Effects of contingency management and bupropion on cigarette smoking in smokers with schizophrenia

Extending contingency management for smoking cessation to patients with or at risk for cardiovascular disease: A preliminary trial of a home-based intervention

Cigarette smoking puts individuals with or at risk for developing cardiovascular disease (CVD) in jeopardy of experiencing a major cardiovascular event. Contingency management (CM) for smoking cessation is an intervention wherein financial incentives are provided contingent on biochemically verified smoking abstinence. Conventional CM programs typically require frequent clinic visits for abstinence monitoring, a potential obstacle for patients with medical comorbidities who may face barriers to access. This preliminary study examined the feasibility and comparative efficacy of (a) usual care (UC; advice to quit smoking, self-help materials, quitline referral) versus (b) UC plus home-based CM for smoking cessation (UC + HBCM). HBCM entailed earning monetary-based vouchers contingent on self-reported 24-hr smoking abstinence biochemically verified by a breath carbon monoxide (CO) sample ≤ 6 ppm. Participants were 20 outpatients with a CVD diagnosis or qualifying CVD risk factor randomly assigned 1:1 to the two conditions. Intervention participants received 14 in-home abstinence visits over 6 weeks. Voucher monetary value started at $10 and escalated by $2.50 for each subsequent negative sample (maximum earnings: $367.50). Positive samples earned no vouchers and reset voucher value to $10, but two negative samples following a positive allowed participants to continue earning vouchers at the prereset value. Primary outcome was point-prevalence smoking abstinence at Week 6 assessment. More participants assigned to UC + HBCM than UC were smoking abstinent at that Week 6 assessment (90% vs. 30%), χ²(1, N = 20) = 7.5, p < .01. These results provide initial evidence that HBCM can effectively promote smoking abstinence in CVD outpatients. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Antidepressants for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

The pharmacological profiles and mechanisms of antidepressants are varied. However, there are common reasons why they might help people to stop smoking tobacco: nicotine withdrawal can produce short-term low mood that antidepressants may relieve; and some antidepressants may have a specific effect on neural pathways or receptors that underlie nicotine addiction.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence for the efficacy, harms, and tolerability of medications with antidepressant properties in assisting long-term tobacco smoking cessation in people who smoke cigarettes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, most recently on 29 April 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in people who smoked, comparing antidepressant medications with placebo or no pharmacological treatment, an alternative pharmacotherapy, or the same medication used differently. We excluded trials with fewer than six months of follow-up from efficacy analyses. We included trials with any follow-up length for our analyses of harms.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data and assessed risk of bias using standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome measure was smoking cessation after at least six months' follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence available in each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Our secondary outcomes were harms and tolerance outcomes, including adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), psychiatric AEs, seizures, overdoses, suicide attempts, death by suicide, all-cause mortality, and trial dropouts due to treatment. We carried out meta-analyses where appropriate.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 124 studies (48,832 participants) in this review, with 10 new studies added to this update version. Most studies recruited adults from the community or from smoking cessation clinics; four studies focused on adolescents (with participants between 12 and 21 years old). We judged 34 studies to be at high risk of bias; however, restricting analyses only to studies at low or unclear risk of bias did not change clinical interpretation of the results.  There was high-certainty evidence that bupropion increased smoking cessation rates when compared to placebo or no pharmacological treatment (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.49 to 1.72; I2 = 16%; 50 studies, 18,577 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence that a combination of bupropion and varenicline may have resulted in superior quit rates to varenicline alone (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.55; I2 = 15%; 3 studies, 1057 participants). However, there was insufficient evidence to establish whether a combination of bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) resulted in superior quit rates to NRT alone (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.44; I2 = 43%; 15 studies, 4117 participants; low-certainty evidence). There was moderate-certainty evidence that participants taking bupropion were more likely to report SAEs than those taking placebo or no pharmacological treatment. However, results were imprecise and the CI also encompassed no difference (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.48; I2 = 0%; 23 studies, 10,958 participants). Results were also imprecise when comparing SAEs between people randomised to a combination of bupropion and NRT versus NRT alone (RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.26 to 8.89; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 657 participants) and randomised to bupropion plus varenicline versus varenicline alone (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.42; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 1268 participants). In both cases, we judged evidence to be of low certainty. There was high-certainty evidence that bupropion resulted in more trial dropouts due to AEs than placebo or no pharmacological treatment (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.65; I2 = 2%; 25 studies, 12,346 participants). However, there was insufficient evidence that bupropion combined with NRT versus NRT alone (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.92; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 737 participants) or bupropion combined with varenicline versus varenicline alone (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.45; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 1230 participants) had an impact on the number of dropouts due to treatment. In both cases, imprecision was substantial (we judged the evidence to be of low certainty for both comparisons). Bupropion resulted in inferior smoking cessation rates to varenicline (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.80; I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 7564 participants), and to combination NRT (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.98; I2 = 0%; 2 studies; 720 participants). However, there was no clear evidence of a difference in efficacy between bupropion and single-form NRT (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.13; I2 = 0%; 10 studies, 7613 participants). We also found evidence that nortriptyline aided smoking cessation when compared with placebo (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.78; I2 = 16%; 6 studies, 975 participants), and some evidence that bupropion resulted in superior quit rates to nortriptyline (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.82; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 417 participants), although this result was subject to imprecision. Findings were sparse and inconsistent as to whether antidepressants, primarily bupropion and nortriptyline, had a particular benefit for people with current or previous depression.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-certainty evidence that bupropion can aid long-term smoking cessation. However, bupropion may increase SAEs (moderate-certainty evidence when compared to placebo/no pharmacological treatment). There is high-certainty evidence that people taking bupropion are more likely to discontinue treatment compared with people receiving placebo or no pharmacological treatment. Nortriptyline also appears to have a beneficial effect on smoking quit rates relative to placebo, although bupropion may be more effective. Evidence also suggests that bupropion may be as successful as single-form NRT in helping people to quit smoking, but less effective than combination NRT and varenicline. In most cases, a paucity of data made it difficult to draw conclusions regarding harms and tolerability. Further studies investigating the efficacy of bupropion versus placebo are unlikely to change our interpretation of the effect, providing no clear justification for pursuing bupropion for smoking cessation over other licensed smoking cessation treatments; namely, NRT and varenicline. However, it is important that future studies of antidepressants for smoking cessation measure and report on harms and tolerability.

Prevalence and severity of tobacco use and access to tobacco cessation among tertiary care psychiatric in-patients in India

Background

Rates of smoking in persons with mental illness are reported to be two times higher than those without mental illness in developed countries. We aimed to examine the prevalence and severity of tobacco use, and access to tobacco cessation services among tertiary care psychiatric in-patients in India.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, 500 consecutive adult in-patients in tertiary care with ICD 10 diagnoses, F20-59, were administered a sociodemographic and clinical proforma, Clinical Global Impression-Severity scale, Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence, Tobacco Craving Questionnaire, Reasons for quitting questionnaire, and Smoke Scale-Adults. Urine cotinine levels were estimated in the last 100 patients. Details of tobacco use and cessation interventions provided were obtained.

Results

Overall prevalence of current tobacco use was 34.00%; 34.3%, 32.6%, 43.6%, and 16.7% in patients of F20-29, F30-39, F40-49, and F50-59 categories, respectively. Males used tobacco products at a significantly higher rate (44.85% vs. 17.58% in females) and were highly dependent. Smokeless tobacco use was reported in 20.5% and 18% of female patients with F20-29 and F30-39 diagnoses, respectively. More than half of the tobacco users were not asked about tobacco use and 89.4% of the users were provided no prior assistance for cessation at the time of assessment. Urinary cotinine levels were significantly greater for those who use smokeless forms than smokers or dual users.

Conclusions

Nearly a third of psychiatric in-patients are current users of tobacco. Moderate to severe tobacco dependence was observed across psychiatric diagnoses. The assessment and interventions provided were suboptimal.

A preliminary investigation of schedule parameters on cocaine abstinence in contingency management

Contingency management (CM) interventions are the most effective psychosocial interventions for substance use disorders. However, further investigation is needed to create the most robust intervention possible. This study investigated the effects of 1) reinforcer magnitude; and 2) fixed and escalating and resetting incentives on cocaine abstinence in an outpatient trial. In this analysis, 34 treatment-seeking individuals with Cocaine Use Disorder received either high or low value incentives for providing a benzoylecgonine-negative urine sample or were in a control condition and received incentives for providing a urine sample regardless of the results. Participants received either escalating and resetting incentives, wherein the value of each incentive increased with consecutive negative samples and reset to the initial level upon a positive sample (Experiment 1), or fixed incentives, wherein they received the same value incentive for each negative urine sample they provided (Experiment 2). Large incentives produced more abstinence, although escalating and resetting reinforcer values did not have a differential effect. Large, fixed incentives promoted abstinence faster than other reinforcers, whereas smaller incentives resulted in poor abstinence and took many visits to achieve initial abstinence. Future research comparing different schedules on cocaine abstinence in a randomized control trial with a larger sample size is required.

The prevalence, odds, predictors, and management of tobacco use disorder or nicotine dependence among people with severe mental illness: Systematic review and meta-analysis

The prevalence, correlates, and management of tobacco use disorder (TUD) or nicotine dependence (ND) among people with severe mental illness (SMI), namely schizophrenia, bipolar disorder (BD), and major depressive disorder (MDD), remain unclear. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. Electronic databases were systematically searched from inception to July 12, 2020, for observational studies documenting the prevalence, odds, and correlates of TUD/ND among people with SMI; randomized controlled trials (RCTs) informing the management of TUD/ND in people with SMI were also included. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted. Sources of heterogeneity were explored. Nineteen observational studies, including 7527 participants with SMI met inclusion criteria. TUD/ND co-occurred in 33.4-65% of people with SMI. Rates were higher among males. While bupropion and varenicline represent promising treatment opportunities for schizophrenia with TUD/ND, non-pharmacological interventions require further research, mainly for people with primary mood disorders. TUD/ND represent prevalent co-occurring conditions among people with SMI. Further well-designed RCTs are warranted to inform their management.

