Interventions for tobacco cessation in the dental setting

Effects of tobacco product use on oral health and the role of oral healthcare providers in cessation: A narrative review

Tobacco use has detrimental effects on health, including oral health. The emergence and increasing popularity of newer tobacco and nicotine products make tobacco use one of the major public health problems in the world. Tobacco use increases the risk of oral diseases such as oral cancer, oral mucosal lesions, periodontal disease, and dental caries, among many other oral diseases and conditions. The dental office is an excellent venue for providing cessation intervention. However, there is a lack of knowledge and training in tobacco use prevention among dental professionals. More efforts are needed for smoking cessation interventions in the dental office. Smoking cessation interventions provided by oral healthcare providers include brief educational, behavioral, and pharmacological interventions. This review provides an overview of the ill effects of tobacco use on oral health and the role of oral healthcare providers in managing and preventing tobacco dependence.

Identifying Behavior Change Techniques Used in Tobacco Cessation Interventions by Oral Health Professionals and Their Relation to Intervention Effects-A Review of the Scientific Literature

This review aimed to identify the behavioral change techniques (BCTs) used in behavioral interventions for tobacco cessation at dental practices in relation to their effect on tobacco use. Six scientific databases were searched for behavior change interventions for tobacco cessation and were coded using the BCT taxonomy of behavioral support for smoking cessation (BCTTsm). Fifteen interventions were identified, and data related to intervention characteristics were abstracted. Sixteen BCTs were identified, mainly related to increased motivation and teaching regulatory skills. Goal setting was the most commonly used BCT. Ten out of fifteen interventions effectively impacted tobacco cessation outcomes (OR = 2 to 5.25). Effective interventions more frequently included goal setting, written materials, readiness to quit and ability assessment, tobacco-use assessment, self-efficacy boost, listing reasons for quitting, action planning and environment restructuring. Other BCTs were not clearly associated with an increased effect. Among the behavioral interventions, certain techniques were associated with successful tobacco quitting. Tobacco cessation interventions in a dental setting appear to benefit from using BCTs that increase motivation and teach regulatory skills. The identified BCTs in this review could provide a source to better inform researchers and dentists about the active ingredients in behavior change interventions for tobacco cessation in a dental setting.

Interventions for tobacco cessation delivered by dental professionals

BACKGROUND

Dental professionals are well placed to help their patients stop using tobacco products. Large proportions of the population visit the dentist regularly. In addition, the adverse effects of tobacco use on oral health provide a context that dental professionals can use to motivate a quit attempt.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness, adverse events and oral health effects of tobacco cessation interventions offered by dental professionals.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialised Register up to February 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised clinical trials assessing tobacco cessation interventions conducted by dental professionals in the dental practice or community setting, with at least six months of follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed abstracts for potential inclusion and extracted data from included trials. We resolved disagreements by consensus. The primary outcome was abstinence from all tobacco use (e.g. cigarettes, smokeless tobacco) at the longest follow-up, using the strictest definition of abstinence reported. Individual study effects and pooled effects were summarised as risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models to combine studies where appropriate. We assessed statistical heterogeneity with the I² statistic. We summarised secondary outcomes narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty clinical trials involving 14,897 participants met the criteria for inclusion in this review. Sixteen studies assessed the effectiveness of interventions for tobacco-use cessation in dental clinics and four assessed this in community (school or college) settings. Five studies included only smokeless tobacco users, and the remaining studies included either smoked tobacco users only, or a combination of both smoked and smokeless tobacco users. All studies employed behavioural interventions, with four offering nicotine treatment (nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) or e-cigarettes) as part of the intervention. We judged three studies to be at low risk of bias, one to be at unclear risk of bias, and the remaining 16 studies to be at high risk of bias. Compared with usual care, brief advice, very brief advice, or less active treatment, we found very low-certainty evidence of benefit from behavioural support provided by dental professionals, comprising either one session (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.01 to 3.41; I² = 66%; four studies, n = 6328), or more than one session (RR 1.90, 95% CI 1.17 to 3.11; I² = 61%; seven studies, n = 2639), on abstinence from tobacco use at least six months from baseline. We found moderate-certainty evidence of benefit from behavioural interventions provided by dental professionals combined with the provision of NRT or e-cigarettes, compared with no intervention, usual care, brief, or very brief advice only (RR 2.76, 95% CI 1.58 to 4.82; I² = 0%; four studies, n = 1221). We did not detect a benefit from multiple-session behavioural support provided by dental professionals delivered in a high school or college, instead of a dental setting (RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.65; I² = 83%; three studies, n = 1020; very low-certainty evidence). Only one study reported adverse events or oral health outcomes, making it difficult to draw any conclusions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very low-certainty evidence that quit rates increase when dental professionals offer behavioural support to promote tobacco cessation. There is moderate-certainty evidence that tobacco abstinence rates increase in cigarette smokers if dental professionals offer behavioural support combined with pharmacotherapy. Further evidence is required to be certain of the size of the benefit and whether adding pharmacological interventions is more effective than behavioural support alone. Future studies should use biochemical validation of abstinence so as to preclude the risk of detection bias. There is insufficient evidence on whether these interventions lead to adverse effects, but no reasons to suspect that these effects would be specific to interventions delivered by dental professionals. There was insufficient evidence that interventions affected oral health.

