没有观察到结果的显着差异。结论：药物治疗对延长戒烟率有一定的促进作用，而不同的非药物干预对戒烟的效果差异很大，需要进一步研究药物治疗与非药物治疗的结合。

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

Tobacco Induced Diseases SUBSTANCE ABUSE-PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH

CiteScore

5.30

自引率

5.40%

发文量

审稿时长

12 weeks

期刊介绍： Tobacco Induced Diseases encompasses all aspects of research related to the prevention and control of tobacco use at a global level. Preventing diseases attributable to tobacco is only one aspect of the journal, whose overall scope is to provide a forum for the publication of research articles that can contribute to reducing the burden of tobacco induced diseases globally. To address this epidemic we believe that there must be an avenue for the publication of research/policy activities on tobacco control initiatives that may be very important at a regional and national level. This approach provides a very important "hands on" service to the tobacco control community at a global scale - as common problems have common solutions. Hence, we see ourselves as "connectors" within this global community. The journal hence encourages the submission of articles from all medical, biological and psychosocial disciplines, ranging from medical and dental clinicians, through health professionals to basic biomedical and clinical scientists.