Smoking cessation medicines and e-cigarettes: a systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Cigarette smoking is one of the leading causes of early death. Varenicline [Champix (UK), Pfizer Europe MA EEIG, Brussels, Belgium; or Chantix (USA), Pfizer Inc., Mission, KS, USA], bupropion (Zyban; GlaxoSmithKline, Brentford, UK) and nicotine replacement therapy are licensed aids for quitting smoking in the UK. Although not licensed, e-cigarettes may also be used in English smoking cessation services. Concerns have been raised about the safety of these medicines and e-cigarettes.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation medicines and e-cigarettes.

DESIGN

Systematic reviews, network meta-analyses and cost-effectiveness analysis informed by the network meta-analysis results.

SETTING

Primary care practices, hospitals, clinics, universities, workplaces, nursing or residential homes.

PARTICIPANTS

Smokers aged ≥ 18 years of all ethnicities using UK-licensed smoking cessation therapies and/or e-cigarettes.

INTERVENTIONS

Varenicline, bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy as monotherapies and in combination treatments at standard, low or high dose, combination nicotine replacement therapy and e-cigarette monotherapies.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Effectiveness - continuous or sustained abstinence. Safety - serious adverse events, major adverse cardiovascular events and major adverse neuropsychiatric events.

DATA SOURCES

Ten databases, reference lists of relevant research articles and previous reviews. Searches were performed from inception until 16 March 2017 and updated on 19 February 2019.

REVIEW METHODS

Three reviewers screened the search results. Data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed by one reviewer and checked by the other reviewers. Network meta-analyses were conducted for effectiveness and safety outcomes. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated using an amended version of the Benefits of Smoking Cessation on Outcomes model.

RESULTS

Most monotherapies and combination treatments were more effective than placebo at achieving sustained abstinence. Varenicline standard plus nicotine replacement therapy standard (odds ratio 5.75, 95% credible interval 2.27 to 14.90) was ranked first for sustained abstinence, followed by e-cigarette low (odds ratio 3.22, 95% credible interval 0.97 to 12.60), although these estimates have high uncertainty. We found effect modification for counselling and dependence, with a higher proportion of smokers who received counselling achieving sustained abstinence than those who did not receive counselling, and higher odds of sustained abstinence among participants with higher average dependence scores. We found that bupropion standard increased odds of serious adverse events compared with placebo (odds ratio 1.27, 95% credible interval 1.04 to 1.58). There were no differences between interventions in terms of major adverse cardiovascular events. There was evidence of increased odds of major adverse neuropsychiatric events for smokers randomised to varenicline standard compared with those randomised to bupropion standard (odds ratio 1.43, 95% credible interval 1.02 to 2.09). There was a high level of uncertainty about the most cost-effective intervention, although all were cost-effective compared with nicotine replacement therapy low at the £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year threshold. E-cigarette low appeared to be most cost-effective in the base case, followed by varenicline standard plus nicotine replacement therapy standard. When the impact of major adverse neuropsychiatric events was excluded, varenicline standard plus nicotine replacement therapy standard was most cost-effective, followed by varenicline low plus nicotine replacement therapy standard. When limited to licensed interventions in the UK, nicotine replacement therapy standard was most cost-effective, followed by varenicline standard.

LIMITATIONS

Comparisons between active interventions were informed almost exclusively by indirect evidence. Findings were imprecise because of the small numbers of adverse events identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined therapies of medicines are among the most clinically effective, safe and cost-effective treatment options for smokers. Although the combined therapy of nicotine replacement therapy and varenicline at standard doses was the most effective treatment, this is currently unlicensed for use in the UK.

FUTURE WORK

Researchers should examine the use of these treatments alongside counselling and continue investigating the long-term effectiveness and safety of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation compared with active interventions such as nicotine replacement therapy.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016041302.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 59. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Systematic Review of Psychosocial Smoking Cessation Interventions for People with Serious Mental Illness

Tobacco smoking is a major driver of premature mortality in people with serious mental illness (SMI; e.g., schizophrenia, bipolar disorder). This systematic literature review described randomized control trials of psychosocial smoking cessation interventions for people with SMI, rated their methodological rigor, evaluated the inclusion of racial/ethnic and sexual/gender minorities, and examined smoking cessation outcomes. Methods: Eligible studies included peer-reviewed articles published between 2009 and 2020 that examined psychosocial smoking cessation interventions in people with SMI. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis guidelines to conduct our review and the Methodological Quality Rating Scale to evaluate methodological rigor. Results: Eighteen studies were included. Ten were categorized as high methodological rigor given their study characteristics (e.g., longer follow-up) and eight as lower methodological rigor based on their characteristics (e.g., not intent-to-treat). Racial/ethnic and sexual/gender minorities were under-represented in these studies. A range of psychosocial interventions were examined including motivational enhancements, smoking cessation education, cognitive behavioral strategies, and contingency management. Most studies also provided smoking cessation medications (e.g., NRT, bupropion), although provision was not always uniform across treatment conditions. Three studies found the intervention condition achieved significantly higher abstinence from smoking compared to the comparison group. Seven studies found the intervention condition achieved significantly higher reductions in smoking compared to the comparison group. Conclusions: Studies finding significant differences between the intervention and comparison groups shared common evidenced-based components, including providing smoking cessation medications (e.g., NRT, bupropion), motivational enhancement techniques, and cessation education and skills training, but differed in intensity (e.g., number and frequency of sessions), duration, and modality (e.g., group, individual, technology). Methodological limitations and a small number of studies finding significant between-group differences prevent the identification of the most effective psychosocial smoking cessation interventions. Clinical trial designs (e.g., SMART, factorial) that control for the provision of psychosocial medications and allow for the identification of optimal psychosocial treatments are needed. Future studies should also ensure greater inclusion of racial/ethnic and sexual/gender minorities and should be culturally/linguistically adapted to improve treatment engagement and study outcomes.

Effectiveness of multimodal interventions focused on smoking cessation in patients with schizophrenia: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Smoking is a significant risk factor for mortality and morbidity among patients with schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE

To clarify the effectiveness of multimodal smoking cessation interventions in adult smokers diagnosed with schizophrenia.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Relevant electronic databases were searched for clinical trials that combined pharmacological and non-pharmacological smoking cessation interventions for patients with schizophrenia, published up to October 2020. Primary outcomes were smoking abstinence and smoking reduction. Secondary outcomes consisted in psychiatric symptoms.

RESULTS

A final sample of nine articles was obtained from a total of 208 studies. All studies reported higher biochemically validated smoking reduction rates after treatment. However, the majority of the studies reported low smoking abstinence rates, which progressively decreased over time. Multimodal interventions did not worsen psychiatric symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Evidence suggests that multimodal smoking cessation interventions for individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia should be recommended by clinicians, as they showed to be effective in reducing smoking without worsening psychiatric symptoms. Further studies are needed to understand how interventions can become more effective in helping patients achieve long-term smoking abstinence.

A systematic review of adherence to group interventions in psychosis: do people attend?

BACKGROUND

Evidence supports the use of group therapy for symptom reduction and improving functioning in people with psychosis. However, research guidelines highlight the importance of establishing the feasibility of interventions. Adherence is an important indicator of feasibility and an essential step in supporting the development of the evidence base for group interventions. This review aims to estimate adherence, and possible barriers and facilitators, to psychotherapeutic groups in people with psychosis.

METHODS

Embase, Ovid MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases were searched for cross-referencing terms related to group therapy and psychosis. Studies were assessed against inclusion criteria and methodological quality was evaluated. Data wasextracted from each paper including the average session attendance, demographic, clinical, study and therapy-related characteristics and the impact of these on adherence levels evaluated.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine original research papers were included, reporting on 52 independent studies which consisted of 66 therapy groups comprised of 2109 participants. Average adherence was 76.4% (s.d. = 17.4). Adherence was improved by receiving incentives and was higher in participants of older age. Study sample size was inversely associated with adherence levels. Study quality was variable with approximately 61.5% found to be at risk of bias. The results support the feasibility of group therapy and suggest that adherence in people with psychosis is not dissimilar to those for people experiencing common mental health difficulties. These findings, alongside efficacy evidence, support the use of group interventions in people with psychosis but also highlight the need for further high-quality research on the efficacy for these approaches.

Meta-Analysis on the Effect of Contingency Management for Patients with Both Psychotic Disorders and Substance Use Disorders

Background: Substance use disorders (SUD) are highly prevalent among psychotic patients and are associated with poorer clinical and functional outcomes. Effective interventions for this clinical population are scarce and challenging. Contingency management (CM) is one of the most evidence-based treatments for SUD’s, however, a meta-analysis of the effect of CM in patients with a dual diagnosis of psychotic disorder and SUD has not been performed. Methods: We searched PubMed and PsycINFO databases up to December 2020. Results: Five controlled trials involving 892 patients were included. CM is effective on abstinence rates, measured by the number of self-reported days of using after intervention (95% CI −0.98 to −0.06) and by the number of negative breath or urine samples after intervention (OR 2.13; 95% CI 0.97 to 4.69) and follow-up (OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.04 to 2.08). Conclusions: Our meta-analysis shows a potential effect of CM on abstinence for patients with SUD and (severe) psychotic disorders, although the number of studies is limited. Additional longitudinal studies are needed to confirm the sustained effectivity of CM and give support for a larger clinical implementation of CM within services targeting these vulnerable co-morbid patients.