Prevalence of Smoking among Medical Students in a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital

Introduction:

Tobacco smoking is one of the most important preventable risk factors for non-communicable diseases. It has been seen that medical students have a higher frequency of smoking compared to the general population. This study aims to determine the prevalence of smoking among third-year medical students in a tertiary care teaching hospital in Nepal.

Methods:

This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted among the hospital’s third-year undergraduate medical students over a four-month period (October 2019 to January 2020). Ethical clearance was received from the Institutional Review Committee of Kathmandu Medical College and Teaching Hospital. The whole sampling technique was used to collect data. The Global Health Professional Students Survey questionnaire was used to collect data. Data analysis was done in the statistical package for social sciences.

Results:

The prevalence of current smoking among selected medical students of Kathmandu Medical College and Teaching Hospital is 34 (30.1%), majority male 26 (23%). Fifty-six (49.4%) of them had ever smoked cigarettes in their life, and 27 (23.9%) had their first cigarette in late adolescence. The number of students who used other forms of tobacco was comparatively lower i.e. 6 (5.3%). Many of the students 53 (46.9%) were exposed to second-hand smoke both at home and in public, while 18 (15.9) exposed only at public places, and 6 (5.3%) only at home.

Conclusions:

Our study has concluded that there is a notable prevalence of smoking among the participants. This points to the need for specific training sessions in their clinical years about smoking cessation for themselves and regarding counseling for patients.

Dental Students' Awareness, Preparedness and Barriers towards Managing Tobacco-Using Patients-A Cross-Sectional Study

Aims: To evaluate Hong Kong dental students' perceived awareness, preparedness and barriers towards managing tobacco-using patients. Methods: A validated questionnaire was administered to dental students who were in their clinical years (the third, fourth, fifth and sixth year of study) in 2017 at the University of Hong Kong. The questionnaire consisted of three sections: (1) awareness towards practicing tobacco cessation counselling (TCC), (2) preparedness in terms of confidence, knowledge and clinical practices when managing tobacco-using patients, and (3) perceived barriers to counselling. Results: All 206 invited students had participated this study. Most (93%) agreed that dentists should deliver TCC. However, only around a quarter (26%) of students were well-prepared to help patients in tobacco cessation. While 60% of students agreed nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) was helpful for patients to quit tobacco use, only 28% understood its mechanism of action, and merely 16% were knowledgeable enough to introduce NRT to their patients. Two-thirds (62%) of students felt they did not have sufficient skills at this stage of their training. Conclusions: Most Hong Kong dental students had good awareness that dental professionals had an important role to promote tobacco cessation in their patient pools. However, not many of them were well-prepared to manage tobacco-using patients. Common barriers were found to be patients' apathy and students' inadequate familiarity with NRT.

Smokeless tobacco control in 180 countries across the globe: call to action for full implementation of WHO FCTC measures

Smokeless tobacco is consumed by 356 million people globally and is a leading cause of head and neck cancers. However, global efforts to control smokeless tobacco use trail behind the progress made in curbing cigarette consumption. In this Policy Review, we describe the extent of the policy implementation gap in smokeless tobacco control, discuss key reasons on why it exists, and make recommendations on how to bridge this gap. Although 180 countries have agreed that the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control is the best approach to control the demand and supply of smokeless tobacco, only 138 (77%) Parties define smokeless tobacco in their statutes. Only 34 (19%) Parties tax or report taxing smokeless tobacco products, six (3%) measure content and emissions of smokeless tobacco products, and 41 (23%) mandate pictorial health warnings on these products. Although awareness of the harms related to smokeless tobacco is growing in many parts of the world, few Parties collect or present data on smokeless tobacco use under global or national surveillance mechanisms (eg, Global Tobacco Surveillance System and WHO STEPwise). Only 16 (9%) Parties have implemented a comprehensive ban on smokeless tobacco advertisement, promotion, and sponsorships. Globally, a smaller proportion of smokeless tobacco users are advised to quit the use of smokeless tobacco products compared to tobacco users. Use of smokeless tobacco is becoming a global cause of concern, requiring a greater commitment on the full implementation of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control measures.

WITHDRAWN: Community-based population-level interventions for promoting child oral health

BACKGROUND

Dental caries and gingival and periodontal disease are commonly occurring, preventable chronic conditions. Even though much is known about how to treat oral disease, currently we do not know which community-based population-level interventions are most effective and equitable in preventing poor oral health.