Treatment Outcomes of a Multi-Component Mobile Health Smoking Cessation Pilot Intervention for People with Schizophrenia

The objective of this study was to investigate the feasibility and acceptability of a multi-component mobile contingency management (CM) pilot intervention for smoking cessation for people with schizophrenia. Methods: This intervention included mobile CM (i.e., monetary compensation for bioverification of abstinence through using a phone app), cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation. This intervention was compared to an intensive treatment comparison (ITC), which contained all components except the CM. Participants were bioverified with carbon monoxide and saliva cotinine at a 6-month follow-up session. Results: In this pilot, the treatment group did not differ from the ITC at any time point. However, measures of treatment feasibility and acceptability indicated that smokers with schizophrenia were able to navigate the CM phone application and adhere to the protocol, demonstrating the potential utility of mobile interventions in this population. Conclusions: Despite lack of long-term abstinence for participants, adherence to the mobile application intervention indicates the potential for future investigation of mobile smoking cessation treatments for people with schizophrenia.

Pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation among people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

People with schizophrenia have higher rates of smoking than the general population, and lower quit rates. Several randomised controlled trials have investigated the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation over the past 20 years. We did a systematic review and pairwise and network meta-analysis of smoking abstinence to guide decision making in offering pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation for people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure from inception to Sept 30, 2019, for randomised controlled trials of varenicline, bupropion, and nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation for people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders or psychotic disorders who were smokers at the time of study recruitment. Data were extracted from published studies on smoking abstinence outcomes and psychotic symptoms. We did pairwise and network meta-analyses for the primary outcome of smoking abstinence. Sensitivity analyses were done on study inclusion criteria, duration, quality, and location. This study is registered with the international prospective register of systematic reviews PROSPERO, CRD42018102343.

FINDINGS

A total of 15 111 records were identified by the database searches, and 163 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. 145 articles were then excluded for several reasons including insufficient data, or abstracts published in later studies, and 18 studies were included in the meta-analysis. In the pairwise meta-analyses, four studies with 394 participants assessed varenicline (RR 3·75, 95% CI 1·96-7·19, p<0·0001; I²=0%), four studies with bupropion and 292 participants (RR 3·40, 95% CI 1·58-7·34, p=0·0002; I²=0%), and three studies with 561 participants assessed nicotine replacement therapy (RR 4·27, 95% CI 1·71-10·65, p=0·0002; I²=0%). All three treatments were deemed superior to placebo. In the network meta-analysis, varenicline was superior to bupropion (RR 2·02, 95% CI 1·04-3·93; p=0·038) but no significant difference was found between varenicline and nicotine replacement therapy, or bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy. No agents were associated with changes in psychiatric symptoms, but varenicline was associated with higher rates of nausea than was placebo.

INTERPRETATION

We found evidence to support use of pharmacological agents for smoking cessation for people with psychosis. Varenicline might be superior to bupropion; however, additional direct testing and combination trials of pharmacological agents for smoking cessation are required to inform clinical decision making for people with psychosis.

FUNDING

None.

Antidepressants for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Whilst the pharmacological profiles and mechanisms of antidepressants are varied, there are common reasons why they might help people to stop smoking tobacco. Firstly, nicotine withdrawal may produce depressive symptoms and antidepressants may relieve these. Additionally, some antidepressants may have a specific effect on neural pathways or receptors that underlie nicotine addiction.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence for the efficacy, safety and tolerability of medications with antidepressant properties in assisting long-term tobacco smoking cessation in people who smoke cigarettes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Specialized Register, which includes reports of trials indexed in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO, clinicaltrials.gov, the ICTRP, and other reviews and meeting abstracts, in May 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited smokers, and compared antidepressant medications with placebo or no treatment, an alternative pharmacotherapy, or the same medication used in a different way. We excluded trials with less than six months follow-up from efficacy analyses. We included trials with any follow-up length in safety analyses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data and assessed risk of bias using standard Cochrane methods. We also used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. The primary outcome measure was smoking cessation after at least six months follow-up, expressed as a risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence available in each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect model. Similarly, we presented incidence of safety and tolerance outcomes, including adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), psychiatric AEs, seizures, overdoses, suicide attempts, death by suicide, all-cause mortality, and trial dropout due to drug, as RRs (95% CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 115 studies (33 new to this update) in this review; most recruited adult participants from the community or from smoking cessation clinics. We judged 28 of the studies to be at high risk of bias; however, restricting analyses only to studies at low or unclear risk did not change clinical interpretation of the results. There was high-certainty evidence that bupropion increased long-term smoking cessation rates (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.52 to 1.77; I2 = 15%; 45 studies, 17,866 participants). There was insufficient evidence to establish whether participants taking bupropion were more likely to report SAEs compared to those taking placebo. Results were imprecise and CIs encompassed no difference (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.48; I2 = 0%; 21 studies, 10,625 participants; moderate-certainty evidence, downgraded one level due to imprecision). We found high-certainty evidence that use of bupropion resulted in more trial dropouts due to adverse events of the drug than placebo (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.56; I2 = 19%; 25 studies, 12,340 participants). Participants randomized to bupropion were also more likely to report psychiatric AEs compared with those randomized to placebo (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.37; I2 = 15%; 6 studies, 4439 participants). We also looked at the safety and efficacy of bupropion when combined with other non-antidepressant smoking cessation therapies. There was insufficient evidence to establish whether combination bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) resulted in superior quit rates to NRT alone (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.51; I2 = 52%; 12 studies, 3487 participants), or whether combination bupropion and varenicline resulted in superior quit rates to varenicline alone (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.55; I2 = 15%; 3 studies, 1057 participants). We judged the certainty of evidence to be low and moderate, respectively; in both cases due to imprecision, and also due to inconsistency in the former. Safety data were sparse for these comparisons, making it difficult to draw clear conclusions. A meta-analysis of six studies provided evidence that bupropion resulted in inferior smoking cessation rates to varenicline (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.79; I2 = 0%; 6 studies, 6286 participants), whilst there was no evidence of a difference in efficacy between bupropion and NRT (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.09; I2 = 18%; 10 studies, 8230 participants). We also found some evidence that nortriptyline aided smoking cessation when compared with placebo (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.78; I2 = 16%; 6 studies, 975 participants), whilst there was insufficient evidence to determine whether bupropion or nortriptyline were more effective when compared with one another (RR 1.30 (favouring bupropion), 95% CI 0.93 to 1.82; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 417 participants). There was no evidence that any of the other antidepressants tested (including St John's Wort, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs)) had a beneficial effect on smoking cessation. Findings were sparse and inconsistent as to whether antidepressants, primarily bupropion and nortriptyline, had a particular benefit for people with current or previous depression.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-certainty evidence that bupropion can aid long-term smoking cessation. However, bupropion also increases the number of adverse events, including psychiatric AEs, and there is high-certainty evidence that people taking bupropion are more likely to discontinue treatment compared with placebo. However, there is no clear evidence to suggest whether people taking bupropion experience more or fewer SAEs than those taking placebo (moderate certainty). Nortriptyline also appears to have a beneficial effect on smoking quit rates relative to placebo. Evidence suggests that bupropion may be as successful as NRT and nortriptyline in helping people to quit smoking, but that it is less effective than varenicline. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether the other antidepressants tested, such as SSRIs, aid smoking cessation, and when looking at safety and tolerance outcomes, in most cases, paucity of data made it difficult to draw conclusions. Due to the high-certainty evidence, further studies investigating the efficacy of bupropion versus placebo are unlikely to change our interpretation of the effect, providing no clear justification for pursuing bupropion for smoking cessation over front-line smoking cessation aids already available. However, it is important that where studies of antidepressants for smoking cessation are carried out they measure and report safety and tolerability clearly.

Pharmacological and behavioural interventions to promote smoking cessation in adults with schizophrenia and bipolar disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials

OBJECTIVE

Smoking in people with serious mental illness is a major public health problem and contributes to significant levels of morbidity and mortality. The aim of the review was to systematically examine the efficacy of methods used to aid smoking cessation in people with serious mental illness.

METHOD

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials to compare the effectiveness and safety of pharmacological and behavioural programmes for smoking cessation in people with serious mental illness. Electronic databases were searched for trials to July 2018. We used the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight randomised controlled trials were identified. Varenicline increased the likelihood of smoking cessation at both 3 months (risk ratio (RR) 3.56, 95% CI 1.82 to 6.96, p=0.0002) and at 6 months (RR 3.69, 95% CI 1.08 to 12.60, p=0.04). Bupropion was effective at 3 months (RR 3.96, 95% CI 1.86 to 8.40, p=0.0003), especially at a dose of 300 mg/day, but there was no evidence of effect at 6 months (RR 2.22, 95% CI 0.52 to 9.47, p=0.28). In one small study, nicotine therapy proved effective at increasing smoking cessation up to a period of 3 months. Bupropion used in conjunction with nicotine replacement therapy showed more effect than single use. Behavioural and bespoke interventions showed little overall benefit. Side effects were found to be low.

CONCLUSION

The new information of this review was the effectiveness of varenicline for smoking cessation at both 3 and 6 months and the lack of evidence to support the use of both bupropion and nicotine products for sustained abstinence longer than 3 months. Overall, the review found relatively few studies in this population.