OBJECTIVES

Primary • To determine the effectiveness of community-based population-level oral health promotion interventions in preventing dental caries and gingival and periodontal disease among children from birth to 18 years of age. Secondary • To determine the most effective types of interventions (environmental, social, community and multi-component) and guiding theoretical frameworks.• To identify interventions that reduce inequality in oral health outcomes.• To examine the influence of context in the design, delivery and outcomes of interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases from January 1996 to April 2014: MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Education Resource Information Center (ERIC), BIOSIS Previews, Web of Science, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), ScienceDirect, Sociological Abstracts, Social Science Citation Index, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Included studies were individual- and cluster-randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before-and-after studies and quasi-experimental and interrupted time series. To be included, interventions had to target the primary outcomes: dental caries (measured as decayed, missing and filled deciduous teeth/surfaces, dmft/s; Decayed, Missing and Filled permanent teeth/surfaces, DMFT/S) and gingival or periodontal disease among children from birth to 18 years of age. Studies had to report on one or more of the primary outcomes at baseline and post intervention, or had to provide change scores for both intervention and control groups. Interventions were excluded if they were solely of a chemical nature (e.g. chlorhexidine, fluoride varnish), were delivered primarily in a dental clinical setting or comprised solely fluoridation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed screening, data extraction and assessment of risk of bias of included studies (a team of six review authors - four review authors and two research assistants - assessed all studies). We calculated mean differences with 95% confidence intervals for continuous data. When data permitted, we undertook meta-analysis of primary outcome measures using a fixed-effect model to summarise results across studies. We used the I2 statistic as a measure of statistical heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes findings from 38 studies (total n = 119,789 children, including one national study of 99,071 children, which contributed 80% of total participants) on community-based oral health promotion interventions delivered in a variety of settings and incorporating a range of health promotion strategies (e.g. policy, educational activities, professional oral health care, supervised toothbrushing programmes, motivational interviewing). We categorised interventions as dietary interventions (n = 3), oral health education (OHE) alone (n = 17), OHE in combination with supervised toothbrushing with fluoridated toothpaste (n = 8) and OHE in combination with a variety of other interventions (including professional preventive oral health care, n = 10). Interventions generally were implemented for less than one year (n = 26), and only 11 studies were RCTs. We graded the evidence as having moderate to very low quality.We conducted meta-analyses examining impact on dental caries of each intervention type, although not all studies provided sufficient data to allow pooling of effects across similar interventions. Meta-analyses of the effects of OHE alone on caries may show little or no effect on DMFT (two studies, mean difference (MD) 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.11 to 0.36, low-quality evidence), dmft (three studies, MD -0.3, 95% CI -1.11 to 0.52, low-quality evidence) and DMFS (one study, MD -0.01, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.22, very low-quality evidence). Analysis of studies testing OHE in combination with supervised toothbrushing with fluoridated toothpaste may show a beneficial effect on dmfs (three studies, MD -1.59, 95% CI -2.67 to -0.52, low-quality evidence) and dmft (two studies, MD -0.97, 95% CI -1.06 to -0.89, low-quality evidence) but may show little effect on DMFS (two studies, MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.10, low-quality evidence) and DMFT (three studies, MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.07, moderate-quality evidence). Meta-analyses of two studies of OHE in an educational setting combined with professional preventive oral care in a dental clinic setting probably show a very small effect on DMFT (-0.09 weighted mean difference (WMD), 95% CI -0.1 to -0.08, moderate-quality evidence). Data were inadequate for meta-analyses on gingival health, although positive impact was reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review provides evidence of low certainty suggesting that community-based oral health promotion interventions that combine oral health education with supervised toothbrushing or professional preventive oral care can reduce dental caries in children. Other interventions, such as those that aim to promote access to fluoride, improve children's diets or provide oral health education alone, show only limited impact. We found no clear indication of when is the most effective time to intervene during childhood. Cost-effectiveness, long-term sustainability and equity of impacts and adverse outcomes were not widely reported by study authors, limiting our ability to make inferences on these aspects. More rigorous measurement and reporting of study results would improve the quality of the evidence.

Community-based population-level interventions for promoting child oral health

BACKGROUND

Dental caries and gingival and periodontal disease are commonly occurring, preventable chronic conditions. Even though much is known about how to treat oral disease, currently we do not know which community-based population-level interventions are most effective and equitable in preventing poor oral health.

OBJECTIVES

Primary • To determine the effectiveness of community-based population-level oral health promotion interventions in preventing dental caries and gingival and periodontal disease among children from birth to 18 years of age. Secondary • To determine the most effective types of interventions (environmental, social, community and multi-component) and guiding theoretical frameworks.• To identify interventions that reduce inequality in oral health outcomes.• To examine the influence of context in the design, delivery and outcomes of interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases from January 1996 to April 2014: MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Education Resource Information Center (ERIC), BIOSIS Previews, Web of Science, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), ScienceDirect, Sociological Abstracts, Social Science Citation Index, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Included studies were individual- and cluster-randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled before-and-after studies and quasi-experimental and interrupted time series. To be included, interventions had to target the primary outcomes: dental caries (measured as decayed, missing and filled deciduous teeth/surfaces, dmft/s; Decayed, Missing and Filled permanent teeth/surfaces, DMFT/S) and gingival or periodontal disease among children from birth to 18 years of age. Studies had to report on one or more of the primary outcomes at baseline and post intervention, or had to provide change scores for both intervention and control groups. Interventions were excluded if they were solely of a chemical nature (e.g. chlorhexidine, fluoride varnish), were delivered primarily in a dental clinical setting or comprised solely fluoridation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed screening, data extraction and assessment of risk of bias of included studies (a team of six review authors - four review authors and two research assistants - assessed all studies). We calculated mean differences with 95% confidence intervals for continuous data. When data permitted, we undertook meta-analysis of primary outcome measures using a fixed-effect model to summarise results across studies. We used the I2 statistic as a measure of statistical heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