Which Types of Tobacco Treatment Interventions Work for People with Schizophrenia? Provider and Mental Health Consumer Perspectives

People with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders (PWS) consume tobacco at high rates, resulting in disproportionate tobacco-related morbidity and mortality. Conventional tobacco treatment (TT) approaches may not adequately address unique affective, cognitive, and social challenges of PWS during cessation. This study sought to obtain provider and mental health consumer perspectives on effective, desirable, applicable, and acceptable components of TT for PWS. This convergent mixed-method study used structured interviews and a cross-sectional survey to obtain data. Eighteen mental health consumers and six mental health providers were engaged in face-to-face or telephone interviews. The qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis and theme identification and descriptive statistics were used for the analysis of quantitative data. In the qualitative analysis, consumers endorsed education, counseling, social support, and pharmacotherapy as key TT components. Consumers further stressed the need for flexible interventions that are available at any point in a quit attempt. Both providers and consumers endorsed targeting TT interventions to consider learning needs, potential cognitive issues, and motivation for behavioral change. Providers encouraged a recovery-driven TT framework with peer support and health promotion activities. Quantitative findings mirrored the qualitative findings with support sessions, relapse prevention, and skills training having the highest desirability, applicability, and acceptability TT component scores. Providers and consumers agreed on components of an effective TT program targeted to PWS. Given these findings, it is crucial to further investigate successful TT approaches for PWS and to test whether targeted or tailored programs are more effective than conventional approaches.

Financial Incentives for Smoking Abstinence in Homeless Smokers: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction

Three-quarters of homeless people smoke cigarettes. Financial incentives for smoking abstinence have appeared promising in nonexperimental studies of homeless smokers, but randomized controlled trial (RCT) data are lacking.

Methods

We conducted a pilot RCT of financial incentives for homeless smokers. Incentive arm participants (N = 25) could earn escalating $15-$35 rewards for brief smoking abstinence (exhaled carbon monoxide <8 parts per million) assessed 14 times over 8 weeks. Control arm participants (N = 25) were given $10 at each assessment regardless of abstinence. All participants were offered nicotine patches and counseling. The primary outcome was a repeated measure of brief smoking abstinence across 14 assessments. The secondary outcome was brief abstinence at 8 weeks. Exploratory outcomes were self-reported 1-day and 7-day abstinence from (1) any cigarette and (2) any puff of a cigarette. Other outcomes included 24-hour quit attempts, nicotine patch use, counseling attendance, and changes in alcohol and drug use.

Results

Compared to control, incentive arm participants were more likely to achieve brief abstinence overall (odds ratio 7.28, 95% confidence interval 2.89 to 18.3) and at 8 weeks (48% vs. 8%, p = .004). Similar effects were seen for 1-day abstinence, but 7-day puff abstinence was negligible in both arms. Incentive arm participants made more quit attempts (p = .03). Nicotine patch use and counseling attendance were not significantly different between the groups. Alcohol and drug use did not change significantly in either group.

Conclusions

Among homeless smokers, financial incentives increased brief smoking abstinence and quit attempts without worsening substance use. This approach merits further development focused on promoting sustained abstinence.

Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02565381).

Implications

Smoking is common among homeless people, and conventional tobacco treatment strategies have yielded modest results in this population. This pilot RCT suggests that financial incentives may be a safe way to promote brief smoking abstinence and quit attempts in this vulnerable group of smokers. However, further development is necessary to translate this approach into real-world settings and to promote sustained periods of smoking abstinence.

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of contingency management for cannabis use in early psychosis: the CIRCLE randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Cannabis is the most commonly used illicit substance amongst people with psychosis. Continued cannabis use following the onset of psychosis is associated with poorer functional and clinical outcomes. However, finding effective ways of intervening has been very challenging. We examined the clinical and cost-effectiveness of adjunctive contingency management (CM), which involves incentives for abstinence from cannabis use, in people with a recent diagnosis of psychosis.

METHODS

CIRCLE was a pragmatic multi-centre randomised controlled trial. Participants were recruited via Early Intervention in Psychosis (EIP) services across the Midlands and South East of England. They had had at least one episode of clinically diagnosed psychosis (affective or non-affective); were aged 18 to 36; reported cannabis use in at least 12 out of the previous 24 weeks; and were not currently receiving treatment for cannabis misuse, or subject to a legal requirement for cannabis testing. Participants were randomised via a secure web-based service 1:1 to either an experimental arm, involving 12 weeks of CM plus a six-session psychoeducation package, or a control arm receiving the psychoeducation package only. The total potential voucher reward in the CM intervention was £240. The primary outcome was time to acute psychiatric care, operationalised as admission to an acute mental health service (including community alternatives to admission). Primary outcome data were collected from patient records at 18 months post-consent by assessors masked to allocation. The trial was registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN33576045.

RESULTS

Five hundred fifty-one participants were recruited between June 2012 and April 2016. Primary outcome data were obtained for 272 (98%) in the CM (experimental) group and 259 (95%) in the control group. There was no statistically significant difference in time to acute psychiatric care (the primary outcome) (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.76, 1.40) between groups. By 18 months, 90 (33%) of participants in the CM group, and 85 (30%) of the control groups had been admitted at least once to an acute psychiatric service. Amongst those who had experienced an acute psychiatric admission, the median time to admission was 196 days (IQR 82, 364) in the CM group and 245 days (IQR 99, 382) in the control group. Cost-effectiveness analyses suggest that there is an 81% likelihood that the intervention was cost-effective, mainly resulting from higher mean inpatient costs for the control group compared with the CM group; however, the cost difference between groups was not statistically significant. There were 58 adverse events, 27 in the CM group and 31 in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, these results suggest that CM is not an effective intervention for improving the time to acute psychiatric admission or reducing cannabis use in psychosis, at least at the level of voucher reward offered.

Incentives for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Financial incentives, monetary or vouchers, are widely used in an attempt to precipitate, reinforce and sustain behaviour change, including smoking cessation. They have been used in workplaces, in clinics and hospitals, and within community programmes.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the long-term effect of incentives and contingency management programmes for smoking cessation.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). The most recent searches were conducted in July 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered only randomised controlled trials, allocating individuals, workplaces, groups within workplaces, or communities to smoking cessation incentive schemes or control conditions. We included studies in a mixed-population setting (e.g. community, work-, clinic- or institution-based), and also studies in pregnant smokers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. The primary outcome measure in the mixed-population studies was abstinence from smoking at longest follow-up (at least six months from the start of the intervention). In the trials of pregnant women we used abstinence measured at the longest follow-up, and at least to the end of the pregnancy. Where available, we pooled outcome data using a Mantel-Haenzel random-effects model, with results reported as risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using adjusted estimates for cluster-randomised trials. We analysed studies carried out in mixed populations separately from those carried out in pregnant populations.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-three mixed-population studies met our inclusion criteria, covering more than 21,600 participants; 16 of these are new to this version of the review. Studies were set in varying locations, including community settings, clinics or health centres, workplaces, and outpatient drug clinics. We judged eight studies to be at low risk of bias, and 10 to be at high risk of bias, with the rest at unclear risk. Twenty-four of the trials were run in the USA, two in Thailand and one in the Phillipines. The rest were European. Incentives offered included cash payments or vouchers for goods and groceries, offered directly or collected and redeemable online. The pooled RR for quitting with incentives at longest follow-up (six months or more) compared with controls was 1.49 (95% CI 1.28 to 1.73; 31 RCTs, adjusted N = 20,097; I² = 33%). Results were not sensitive to the exclusion of six studies where an incentive for cessation was offered at long-term follow up (result excluding those studies: RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.69; 25 RCTs; adjusted N = 17,058; I² = 36%), suggesting the impact of incentives continues for at least some time after incentives cease.Although not always clearly reported, the total financial amount of incentives varied considerably between trials, from zero (self-deposits), to a range of between USD 45 and USD 1185. There was no clear direction of effect between trials offering low or high total value of incentives, nor those encouraging redeemable self-deposits.We included 10 studies of 2571 pregnant women. We judged two studies to be at low risk of bias, one at high risk of bias, and seven at unclear risk. When pooled, the nine trials with usable data (eight conducted in the USA and one in the UK), delivered an RR at longest follow-up (up to 24 weeks post-partum) of 2.38 (95% CI 1.54 to 3.69; N = 2273; I² = 41%), in favour of incentives.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall there is high-certainty evidence that incentives improve smoking cessation rates at long-term follow-up in mixed population studies. The effectiveness of incentives appears to be sustained even when the last follow-up occurs after the withdrawal of incentives. There is also moderate-certainty evidence, limited by some concerns about risks of bias, that incentive schemes conducted among pregnant smokers improve smoking cessation rates, both at the end of pregnancy and post-partum. Current and future research might explore more precisely differences between trials offering low or high cash incentives and self-incentives (deposits), within a variety of smoking populations.

Incentivizing healthy lifestyle behaviors to reduce cardiovascular risk in people with serious mental illness: An equipoise randomized controlled trial of the wellness incentives program

BACKGROUND

Medicaid recipients with serious mental illness die 25-30 years earlier than people in the general population due to health conditions that are modifiable through lifestyle changes. Cardiovascular diseases from excess weight, smoking, and sedentary lifestyle contribute substantially to this life expectancy disparity. The current study evaluated the impact of incentives on participation in weight management programming (for overweight and obese adults) and smoking cessation treatment (for regular smokers).

METHODS

Participants were Medicaid recipients with disabling mental illness receiving services at any one of 10 community mental health centers across New Hampshire. Using an equipoise stratified randomized design, n = 1348 were enrolled and assigned to one of four weight management programs (Healthy Choices Healthy Changes: HCHC) and n = 661 were enrolled and assigned to one of three smoking cessation interventions (Breathe Well Live Well: BWLW). Following assignment to an intervention, participants were randomized to receive financial incentives (to attend weight management programs, or to achieve abstinence from smoking) or not. Data were collected at baseline and every 3 months for 12 months.

DISCUSSION

New Hampshire's HCHC and BWLW programs were designed to address serious and preventable health disparities by providing incentivized health promotion programs to overweight/obese and/or tobacco-smoking Medicaid beneficiaries with mental illness. This study was an unprecedented opportunity to evaluate an innovative statewide implementation of incentivized health promotion targeting the most at-risk and costly beneficiaries. If proven effective, this program has the potential to serve as a national model for widespread implementation.

Contingency management and cognitive behavioral therapy for trauma-exposed smokers with and without posttraumatic stress disorder

INTRODUCTION

Trauma-exposed individuals with and without posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are more likely to smoke and less successful in quit attempts than individuals without psychopathology. Contingency management (CM) techniques (i.e., incentives for abstinence) have demonstrable efficacy for smoking cessation in some populations with psychopathology, but have not been well tested in PTSD. This pilot study examined the feasibility of CM plus brief cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in promoting smoking cessation among trauma-exposed individuals with and without PTSD.

METHODS

Fifty trauma-exposed smokers (18 with PTSD) were asked to abstain from tobacco and nicotine replacement therapy for one month. During week one of cessation, CBT was provided daily and increasing CM stipends were paid for each continuous day of biochemically-verified abstinence; CM stipends were withheld in response to smoking lapses and reset to the initial payment level upon abstinence resumption. CBT and fixed payments for study visits were provided during the subsequent three weeks.

RESULTS

Of the 50 eligible participants who attended at least one pre-quit visit (49% female, 35% current PTSD), 43 (86%) attended the first post-quit study visit, 32 (64%) completed the first week of CM/CBT treatment, and 26 (52%) completed the study. Post-quit seven-day point prevalence abstinence rates for participants with and without PTSD, respectively, were similar: 39% vs. 38% (1 week), 33% vs. 28% (2 weeks), 22% vs. 19% (3 weeks), and 22% vs. 13% (4 weeks).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of CM + CBT to support tobacco abstinence is a promising intervention for trauma-exposed smokers with and without PTSD.

Patient-Informed Treatment Development of Behavioral Smoking Cessation for People With Schizophrenia

The objective of this study was to use qualitative methodology to tailor and refine an existing smoking cessation intervention for the population of people who use cigarettes and are diagnosed with schizophrenia, schizoaffective, or psychotic disorder. Successive cohort design methodology was used to iteratively modify the treatment in response to qualitative participant, therapist, and consultant feedback on the intervention. Qualitative methodology for participant feedback included analysis of semistructured interviews with participants, visualization of app utilization data, and stakeholder feedback from study therapists and consultants. Using the successive cohort design, a tailored multicomponent mobile health smoking cessation intervention was developed. The intervention included mobile contingency management (i.e., financial compensation for confirmed abstinence from smoking), pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation, cognitive-behavioral counseling sessions, and the Stay Quit app for relapse prevention. Two cohorts (N = 13) were completed in the study; after each cohort, the treatment protocol was revised. The intervention is described, as well as the qualitative findings from each cohort and subsequent changes made to the intervention based upon patient and provider feedback. Metrics of patient engagement included treatment adherence (40% in Cohort 1 and 63% in Cohort 2). Both participants and therapists reported that the intervention was helpful. Over one third of participants self-reported abstinence at posttreatment. Since qualitative methodology is often underutilized in mental health treatment development, this study demonstrates the utility of the successive cohort design for treatment development of behavior change interventions for at-risk, vulnerable populations.

Minimal effects of prolonged smoking abstinence or resumption on cognitive performance challenge the "self-medication" hypothesis in schizophrenia

One prominent, long-standing view is that individuals with schizophrenia smoke cigarettes more than the general population to "self-medicate" cognitive deficits and other symptoms. This study tested the self-medication hypothesis by examining the effects of smoking abstinence and resumption on cognition in patients with schizophrenia. Nicotine-dependent smokers with schizophrenia (n=26) were trained on a cognitive battery and then hospitalized to achieve and maintain confirmed abstinence from smoking for ~1 week. Cognition was tested while smoking as usual (baseline), one day after smoking cessation (early abstinence), ~1 week later (extended abstinence), and within ~3 weeks of resuming smoking (resumption). The test battery included measures of processing speed, attention, conflict resolution, verbal memory, working memory, verbal fluency, and executive function to evaluate multiple cognitive domains affected by schizophrenia. Positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia, depressive symptoms, and dyskinesia were also measured at baseline and after prolonged abstinence. There were no significant changes in global cognitive test performance with smoking cessation, abstinence, or resumption. There were small decreases in a measure of processing speed and delayed verbal recall with abstinence, but these findings failed to survive adjustments for multiple comparisons. Surprisingly, in this within subject "On-Off-Off-On" design, there were no significant effects of early or prolonged abstinence from smoking on cognitive and behavioral measures in smokers with schizophrenia. The results of this study challenge the widely held "self-medication" hypothesis of smoking and schizophrenia, question the extent of pro-cognitive effects of smoking and nicotine in schizophrenia, and support encouraging smoking cessation in schizophrenia.

Review of pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation in patients with schizophrenia

Smoking cessation is a chronic issue surrounding individuals with schizophrenia. It is estimated that up to 90% of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia smoke cigarettes. The purpose of this article is to provide a nonsystematic review of the efficacy of smoking cessation interventions as well as to explore the potential neuropsychiatric adverse effects of these agents in patients with schizophrenia. Eighteen studies were found and included in the review. Overall, nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, and varenicline have all proven their effectiveness at either promoting smoking abstinence or a significant reduction in cigarette use.

Need for Cardiovascular Risk Reduction in Persons With Serious Mental Illness: Design of a Comprehensive Intervention

Persons with serious mental illness (SMI) comprise a high-risk group for cardiovascular disease (CVD)-related mortality with rates at least twice those of the overall US. Potentially modifiable CVD risk behaviors (tobacco smoking, obesity, physical inactivity, unhealthy diet) and risk factors (hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia) are all markedly elevated in persons with SMI. Evaluations of programs implementing integrated medical care into specialty mental health settings have not shown meaningful effects on CVD risk factor reduction. Rigorously tested, innovative interventions are needed to address the large burden of CVD risk in populations with SMI. In this article, we describe the design of a comprehensive 18-month intervention to decrease CVD risk that we are studying in a randomized clinical trial in a community mental health organization with psychiatric rehabilitation programs. The individual-level intervention incorporated health behavior coaching and care coordination/care management to address all seven CVD risk behaviors and risk factors, and is delivered by a health coach and nurse. If successful, the intervention could be adopted within current integrated care models and significantly improve the physical health of persons with SMI.

A Systematic Review of Psychosocial Barriers and Facilitators to Smoking Cessation in People Living With Schizophrenia

Background: People living with schizophrenia are less likely to quit smoking compared with the general population and people living with other psychiatric disorders. Understanding the schizophrenia-specific psychosocial barriers and facilitators to smoking cessation is important for designing effective smoking cessation interventions. We aimed to systematically review research examining psychosocial barriers and facilitators to smoking cessation in people living with schizophrenia. Methods: We followed the PRISMA statement to conduct a systematic literature review examining psychosocial barriers and facilitators to smoking cessation in people living with schizophrenia. We searched EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO, and CINAHL databases from inception to 14 June 2018 to identify relevant articles. We included peer-reviewed original research articles that examined psychosocial barriers and facilitators to smoking cessation, as well as factors associated with maintenance of smoking habits in people living with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods study designs were included. Three authors screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts using the eligibility criteria. We conducted a narrative synthesis of the data to account for the heterogeneity of study designs. We analyzed qualitative and quantitative studies separately. Results: We identified 685 studies from our systematic search and screened the full-text of 134 articles. The final set of 23 articles included 20 quantitative studies and 3 qualitative studies. The most commonly cited barrier to smoking cessation in people living with schizophrenia was cravings and addiction, followed by a perceived increased risk of negative affect associated with quitting smoking. People living with schizophrenia reported smoking to manage stress and to maintain social relationships. People living with schizophrenia were found to be less likely to receive cessation support from health professionals than smokers without schizophrenia. Health concerns were the most commonly mentioned facilitator to quit smoking. Conclusions: People living with schizophrenia experience a wide range of barriers to smoking cessation. The influence of these barriers on smoking cessation likelihood may be greater among people living with schizophrenia than people without psychiatric disorders. Health professionals play an important role in smoking cessation for people living with schizophrenia and should consider barriers and facilitators identified in this review to support quitting in this vulnerable population.

Contingency management treatment for substance use disorders: How far has it come, and where does it need to go?

Contingency management (CM) interventions consistently improve substance abuse treatment outcomes, yet CM remains a highly controversial intervention and is rarely implemented in practice settings. This article briefly outlines the evidence base of CM and then describes 4 of the most often-cited concerns about it: philosophical, motivational, durability, and economic. Data supporting and refuting each of these issues are reviewed. The article concludes with suggestions to address these matters and other important areas for CM research and implementation, with the aims of improving uptake of this efficacious intervention in practice settings and outcomes of patients with substance use disorders. (PsycINFO Database Record

Smoking cessation in severe mental ill health: what works? an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

People with severe mental ill health are more likely to smoke than those in the general population. It is therefore important that effective smoking cessation strategies are used to help people with severe mental ill health to stop smoking. This study aims to assess the effectiveness and cost -effectiveness of smoking cessation and reduction strategies in adults with severe mental ill health in both inpatient and outpatient settings.

METHODS

This is an update of a previous systematic review. Electronic databases were searched during September 2016 for randomised controlled trials comparing smoking cessation interventions to each other, usual care, or placebo. Data was extracted on biochemically-verified, self-reported smoking cessation (primary outcome), as well as on smoking reduction, body weight, psychiatric symptom, and adverse events (secondary outcomes).