This review includes findings from 38 studies (total n = 119,789 children, including one national study of 99,071 children, which contributed 80% of total participants) on community-based oral health promotion interventions delivered in a variety of settings and incorporating a range of health promotion strategies (e.g. policy, educational activities, professional oral health care, supervised toothbrushing programmes, motivational interviewing). We categorised interventions as dietary interventions (n = 3), oral health education (OHE) alone (n = 17), OHE in combination with supervised toothbrushing with fluoridated toothpaste (n = 8) and OHE in combination with a variety of other interventions (including professional preventive oral health care, n = 10). Interventions generally were implemented for less than one year (n = 26), and only 11 studies were RCTs. We graded the evidence as having moderate to very low quality.We conducted meta-analyses examining impact on dental caries of each intervention type, although not all studies provided sufficient data to allow pooling of effects across similar interventions. Meta-analyses of the effects of OHE alone on caries may show little or no effect on DMFT (two studies, mean difference (MD) 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.11 to 0.36, low-quality evidence), dmft (three studies, MD -0.3, 95% CI -1.11 to 0.52, low-quality evidence) and DMFS (one study, MD -0.01, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.22, very low-quality evidence). Analysis of studies testing OHE in combination with supervised toothbrushing with fluoridated toothpaste may show a beneficial effect on dmfs (three studies, MD -1.59, 95% CI -2.67 to -0.52, low-quality evidence) and dmft (two studies, MD -0.97, 95% CI -1.06 to -0.89, low-quality evidence) but may show little effect on DMFS (two studies, MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.10, low-quality evidence) and DMFT (three studies, MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.07, moderate-quality evidence). Meta-analyses of two studies of OHE in an educational setting combined with professional preventive oral care in a dental clinic setting probably show a very small effect on DMFT (-0.09 weighted mean difference (WMD), 95% CI -0.1 to -0.08, moderate-quality evidence). Data were inadequate for meta-analyses on gingival health, although positive impact was reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review provides evidence of low certainty suggesting that community-based oral health promotion interventions that combine oral health education with supervised toothbrushing or professional preventive oral care can reduce dental caries in children. Other interventions, such as those that aim to promote access to fluoride, improve children's diets or provide oral health education alone, show only limited impact. We found no clear indication of when is the most effective time to intervene during childhood. Cost-effectiveness, long-term sustainability and equity of impacts and adverse outcomes were not widely reported by study authors, limiting our ability to make inferences on these aspects. More rigorous measurement and reporting of study results would improve the quality of the evidence.

Substance-use screening and interventions in dental practices: survey of practice-based research network dentists regarding current practices, policies and barriers

BACKGROUND

Dental visits represent an opportunity to identify and assist patients with unhealthy substance use, but little is known about how dentists are addressing patients' use of tobacco, alcohol and illicit drugs. The authors surveyed dentists to learn about the role their practices might play in providing substance-use screening and interventions.

METHODS

The authors distributed a 41-item Web-based survey to all 210 dentists active in the Practitioners Engaged in Applied Research and Learning Network, a practice-based research network. The questionnaire assessed dental practices' policies and current practices, attitudes and perceived barriers to providing services for tobacco, alcohol and illicit drug use.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-three dentists completed the survey (68 percent response rate). Although screening was common, fewer dentists reported that they were providing follow-up counseling or referrals for substance use. Insufficient knowledge or training was the most frequently cited barrier to intervention. Many dentists reported they would offer assistance for use of tobacco (67 percent) or alcohol or illicit drugs (52 percent) if reimbursed; respondents who treated publicly insured patients were more likely to reply that they would offer this assistance.

CONCLUSIONS

Dentists recognize the importance of screening for substance use, but they lack the clinical training and practice-based systems focused on substance use that could facilitate intervention. Practical Implications. The results of this study indicate that dentists may be willing to address substance use among patients, including use of alcohol and illicit drugs in addition to tobacco, if barriers are reduced through changes in reimbursement, education and systems-level support.

Pharmacological interventions for promoting smoking cessation during pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Smoking in pregnancy is a substantial public health problem. When used by non-pregnant smokers, pharmacotherapies [nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion and varenicline] are effective treatments for smoking cessation, however, their efficacy and safety in pregnancy remains unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of smoking cessation pharmacotherapies, including NRT, varenicline and bupropion (or any other medications) when used to support smoking cessation in pregnancy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (5 March 2012), checked references of retrieved studies and contacted authors in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with designs that permit the independent effects of any type of NRT (e.g. patch, gum etc.) or any other pharmacotherapy on smoking cessation to be ascertained were eligible for inclusion. Trials must provide very similar (ideally identical) levels of behavioural support or cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) to participants in active drug and comparator trial arms.The following RCT designs are considered acceptable.Placebo RCTs: any form of NRT or other pharmacotherapy, with or without behavioural support/CBT, or brief advice compared with placebo NRT and additional support of similar intensity.RCTs providing a comparison between i) behavioural support/CBT or brief advice and ii) any form of NRT or other pharmacotherapy added to behavioural support of similar (ideally identical) intensity.Parallel- or cluster-randomised design trials are eligible for inclusion. However, quasi-randomised, cross-over and within-participant designs are not eligible for inclusion due to the potential biases associated with these designs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias and extracted data. Two assessors independently extracted data and cross checked individual outcomes of this process to ensure accuracy. The primary efficacy outcome was smoking cessation in later pregnancy (in all but one trial, at or around delivery); safety was assessed by seven birth outcomes that indicated neonatal well being and we also collated data on adherence.