RESULTS

We included 26 trials of pharmacological and/or behavioural interventions. Eight trials comparing bupropion to placebo were pooled showing that bupropion improved quit rates significantly in the medium and long term but not the short term (short term RR = 6.42 95% CI 0.82-50.07; medium term RR = 2.93 95% CI 1.61-5.34; long term RR = 3.04 95% CI 1.10-8.42). Five trials comparing varenicline to placebo showed that that the addition of varenicline improved quit rates significantly in the medium term (RR = 4.13 95% CI 1.36-12.53). The results from five trials of specialised smoking cessation programmes were pooled and showed no evidence of benefit in the medium (RR = 1.32 95% CI 0.85-2.06) or long term (RR = 1.33 95% CI 0.85-2.08). There was insufficient data to allowing pooling for all time points for varenicline and trials of specialist smoking cessation programmes. Trials suggest few adverse events although safety data were not always reported. Only one pilot study reported cost effectiveness data.

CONCLUSIONS

Bupropion and varenicline, which have been shown to be effective in the general population, also work for people with severe mental ill health and their use in patients with stable psychiatric conditions. Despite good evidence for the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions for people with severe mental ill health, the percentage of people with severe mental ill health who smoke remains higher than that for the general population.

A systematic narrative review of the effectiveness of behavioural smoking cessation interventions in selected disadvantaged groups (2010-2017)

INTRODUCTION

Tobacco remains the key modifiable risk factor for the development of a number of diseases, including cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, lower respiratory infections, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, tuberculosis and cancer. Among priority populations, smoking prevalence remains high, smokers tend to relapse more often and earlier and fewer are able to sustain quit attempts. This systematic review provides an update on the literature. Areas covered: Twenty-four randomized controlled trials published from 2010-2017, in English language, were identified after searching on Medline, Ovid, Embase and PsycINFO databases. Studies reported on the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions among six disadvantaged groups known to have high smoking rates: (i) homeless, (ii) prisoners, (iii) indigenous populations, (iv) at-risk youth, (v) people with low income, and (vi) those with a mental illness. Narrative review and assessment of methodological quality of included papers was undertaken. Expert commentary: There is a growing evidence base of methodologically robust studies evaluating a variety of behavioural smoking cessation interventions for priority populations. Multi-component interventions and those examining behavioural interventions incorporating mindfulness training, financial incentives, motivational interviewing and extended telephone-delivered counseling may be effective in the short-term, particularly for smokers on low incomes and people with a mental illness.

Income Levels and Response to Contingency Management for Smoking Cessation

BACKGROUND

Contingency management (CM) has demonstrated its efficacy in treating many drug addictions, including nicotine. However, one of the most commonly perceived limitations with regard to its dissemination into community settings is whether this protocol could be equally effective for treating patients across different income levels.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine whether individuals' income levels affect treatment success in a cognitive behavioral treatment (CBT) that included a voucher-based CM protocol for smoking cessation.

METHODS

A total of 92 treatment-seeking smokers in a community setting were randomly assigned to a CBT group (N = 49) or to a CBT plus CM group (N = 43). The CM procedure included a voucher program through which smoking abstinence was reinforced on a schedule of escalating magnitude of reinforcement with a reset contingency. We analyzed the impact of self-reported monthly income, alone and in combination with treatment condition, on short-term (treatment retention) and long-term (self-reported number of days of continuous smoking abstinence at 6-month follow-up) results.

RESULTS

Income had no effect on treatment retention and continuous abstinence outcomes at 6-month follow-up in either treatment condition. Treatment modality emerged as the only significant predictor of treatment success.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that treatment-seeking smokers from the general population respond equally well to CM regardless of their income levels. The results of this randomized controlled trial support the generalizability of this evidenced-based program into community settings.

Achieving Smoking Cessation in Individuals with Schizophrenia: Special Considerations

Premature mortality due to cardiovascular disease in those with schizophrenia is the largest lifespan disparity in the US and is growing; adults in the US with schizophrenia die, on average, 28 years earlier than those in the general population. The rate of smoking prevalence among individuals with schizophrenia is estimated to be from 64 to 79%. Smokers with schizophrenia have historically been excluded from most large nicotine-dependence treatment studies. However, converging evidence indicates that a majority of smokers with schizophrenia want to quit smoking, and that available pharmacotherapeutic smoking cessation aids are well tolerated by this population of smokers and are effective when combined with behavioral treatment. The aim of this review is to present updated evidence for safety and efficacy of smoking cessation interventions for those with schizophrenia spectrum illness. We also highlight implications of the very low abstinence rates for smokers with schizophrenia who receive placebo plus behavioral treatment in randomized trials, and review treatment approaches to address the high rate of rapid relapse observed upon pharmacologic treatment discontinuation in this population. Recommendations for monitoring for treatment-emergent nicotine withdrawal symptoms, side effects, and effects of cessation on antipsychotic medication are also provided. Smokers with schizophrenia spectrum disorders should be encouraged to quit smoking and should receive varenicline, bupropion with or without nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), or NRT, all in combination with behavioral treatment for at least 12 weeks. Maintenance pharmacotherapy may reduce relapse and improve sustained abstinence rates. Controlled trials in smokers with schizophrenia consistently show no greater rate of neuropsychiatric adverse events with pharmacotherapeutic cessation aids than with placebo.

Financial Incentives for Reducing Smoking and Promoting Other Health-Related Behavior Change in Vulnerable Populations

Substantial reductions in U.S. cigarette smoking and associated chronic diseases over the past 50 years have benefited health. Unfortunately, those reductions have distributed unevenly throughout the population. Smoking remains prevalent and even increasing among certain vulnerable populations: economically disadvantaged groups, those with other substance-use disorders or mental illness, certain ethnic and racial minorities, and gender and sexual minorities. Moreover, other unhealthy behavior patterns (physical inactivity, unhealthy food choices, risky sexual behavior, poor adherence to medical preventive regimens) and associated chronic diseases are also overrepresented in many of these same populations. Disparities in unhealthy behavior patterns contribute to health disparities and escalating health care costs, underscoring the need for more effective behavior-change strategies. This report reviews research on the efficacy of financial incentives for reducing smoking in vulnerable populations, while also touching on applications of that behavior-change strategy for promoting other health-related behavior changes in vulnerable populations.

Contingency Management: New Directions and Remaining Challenges for An Evidence-Based Intervention

This article introduces the special issue on contingency management (CM), an efficacious intervention for the treatment of substance use disorders with low uptake in clinical settings that is not commensurate with evidence for efficacy. In this special issue of the Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, we present 16 articles representing the latest research in efficacy, implementation, and technological advances related to CM. Combined, this collection of articles highlights the diverse populations, settings, and applications of CM in the treatment of substance use disorders. We conclude by highlighting directions for future research, particularly those that may increase CM's appeal and uptake in routine clinical care.

A review of the literature on contingency management in the treatment of substance use disorders, 2009-2014

This report describes a systematic literature review of voucher and related monetary-based contingency management (CM) interventions for substance use disorders (SUDs) over 5.2years (November 2009 through December 2014). Reports were identified using the search engine PubMed, expert consultations, and published bibliographies. For inclusion, reports had to (a) involve monetary-based CM; (b) appear in a peer-reviewed journal; (c) include an experimental comparison condition; (d) describe an original study; (e) assess efficacy using inferential statistics; (f) use a research design allowing treatment effects to be attributed to CM. Sixty-nine reports met inclusion criteria and were categorized into 7 research trends: (1) extending CM to special populations, (2) parametric studies, (3) extending CM to community clinics, (4) combining CM with pharmacotherapies, (5) incorporating technology into CM, (6) investigating longer-term outcomes, (7) using CM as a research tool. The vast majority (59/69, 86%) of studies reported significant (p<0.05) during-treatment effects. Twenty-eight (28/59, 47%) of those studies included at least one follow-up visit after CM was discontinued, with eight (8/28, 29%) reporting significant (p<0.05) effects. Average effect size (Cohen's d) during treatment was 0.62 (95% CI: 0.54, 0.70) and post-treatment it was 0.26 (95% CI: 0.11, 0.41). Overall, the literature on voucher-based CM over the past 5years documents sustained growth, high treatment efficacy, moderate to large effect sizes during treatment that weaken but remain evident following treatment termination, and breadth across a diverse set of SUDs, populations, and settings consistent with and extending results from prior reviews.

A behavioral economic perspective on smoking persistence in serious mental illness

Serious mental illness (SMI) is associated with disproportionately high rates of cigarette smoking. The identification of factors that contribute to persistent smoking in people with SMI may lead to the development and adoption of tobacco control policies and treatment approaches that help these smokers quit. This commentary examines factors underlying smoking persistence in people with SMI from the perspective of behavioral economics, a discipline that applies economic principles to understanding drug abuse and dependence. Studies, conducted in the Northeastern US within the past 30years, that compare the reinforcing effects of nicotine and the costs of smoking in smokers with and without schizophrenia and depression are discussed, and interventions that may reduce the reinforcing efficacy of nicotine and increase the costs of smoking in people with SMI are described.

Tobacco Use, Use Disorders, and Smoking Cessation Interventions in Persons Living With HIV

Cigarette smoking remains highly prevalent among persons living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), estimated to be 40-75 %, and is significantly higher than what is observed among the general population. Health risks of smoking in this population include cardiovascular disease; bacterial pneumonia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and other respiratory conditions; lung cancer and other malignancies; adverse cognitive and neurological outcomes; low birth weight, preterm birth, and small-for-gestational-age infants; and overall mortality. Smokers with HIV now lose more life years to smoking than they do to the HIV itself. A majority of smokers living with HIV report being interested in cessation, and a significant proportion has made recent quit attempts. There is a general paucity of large, randomized controlled trials of smoking cessation interventions among smokers living with HIV, and among the existing research, cessation rates are suboptimal. Greater resources and effort should be allocated to developing and evaluating cessation treatment modalities for smokers living with HIV. Efforts to individualize and tailor treatments to address specific client needs and comorbidities are warranted. HIV care providers and other health professionals can play a key role in improving health among this population by regularly screening for smoking and promoting cessation.