MAIN RESULTS

Six trials of NRT enrolling 1745 pregnant smokers were included; we found no trials of varenicline or bupropion. No statistically significant difference was seen for smoking cessation in later pregnancy after using NRT as compared to control (risk ratio (RR) 1.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.91, six studies, 1745 women). Subgroup analysis comparing placebo-RCTs with those which did not use placebos found that efficacy estimates for cessation varied with trial design (placebo RCTs, RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.56, four studies, 1524 women; non-placebo RCTs, RR 7.81, 95% CI 1.51 to 40.35, two studies, 221 women; P value for random-effects subgroup interaction test = 0.03). There were no statistically significant differences in rates of miscarriage, stillbirth, premature birth, birthweight, low birthweight, admissions to neonatal intensive care or neonatal death between NRT or control groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Nicotine replacement therapy is the only pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation that has been tested in RCTs conducted in pregnancy. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether or not NRT is effective or safe when used to promote smoking cessation in pregnancy or to determine whether or not using NRT has positive or negative impacts on birth outcomes. Further research evidence of efficacy and safety is needed, ideally from placebo-controlled RCTs that investigate higher doses of NRT than were tested in the included studies.

Interventions for tobacco cessation in the dental setting

BACKGROUND

Tobacco use has significant adverse effects on oral health. Oral health professionals in the dental office or community setting have a unique opportunity to increase tobacco abstinence rates among tobacco users.

OBJECTIVES

This review assesses the effectiveness of interventions for tobacco cessation delivered by oral health professionals and offered to cigarette smokers and smokeless tobacco users in the dental office or community setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1966-November 2011), EMBASE (1988-November 2011), CINAHL (1982-November 2011), Healthstar (1975-November 2011), ERIC (1967-November 2011), PsycINFO (1984-November 2011), National Technical Information Service database (NTIS, 1964-November 2011), Dissertation Abstracts Online (1861-November 2011), Database of Abstract of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE, 1995-November 2011), and Web of Science (1993-November 2011).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized and pseudo-randomized clinical trials assessing tobacco cessation interventions conducted by oral health professionals in the dental office or community setting with at least six months of follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently reviewed abstracts for potential inclusion and abstracted data from included trials. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. The primary outcome was abstinence from smoking or all tobacco use (for users of smokeless tobacco) at the longest follow-up, using the strictest definition of abstinence reported. The effect was summarised as an odds ratio, with correction for clustering where appropriate. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic and where appropriate a pooled effect was estimated using an inverse variance fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen clinical trials met the criteria for inclusion in this review. Included studies assessed the efficacy of interventions in the dental office or in a community school or college setting. Six studies evaluated the effectiveness of interventions among smokeless tobacco (ST) users, and eight studies evaluated interventions among cigarette smokers, six of which involved adult smokers in dental practice settings. All studies employed behavioral interventions and only one required pharmacotherapy as an interventional component. All studies included an oral examination component. Pooling all 14 studies suggested that interventions conducted by oral health professionals can increase tobacco abstinence rates (odds ratio [OR] 1.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.44 to 2.03) at six months or longer, but there was evidence of heterogeneity (I² = 61%). Within the subgroup of interventions for smokers, heterogeneity was smaller (I² = 51%), but was largely attributable to a large study showing no evidence of benefit. Within this subgroup there were five studies which involved adult smokers in dental practice settings. Pooling these showed clear evidence of benefit and minimal heterogeneity (OR 2.38, 95% CI 1.70 to 3.35, 5 studies, I² = 3%) but this was a posthoc subgroup analysis. Amongst the studies in smokeless tobacco users the heterogeneity was also attributable to a large study showing no sign of benefit, possibly due to intervention spillover to control colleges; the other five studies indicated that interventions for ST users were effective (OR 1.70; 95% CI 1.36 to 2.11).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence suggests that behavioral interventions for tobacco cessation conducted by oral health professionals incorporating an oral examination component in the dental office or community setting may increase tobacco abstinence rates among both cigarette smokers and smokeless tobacco users. Differences between the studies limit the ability to make conclusive recommendations regarding the intervention components that should be incorporated into clinical practice, however, behavioral counselling (typically brief) in conjunction with an oral examination was a consistent intervention component that was also provided in some control groups.

Reimbursing dentists for smoking cessation treatment: views from dental insurers

INTRODUCTION

Screening and delivery of evidence-based interventions by dentists is an effective way to reduce tobacco use. However, dental visits remain an underutilized opportunity for the treatment of tobacco dependence. This is, in part, because the current reimbursement structure does not support expansion of dental providers' role in this arena. The purpose of this study was to interview dental insurers to assess attitudes toward tobacco use treatment in dental practice, pros and cons of offering dental provider reimbursement, and barriers to instituting a tobacco use treatment-related payment policy for dental providers.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 dental insurance company executives. Participants were identified using a targeted sampling method and represented viewpoints from a significant share of companies within the dental insurance industry.

RESULTS

All insurers believed that screening and intervention for tobacco use was an appropriate part of routine care during a dental visit. Several indicated a need for more evidence of clinical and cost-effectiveness before reimbursement for these services could be actualized. Lack of purchaser demand, questionable returns on investment, and segregation of the medical and dental insurance markets were cited as additional barriers to coverage.

CONCLUSIONS

Dissemination of findings on efficacy and additional research on financial returns could help to promote uptake of coverage by insurers. Wider issues of integration between dental and medical care and payment systems must be addressed in order to expand opportunities for preventive services in dental care settings.

Promoting Tobacco Abstinence Among Older Adolescents in Dental Clinics

The health care setting, and most notably dental clinics, may hold promise in delivering effective tobacco intervention to adolescents. Adolescents between the ages of 14 and 17 were randomly assigned to brief advice from dental hygienists and dentists only or to brief advice plus a motivational interview and follow-up telephone contact from a study hygienist. Due to difficulties in identifying and recruiting subjects, study goals were expanded from cessation only to cessation and prevention. No differences in smoking prevalence were found between treatment conditions at either 3- or 12-month follow-up. Firm conclusions cannot be drawn about the effectiveness of treatment due both to problems in enrolling subjects and limited implementation of the motivational intervention.

Necessity and readiness for smoking cessation intervention in dental clinics in Japan

BACKGROUND

The necessity and readiness for smoking cessation intervention in dental clinics was assessed by investigating smoking status and stage of behavior change in patients and the attitudes of dentists toward the effects of smoking on their patients, respectively.

METHODS

A self-administered questionnaire was mailed to 1022 dentists randomly selected from the Japanese Dental Association database. The questionnaire survey consisted of 1 section for dentists and 1 for patients aged 20 years or older and was scheduled to be completed at the dentists' clinics on a designated day in February 2008.

RESULTS

The response rate to the questionnaire was 78.2% from among target dental clinics and 73.7% and 74.7% for patient and dentist questionnaires, respectively. Data from 11,370 patients and 739 dentists were analyzed. The overall smoking prevalence among the patients (25.1%) was similar to that reported by the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, and young female patients had a markedly higher smoking prevalence. More than 70% of patients who smoked were interested in quitting. Although the prevalence of current smoking among dentists (27.1%) was significantly higher than that reported among Japanese physicians (15.0%), approximately 70% of dentists were concerned about the effects of smoking on patient health and prohibited smoking inside their clinic.

CONCLUSIONS

Many smokers who were interested in quitting, particularly young women, visited dental clinics, and most dentists believed that smoking was harmful for their patients. These results indicate that smoking cessation intervention in dental settings is necessary and that dentists are ready to provide such interventions.

Cognitive mapping tobacco control advice for dentistry: a dental PBRN study

OBJECTIVE

To identify facilitative strategies that could be used in developing a tobacco cessation program for community dental practices.

METHODS

Nominal group technique (NGT) meetings and a card-sort task were used to obtain formative data. A cognitive mapping approach involving multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

Three NGT meetings conducted with 23 dental professionals yielded 27 nonredundant facilitative strategies. A 2-dimensional 4-cluster cognitive map provided an organizational framework for understanding these strategies.

CONCLUSION

Views of the target population solicited in a structured format provided clear direction for designing a tobacco cessation intervention.

Stopping smokeless tobacco with varenicline: randomised double blind placebo controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of varenicline (a licensed cigarette smoking cessation aid) in helping users of smokeless tobacco to quit.

DESIGN

Double blind, placebo controlled, parallel group, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Medical clinics (mostly primary care) in Norway and Sweden.

PARTICIPANTS

Men and women aged ≥18 who used smokeless tobacco at least eight times a day, with no abstinence period over three months within one year before screening, who wanted to quit all tobacco use. Participants were excluded if they used any other form of tobacco (except smokeless tobacco) or medication to stop smoking within three months of screening or had any pre-existing medical or psychiatric condition.

INTERVENTIONS

Varenicline 1 mg twice daily (titrated during the first week) or placebo for 12 weeks, with 14 weeks' follow-up after treatment.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary end point was the four week continuous abstinence rate at the end of treatment (weeks 9-12) confirmed with cotinine concentration. A secondary end point was continuous abstinence rate for weeks 9-26. Safety and tolerability were also evaluated.

RESULTS

431 participants (213 varenicline; 218 placebo) were randomised and received at least one dose of study drug. Participants' demographics and baseline use of smokeless tobacco were similar (89% (189) and 90% (196), respectively, were men; mean age in both groups was 43.9; participants used smokeless tobacco products about 15 times a day, and about 80% first used smokeless tobacco within 30 minutes after awakening). Continuous abstinence rate at week 9-12 was higher in the varenicline group than the placebo group (59% (125) v 39% (85); relative risk 1.60, 95% confidence interval 1.32 to 1.87, P<0.001; risk difference 20%; number needed to treat 5). The advantage of varenicline over placebo persisted through 14 weeks of follow-up (continuous abstinence rate at week 9-26 was 45% (95) v 34% (73); relative risk 1.42, 1.08 to 1.79, P=0.012; risk difference 11%; number needed to treat 9). The most common adverse events in the varenicline group compared with the placebo group were nausea (35% (74) v 6% (14)), fatigue (10% (22) v 7% (15)), headache (10% (22) v 9% (20)), and sleep disorder (10% (22) v 7% (15)). Few adverse events led to discontinuation of treatment (9% (19) and 4% (9), respectively), and serious adverse events occurred in two (1%) and three (1%) participants, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Varenicline can help people to give up smokeless tobacco and has an acceptable safety profile. The response rate in the placebo group in this study was high, suggesting a population less resistant to treatment than smokers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00717093.

Tobacco cessation via doctors of chiropractic: results of a feasibility study

INTRODUCTION

There is a sizeable and growing body of empirical literature on the effects of physician advice to quit smoking. Because of the association between tobacco use and the health problems that may provoke referral to chiropractic care, doctors of chiropractic (DCs) may be able to give patients personalized proximal health feedback that may motivate them to quit. However, DCs have not been utilized in this role. The primary aim of this study was to design and refine a brief office-based tobacco intervention for use within chiropractic settings.