Interventions to Address Medical Conditions and Health-Risk Behaviors Among Persons With Serious Mental Illness: A Comprehensive Review

People with serious mental illness (SMI) have mortality rates 2 to 3 times higher than the overall US population, largely due to cardiovascular disease. The prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors such as obesity and diabetes mellitus and other conditions, such as HIV/AIDS, is heightened in this group. Based on the recommendations of a National Institute of Mental Health stakeholder meeting, we conducted a comprehensive review examining the strength of the evidence surrounding interventions to address major medical conditions and health-risk behaviors among persons with SMI. Peer-reviewed studies were identified using 4 major research databases. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies testing interventions to address medical conditions and risk behaviors among persons with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder between January 2000 and June 2014 were included. Information was abstracted from each study by 2 trained reviewers, who also rated study quality using a standard tool. Following individual study review, the quality of the evidence (high, medium, low) and the effectiveness of various interventions were synthesized. 108 studies were included. The majority of studies examined interventions to address overweight/obesity (n = 80). The strength of the evidence was high for 4 interventions: metformin and behavioral interventions had beneficial effects on weight loss; and bupropion and varenicline reduced tobacco smoking. The strength of the evidence was low for most other interventions reviewed. Future studies should test long-term interventions to cardiovascular risk factors and health-risk behaviors. In addition, future research should study implementation strategies to effectively translate efficacious interventions into real-world settings.

Voucher-based contingency management and in-treatment behaviors in smoking cessation treatment

A high percentage of patients relapse within months following an attempt to quit smoking. For this reason, greater understanding of the determinants of successful smoking cessation is needed. The present study assessed the effect of Contingency Management (CM) combined with Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment (CBT) on certain in-treatment behaviors (treatment retention, in-treatment smoking abstinence, and weekly decrease of cotinine levels) and examined the effects of these in-treatment behaviors on smoking status at a 6-month follow-up. A total of 154 treatment-seeking patients in a community setting were randomly assigned to a CBT, CBT plus CM for Abstinence (CMA) or to a CBT plus CM for Shaping cessation (CMS) group. Both CBT + CM procedures improved the in-treatment behaviors compared to CBT alone. These in-treatment behaviors (particularly in-treatment smoking abstinence) were associated with long-term abstinence. The effect of CM on in-treatment behaviors may partially explain the positive long-term outcomes of this procedure. Our findings extend previous knowledge about the effect of CM on smoking behavior.

Effect of Brief Mindfulness Practice on Self-Reported Affect, Craving, and Smoking: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Using Ecological Momentary Assessment

INTRODUCTION

Despite efficacious pharmacological and behavioral treatments, most smokers attempt to quit without assistance and fail to quit. Mindfulness practice may be useful in smoking cessation.

METHODS

This ecological momentary assessment (EMA) study was a pilot parallel group randomized controlled trial of a brief mindfulness practice (Brief-MP) intervention on self-reported smoking behavior delivered to smokers on a Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) in the field. Adult community smokers (N = 44) were randomly assigned to a Brief-MP (n = 24) or Control (sham meditation; n = 20) group. Participants were instructed to smoke as much or as little as they liked. Participants carried a PDA for 2 weeks and were instructed to initiate 20 minutes of meditation (or control) training on the PDA daily, completing an assessment of cognitive and affective processes immediately afterwards. Additionally, they completed assessments at random times up to four times per day. Primary outcome variables were negative affect, craving, and cigarettes smoked per day, all self-reported.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven participants provided EMA data totaling 1874 assessments. Linear Mixed Model analyses on EMA data revealed that Brief-MP (vs. Control) reduced overall negative affect, F(1, 1798) = 13.8, P = .0002; reduced craving immediately post-meditation, (Group × Assessment Type interaction, F(2, 1796) = 12.3, P = .0001); and reduced cigarettes smoked per day over time (Group × Day interaction, F(1, 436) = 5.50, P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Brief-MP administered in the field reduced negative affect, craving, and cigarette use, suggesting it may be a useful treatment.

Cost-effectiveness of a voucher-based intervention for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Contingency management (CM) has been shown to be effective in reducing smoking consumption, but has traditionally been criticized for its costs.

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of using a voucher-based CM protocol added to a cognitive behavioral treatment (CBT) for smoking cessation among treatment-seeking patients from the general population.

METHODS

A total of 92 patients were randomly assigned to CBT or CBT plus CM for abstinence. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated by dividing the increase in costs by the increase in effects (continuous abstinence, longest duration of abstinence at 6-month follow-up and cotinine results during the treatment). An acceptability curve illustrated the statistical uncertainty surrounding the cost-effectiveness estimate. We also determined the optimum cost per participant for predicting the smoking status at 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

The average cost per participant in the CBT condition was €138.73 (US$ 150.23) as opposed to €411.61 (US$ 445.73) in the CBT plus CM condition (p < 0.01). The incremental cost of using voucher-based CM to increase the number of participants that maintained abstinence at 6-month follow-up by one extra participant was €68.22 (US$ 73.88), and to lengthen the longest duration of abstinence by 1 week was €53.92 (US$ 58.39). The incremental cost to obtain an extra cotinine-negative result was €181.90 (US$ 196.98).

CONCLUSION

Compared with CBT alone, the voucher-based protocol required additional costs but achieved significantly better outcomes. These results will allow stakeholders to make policy decisions about CM implementation for smoking cessation in the broader community.

Smoking cessation and reduction in people with chronic mental illness

The high prevalence of cigarette smoking and tobacco related morbidity and mortality in people with chronic mental illness is well documented. This review summarizes results from studies of smoking cessation treatments in people with schizophrenia, depression, anxiety disorders, and post-traumatic stress disorder. It also summarizes experimental studies aimed at identifying biopsychosocial mechanisms that underlie the high smoking rates seen in people with these disorders. Research indicates that smokers with chronic mental illness can quit with standard cessation approaches with minimal effects on psychiatric symptoms. Although some studies have noted high relapse rates, longer maintenance on pharmacotherapy reduces rates of relapse without untoward effects on psychiatric symptoms. Similar biopsychosocial mechanisms are thought to be involved in the initiation and persistence of smoking in patients with different disorders. An appreciation of these common factors may aid the development of novel tobacco treatments for people with chronic mental illness. Novel nicotine and tobacco products such as electronic cigarettes and very low nicotine content cigarettes may also be used to improve smoking cessation rates in people with chronic mental illness.

Mental health starts with physical health: current status and future directions of non-pharmacological interventions to improve physical health in first-episode psychosis

People with psychotic disorders have reduced life expectancy compared with the general population. This difference is primarily due to increased prevalence of cardiovascular disease associated with antipsychotic drugs and with modifiable risk factors, including weight gain, low exercise, poor diet, and high prevalence of cigarette smoking. We review non-pharmacological interventions for physical health behaviour in patients with chronic and first-episode psychosis. Our findings suggest that weight loss and attenuation of weight gain are achievable but limited and might not persist beyond the end of an intervention. Evidence for smoking cessation interventions is scarce. The case for early intervention to prevent deterioration of physical health is strong. We propose a framework for development of interventions, which addresses three main factors largely absent in previous research: (1) examination of aetiological factors related to poor physical health, (2) theory-driven interventions that target aetiological factors, and (3) assessment of feasibility.

Contingent vouchers and motivational interviewing for cigarette smokers in residential substance abuse treatment

Residential drug treatment provides an opportunity to intervene with smokers with substance use disorders (SUD). A randomized controlled clinical trial compared: (1) contingent vouchers (CV) for smoking abstinence to noncontingent vouchers (NCV), crossed with (2) motivational interviewing (MI) or brief advice (BA), for 184 smokers in SUD treatment. During the voucher period, 36% of carbon monoxide readings indicated smoking abstinence for those receiving CV versus 13% with NCV (p < .001). Post-treatment (3-9 months) point-prevalence abstinence rates were low (3-4% at each follow up), with more abstinence when CV was combined with MI (6.6% on average) than with BA (0% on average). No differential effects on drug use or motivation to quit smoking occurred. Thus, CV had limited effects on long-term smoking abstinence in this population but effects were improved when CV was combined with MI. More effective methods are needed to increase motivation to quit smoking and quit rates in this high-risk population.