METHODS

This study was conducted in 20 private chiropractic practices in 2 phases: (a) intervention development, in which we created and focus tested practitioner and patient materials, and (b) feasibility, in which we evaluated the impact of the intervention on 210 tobacco-using chiropractic patients.

RESULTS

Analyses were conducted on 156 patients who exclusively smoked cigarettes. Using an intent-to-treat approach, assuming all nonresponders to be smokers, 13 (8.3%) reported 7-day abstinence at 6 weeks, 22 (14.1%) at the 6-month follow-up, and 35 (22.4%) at the 12-month assessment. Eleven participants (7.1%) reported prolonged abstinence at the 6-month follow-up, and 15 (9.6%) reported prolonged abstinence at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first study to refine a brief office-based treatment for tobacco dependence for use in chiropractic settings. The results of this study were promising and will lead to a randomized clinical trial. If found to be effective, this model could be disseminated to chiropractic practitioners throughout the United States.

Dietary carbohydrates and dental-systemic diseases

Two contradictory hypotheses on the role of dietary carbohydrates in health and disease shape how dental-systemic associations are regarded. On one side, Cleave and Yudkin postulated that excessive dietary fermentable carbohydrate intake led-in the absence of dental interventions such as fluorides-first to dental diseases and then to systemic diseases. Under this hypothesis, dental and systemic diseases shared-as a common cause-a diet of excess fermentable carbohydrates. Dental diseases were regarded as an alarm bell for future systemic diseases, and restricting carbohydrate intake prevented both dental and systemic diseases. On the opposite side, Keys postulated the lipid hypothesis: that excessive dietary lipid intake caused systemic diseases. Keys advocated a diet high in fermentable carbohydrate for the benefit of general health, and dental diseases became regarded as local dietary side effects. Because general health takes precedence over dental health when it comes to dietary recommendations, dental diseases became viewed as local infections; interventions such as fluorides, sealants, oral hygiene, antimicrobials, and dental fillings became synonymous with maintaining dental health, and carbohydrates were no longer considered as a common cause for dental-systemic diseases. These opposing dietary hypotheses have increasingly been put to the test in clinical trials. The emerging trial results favor Cleave-Yudkin's hypothesis and may affect preventive approaches for dental and systemic diseases.

Interventions for promoting smoking cessation during pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Tobacco smoking in pregnancy remains one of the few preventable factors associated with complications in pregnancy, low birthweight, preterm birth and has serious long-term health implications for women and babies. Smoking in pregnancy is decreasing in high-income countries and increasing in low- to middle-income countries and is strongly associated with poverty, low educational attainment, poor social support and psychological illness.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of smoking cessation interventions during pregnancy on smoking behaviour and perinatal health outcomes.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (June 2008), the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Trials Register (June 2008), EMBASE, PsycLIT, and CINAHL (all from January 2003 to June 2008). We contacted trial authors to locate additional unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials where smoking cessation during pregnancy was a primary aim of the intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trials were identified and data extracted by one person and checked by a second. Subgroup analysis was conducted to assess the effect of risk of trial bias, intensity of the intervention and main intervention strategy used.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventy-two trials are included. Fifty-six randomised controlled trials (over 20,000 pregnant women) and nine cluster-randomised trials (over 5000 pregnant women) provided data on smoking cessation outcomes.There was a significant reduction in smoking in late pregnancy following interventions (risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 0.96), an absolute difference of six in 100 women who stopped smoking during pregnancy. However, there is significant heterogeneity in the combined data (I(2) > 60%). In the trials with the lowest risk of bias, the interventions had less effect (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.94 to 0.99), and lower heterogeneity (I(2) = 36%). Eight trials of smoking relapse prevention (over 1000 women) showed no statistically significant reduction in relapse.Smoking cessation interventions reduced low birthweight (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.95) and preterm birth (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.98), and there was a 53.91g (95% CI 10.44 g to 95.38 g) increase in mean birthweight. There were no statistically significant differences in neonatal intensive care unit admissions, very low birthweight, stillbirths, perinatal or neonatal mortality but these analyses had very limited power.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Smoking cessation interventions in pregnancy reduce the proportion of women who continue to smoke in late pregnancy, and reduce low birthweight and preterm birth. Smoking cessation interventions in pregnancy need to be implemented in all maternity care settings. Given the difficulty many pregnant women addicted to tobacco have quitting during pregnancy, population-based measures to reduce smoking and social inequalities should be supported.

Internet delivered support for tobacco control in dental practice: randomized controlled trial

Background

The dental visit is a unique opportunity for tobacco control. Despite evidence of effectiveness in dental settings, brief provider-delivered cessation advice is underutilized.

Objective

To evaluate an Internet-delivered intervention designed to increase implementation of brief provider advice for tobacco cessation in dental practice settings.

Methods

Dental practices (N = 190) were randomized to the intervention website or wait-list control. Pre-intervention and after 8 months of follow-up, each practice distributed exit cards (brief patient surveys assessing provider performance, completed immediately after the dental visit) to 100 patients. Based on these exit cards, we assessed: whether patients were asked about tobacco use (ASK) and, among tobacco users, whether they were advised to quit tobacco (ADVISE). All intervention practices with follow-up exit card data were analyzed as randomized regardless of whether they participated in the Internet-delivered intervention.

Results

Of the 190 practices randomized, 143 (75%) dental practices provided follow-up data. Intervention practices’ mean performance improved post-intervention by 4% on ASK (29% baseline, adjusted odds ratio = 1.29 [95% CI 1.17-1.42]), and by 11% on ADVISE (44% baseline, OR = 1.55 [95% CI 1.28-1.87]). Control practices improved by 3% on ASK (Adj. OR 1.18 [95% CI 1.07-1.29]) and did not significantly improve in ADVISE. A significant group-by-time interaction effect indicated that intervention practices improved more over the study period than control practices for ADVISE (P = 0.042) but not for ASK.

Conclusion

This low-intensity, easily disseminated intervention was successful in improving provider performance on advice to quit.

Trial Registration

clinicaltrials.gov NCT00627185; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00627185 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/5c5Kugvzj)

A randomised controlled trial of a smoking cessation intervention delivered by dental hygienists: a feasibility study

BACKGROUND

Tobacco use continues to be a global public health problem. Helping patients to quit is part of the preventive role of all health professionals. There is now increasing interest in the role that the dental team can play in helping their patients to quit smoking. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of undertaking a randomised controlled smoking cessation intervention, utilising dental hygienists to deliver tobacco cessation advice to a cohort of periodontal patients.

METHODS

One hundred and eighteen patients who attended consultant clinics in an outpatient dental hospital department (Periodontology) were recruited into a trial. Data were available for 116 participants, 59 intervention and 57 control, and were analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. The intervention group received smoking cessation advice based on the 5As (ask, advise, assess, assist, arrange follow-up) and were offered nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), whereas the control group received 'usual care'. Outcome measures included self-reported smoking cessation, verified by salivary cotinine measurement and CO measurements. Self-reported measures in those trial participants who did not quit included number and length of quit attempts and reduction in smoking.

RESULTS

At 3 months, 9/59 (15%) of the intervention group had quit compared to 5/57 (9%) of the controls. At 6 months, 6/59 (10%) of the intervention group quit compared to 3/57 (5%) of the controls. At one year, there were 4/59 (7%) intervention quitters, compared to 2/59 (4%) control quitters. In participants who described themselves as smokers, at 3 and 6 months, a statistically higher percentage of intervention participants reported that they had had a quit attempt of at least one week in the preceding 3 months (37% and 47%, for the intervention group respectively, compared with 18% and 16% for the control group).

CONCLUSION

This study has shown the potential that trained dental hygienists could have in delivering smoking cessation advice. While success may be modest, public health gain would indicate that the dental team should participate in this activity. However, to add to the knowledge-base, a multi-centred randomised controlled trial, utilising biochemical verification would be required to be undertaken.

Prognostic factors in the treatment of generalized aggressive periodontitis: II. Effects of smoking on initial outcome

AIMS

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of smoking on the response to non-surgical treatment for aggressive periodontitis.

METHODS

Seventy-nine patients with generalized aggressive periodontitis were included in the study; 20 were smokers. All patients received a course of non-surgical periodontal therapy and outcomes assessed 10 weeks post-operatively. Non-responding patients were designated if they had 30% or more non-responding deep sites.

RESULTS

At baseline, bleeding scores were lower in smokers. There was no difference in baseline plaque, pocket depth (PD), recession or clinical attachment levels (CALs); when sites were selected by equal levels of CAL, increased recession was seen in smokers. Outcomes were poorer in smokers (mean PD change 1.75+/-0.56 versus 2.23+/-0.87 mm). The odds ratio for 30% of sites not responding in smokers was 2.9; for 40% non-responding it was 5.9. Smoking altered the distribution of site-specific responses to increase specifically the number of non-responding sites. There was no significant difference in responses between ex-smokers and never-smokers.

CONCLUSIONS

The results demonstrate that smoking is a major risk factor for poor response to initial treatment and emphasize the importance of smoking cessation in periodontal therapy.

Socio-demographic correlates of betel, areca and smokeless tobacco use as a high risk behavior for head and neck cancers in a squatter settlement of Karachi, Pakistan

BACKGROUND

Head and neck cancers are a major cancer burden in Pakistan. They share a common risk factor profile including regular consumption of products of betel, areca and tobacco. Use of paan, chaalia, gutka, niswar and tumbaku is acceptable in Pakistan and is considered a normal cultural practice. This cross-sectional study was carried out to understand the relation of socio-demographic factors for the consumption of paan, chaalia, gutka, niswar and tumbaku in Pakistani population. Through systematic sampling, 425 subjects from a squatter settlement in Karachi were interviewed using a structured questionnaire. High risk behavior was defined as Daily use of any of the above products.

RESULTS

Daily use of all the substances except chaalia was higher among males compared to females. Chaalia use was higher among adolescents than adults while non-married consumed both chaalia and gutka more than married. Mohajir ethnicity had higher prevalence of paan, gutka and tumbaku use while Pathans had higher prevalence of niswar use.

CONCLUSION

Prevalence of use of chewable products is high in Pakistan with particularly high use of certain substances related with socio-demographic profiles. Industrially prepared products, chaalia and gutka, are gaining popularity among youth. Policies and focused interventions can be developed taking into consideration the preferred use of products among different socio-demographic groups.