Incentives for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Material or financial incentives are widely used in an attempt to precipitate or reinforce behaviour change, including smoking cessation. They operate in workplaces, in clinics and hospitals, and to a lesser extent within community programmes. In this third update of our review we now include trials conducted in pregnant women, to reflect the increasing activity and resources now targeting this high-risk group of smokers.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether incentives and contingency management programmes lead to higher long-term quit rates.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, with additional searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO. The most recent searches were in December 2014, although we also include two trials published in 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials, allocating individuals, workplaces, groups within workplaces, or communities to experimental or control conditions. We also considered controlled studies with baseline and post-intervention measures. We include studies in a mixed-population setting (e.g. community-, work-, institution-based), and also, for this update, trials in pregnant smokers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One author (KC) extracted data and a second (JH-B) checked them. We contacted study authors for additional data where necessary. The main outcome measure in the mixed-population studies was abstinence from smoking at longest follow-up, and at least six months from the start of the intervention. In the trials of pregnant smokers abstinence was measured at the longest follow-up, and at least to the end of the pregnancy.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-one mixed-population studies met our inclusion criteria, covering more than 8400 participants. Ten studies were set in clinics or health centres, one in Thai villages served by community health workers, two in academic institutions, and the rest in worksites. All but six of the trials were run in the USA. The incentives included lottery tickets or prize draws, cash payments, vouchers for goods and groceries, and in six trials the recovery of money deposited by those taking part. The odds ratio (OR) for quitting with incentives at longest follow-up (six months or more) compared with controls was 1.42 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.69; 17 trials, [20 comparisons], 7715 participants). Only three studies demonstrated significantly higher quit rates for the incentives group than for the control group at or beyond the six-month assessment: One five-arm USA trial compared rewards- and deposit-based interventions at individual and group level, with incentives available up to USD 800 per quitter, and demonstrated a quit rate in the rewards groups of 8.1% at 12 months, compared with 4.7% in the deposits groups. A direct comparison between the rewards-based and the deposit-based groups found a benefit for the rewards arms, with an OR at 12 months of 1.76 (95% CI 1.22 to 2.53; 2070 participants). Although more people in this trial accepted the rewards programmes than the deposit programmes, the proportion of quitters in each group favoured the deposit-refund programme. Another USA study rewarded both participation and quitting up to USD 750, and achieved sustained quit rates of 9.4% in the incentives group compared with 3.6% for the controls. A deposit-refund trial in Thailand also achieved significantly higher quit rates in the intervention group (44.2%) compared with the control group (18.8%), but uptake was relatively low, at 10.5%. In the remaining trials, there was no clear evidence that participants who committed their own money to the programme did better than those who did not, or that contingent rewards enhanced success rates over fixed payment schedules. We rated the overall quality of the older studies as low, but with later trials (post-2000) more likely to meet current standards of methodology and reporting.Eight of nine trials with usable data in pregnant smokers (seven conducted in the USA and one in the UK) delivered an adjusted OR at longest follow-up (up to 24 weeks post-partum) of 3.60 (95% CI 2.39 to 5.43; 1295 participants, moderate-quality studies) in favour of incentives. Three of the trials demonstrated a clear benefit for contingent rewards; one delivered monthly vouchers to confirmed quitters and to their designated 'significant other supporter', achieving a quit rate in the intervention group of 21.4% at two months post-partum, compared with 5.9% among the controls. Another trial offered a scaled programme of rewards for the percentage of smoking reduction achieved over the course of the 12-week intervention, and achieved an intervention quit rate of 31% at six weeks post-partum, compared with no quitters in the control group. The largest (UK-based) trial provided intervention quitters with up to GBP 400-worth of vouchers, and achieved a quit rate of 15.4% at longest follow-up, compared to the control quit rate of 4%. Four trials confirmed that payments made to reward a successful quit attempt (i.e. contingent), compared to fixed payments for attending the antenatal appointment (non-contingent), resulted in higher quit rates. Front-loading of rewards to counteract early withdrawal symptoms made little difference to quit rates.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Incentives appear to boost cessation rates while they are in place. The two trials recruiting from work sites that achieved sustained success rates beyond the reward schedule concentrated their resources into substantial cash payments for abstinence. Such an approach may only be feasible where independently-funded smoking cessation programmes are already available, and within a relatively affluent and educated population. Deposit-refund trials can suffer from relatively low rates of uptake, but those who do sign up and contribute their own money may achieve higher quit rates than reward-only participants. Incentive schemes conducted among pregnant smokers improved the cessation rates, both at the end-of-pregnancy and post-partum assessments. Current and future research might continue to explore the scale, loading and longevity of possible cash or voucher reward schedules, within a variety of smoking populations.

Treatment of tobacco use disorders in smokers with serious mental illness: toward clinical best practices

Addiction to tobacco-derived nicotine remains highly prevalent in the United States, with 18% using daily, and 53% of those with serious mental illness using daily. While smokers with serious mental illness have been excluded from most large nicotine-dependence treatment studies, a growing evidence base is available to guide clinicians in assisting their patients with psychiatric illness to quit smoking. The aim of this review is to present the evidence on safety and efficacy of smoking cessation interventions for those with serious mental illness. Smokers with schizophrenia spectrum disorders should receive varenicline or bupropion with or without nicotine replacement therapy in combination with behavioral treatment. Although more research is needed, preliminary evidence suggests that varenicline in combination with behavioral support is efficacious and well tolerated for smoking cessation for those with bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder. Controlled trials have found no evidence that in patients with serious mental illness, the use of pharmacotherapeutic cessation aids worsens psychiatric symptoms or increases the rate of psychiatric adverse events. Converging evidence indicates that a majority of smokers with serious mental illness want to quit smoking and that available pharmacotherapeutic cessation aids combined with behavioral support are both effective for, and well tolerated by, these smokers.

Behavioral Interventions for Individuals Dually-Diagnosed with a Severe Mental Illness and a Substance Use Disorder

The prevalence of substance abuse among severely mentally ill individuals (SMI) with a schizophrenia-spectrum or bipolar disorder is about three times the rate of the general population. However, few effective interventions exist to address the problem. In this paper, we evaluate recent studies of behavioral interventions for substance abuse among SMI individuals. These include cognitive-behavioral, motivational interviewing, and contingency management interventions, as well as combinations thereof. Consistent with prior systematic reviews, ours indicates that no behavioral intervention has clearly demonstrated efficacy beyond that of usual care. Unfortunately, most of the reviewed studies suffer from methodological problems that hamper detection of treatment effects. Also, it can be argued that interventions tested thus far may not be well-suited for this cognitively-impaired population. A programmatic series of studies is needed to further develop and test behavioral interventions for treating substance abuse in this population.

Information and communication technology based prompting for treatment compliance for people with serious mental illness

BACKGROUND

Non-compliance is a significant problem among people with serious mental disorders, presenting a challenge for mental health professionals. Prompts such as telephone calls, visits, and a posted referral letter to patients are currently used to encourage patient attendance at clinics and/or compliance with medication. More recently, the use of information and communication technology (ICT)-based prompting methods have increased. Methods include mobile text message (SMS - short message service), e-mail or use of any other electronic device with the stated purpose of encouraging compliance.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effects of ICT-based prompting to support treatment compliance in people with serious mental illness compared with standard care.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register (31(st) May 2011 and 9(th) July 2012) which is based on regular searches of CINAHL, BIOSIS, AMED, EMBASE, PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and registries of clinical trials. Also, we inspected references of all identified studies for further trials and contacted authors of trials for additional information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Relevant randomised controlled trials involving adults with serious mental illness, comparing any ICT-based prompt or combination of prompts by automatic or semi-automatic system compared with standard care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors reliably assessed trial quality and extracted data. We calculated risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a fixed-effect model. For continuous outcomes, we estimated the mean difference (MD) between groups, again with 95% confidence intervals. A 'Summary of findings' table using GRADE was created, and we assessed included studies for risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

The search identified 35 references, with 25 studies, but we could only include two studies with a total of 358 participants. The studies had a moderate risk of bias, and therefore risk overestimating any positive effects of ICT-based prompting. Both included studies compared semi-automatised ICT-based prompting intervention with standard care groups in mental health outpatient care. The interventions were SMS-message and an electronic assistant device. One included study reported our primary outcome, compliance.There was not any clear evidence that ICT-based prompts increase improvement in compliance (stop taking medication within six months n = 320, RR 1.11 CI 0.96 to 1.29, moderate quality evidence). There was some low quality evidence that ICT-based prompts have small effects for: mental state (average change in specific symptom scores within three months n = 251, MD -0.30 CI -0.53 to -0.07; severity of illness within three months n = 251, MD -0.10 CI -0.13 to -0.07 and six months n = 251, MD -0.10 CI -0.13 to -0.07; average change in depressive scores within six months n = 251, RR 0.00 CI -0.28 to 0.28; global symptoms within three months n = 251, MD -0.10 CI -0.38 to -0.07; negative symptoms within three months n = 251, MD -0.10 CI -0.38 to 0.18 and six months n = 251, MD -0.30 CI -0.58 to 0.02, low quality evidence). Level of insight improved more among people receiving ICT-based prompt compared with those in the control group at six months (n = 251, MD -0.10 CI -0.13 to -0.07). ICT-based prompts also increased quality of life (average change in quality of life within six months n = 251, RR 0.50 CI 0.19 to 0.81, moderate quality evidence).Based on the existing data, there is no evidence that either intervention is less acceptable than the other (n = 347, 2 RCTs, RR 1.46 CI 0.70 to 3.05, low quality evidence). Included studies did not report outcomes of service utilisation, behaviour, costs or adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence base on the effects of ICT-based prompts is still inconclusive. Data to clarify ICT-based prompting effects are awaited from an ongoing trial, but further well-conducted trials considering the different ICT-based prompts are warranted.

EPA Guidance on Tobacco Dependence and Strategies for Smoking Cessation in People with Mental Illness

Tobacco dependence is the most common substance use disorder in adults with mental illness. The prevalence rates for tobacco dependence are two to four times higher in these patients than in the general population. Smoking has a strong, negative influence on the life expectancy and quality of life of mental health patients, and remains the leading preventable cause of death in this group. Despite these statistics, in some countries smokers with mental illness are disadvantaged in receiving intervention and support for their tobacco dependence, which is often overlooked or even tolerated. This statement from the European Psychiatric Association (EPA) systematically reviews the current evidence on tobacco dependence and withdrawal in patients with mental illness and their treatment. It provides seven recommendations for the core components of diagnostics and treatment in this patient group. These recommendations concern: (1) the recording process, (2) the timing of the intervention, (3) counselling specificities, (4) proposed treatments, (5) frequency of contact after stopping, (6) follow-up visits and (7) relapse prevention. They aim to help clinicians improve the care, health and well-being of patients suffering from mental illness.