Promoting smoking cessation among parents: effects on smoking-related cognitions and smoking initiation in children

Predicting Young Adult Tobacco, Drug and Alcohol Use Among Participants in the CAMP Trial

The development of substance abuse in youth with asthma have seldom been examined with longitudinal research. The prospective and well-characterized CAMP cohort provides outcome data on youth with asthma over 13 years. This manuscript seeks to determine the contributions of asthma features and child behavioral/emotional functioning to subsequent tobacco, alcohol, and drug use in early adulthood. Childhood smoking exposures as well as parent report and youth report of substance use were prospectively assessed concurrently with assessments of asthma symptoms, study medication, and lung development. Logistic regression models evaluated predictors of adolescent and young adult tobacco, alcohol, and drug use. Use of tobacco products was reported by 33% of youth with mild/moderate asthma. Tobacco use was significantly associated with self-reported externalizing behaviors. Early life passive smoke exposure, especially in utero exposure, makes a significant contribution to tobacco use (OR1.58). Greater risk for tobacco use is conveyed by self-reported externalizing behaviors, which are consistently robust predictors of any future use of tobacco products, alcohol and drugs. These findings provide evidence for health care providers to use routine behavioral screening in youth with asthma.

Promoting smoking cessation in the paediatric respiratory clinic

Exposure to tobacco smoke is harmful to children and young people (CYP). There is, to our knowledge, no published evidence quantifying the success of smoking cessation interventions targeted at both CYP and their parents or guardians in paediatric respiratory clinics. We offered 102 participants smoking cessation advice, using motivational interviewing and exhaled carbon monoxide measurements to help them quit smoking. In total, 16 of 102 participants quit smoking, with 4 lost to follow-up. A further 40 participants cut down on how much they smoked.

CONCLUSION

Formal screening questions on smoking and the provision of smoking cessation advice should form a regular part of all respiratory clinics where CYP and their parents are seen. Simple smoking cessation interventions can lead to reduced smoking in this population.

WHAT IS KNOWN

• Tobacco smoking is strongly associated with significant morbidity and mortality. • Adolescents with chronic respiratory diseases may themselves smoke, or may have parents who do so.

WHAT IS NEW

• Smoking cessation interventions are well received in paediatric respiratory clinic by patients and their families. • Simple smoking cessation interventions can help young people and their parents to stop smoking or cut down on smoking.

Primary Care-Relevant Interventions for Tobacco and Nicotine Use Prevention and Cessation in Children and Adolescents: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Interventions to discourage the use of tobacco products (including electronic nicotine delivery systems or e-cigarettes) among children and adolescents may help decrease tobacco-related illness and injury.

OBJECTIVE

To update the 2013 review on primary care-relevant interventions for tobacco use prevention and cessation in children and adolescents to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.

DATA SOURCES

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MEDLINE, PsyINFO, and EMBASE (September 1, 2012, to June 25, 2019), with surveillance through February 7, 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Primary care-relevant studies; randomized clinical trials and nonrandomized controlled intervention studies of children and adolescents up to age 18 years for cessation and age 25 years for prevention. Trials comparing behavioral or pharmacological interventions with no or a minimal tobacco use intervention control group (eg, usual care, attention control, wait list) were included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

One investigator abstracted data and a second investigator checked data abstraction for accuracy. Two investigators independently assessed study quality. Studies were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Tobacco use initiation; tobacco use cessation; health outcomes; harms.

RESULTS

Twenty-four randomized clinical trials (N = 44 521) met inclusion criteria. Behavioral interventions were associated with decreased likelihood of cigarette smoking initiation compared with control interventions at 7 to 36 months' follow-up (13 trials, n = 21 700; 7.4% vs 9.2%; relative risk [RR], 0.82 [95% CI, 0.73-0.92]). There was no statistically significant difference between behavioral interventions and controls in smoking cessation when trials were restricted to smokers (9 trials, n = 2516; 80.7% vs 84.1% continued smoking; RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.93-1.01]). There were no significant benefits of medication on likelihood of smoking cessation in 2 trials of bupropion at 26 weeks (n = 523; 17% [300 mg] and 6% [150 mg] vs 10% [placebo]; 24% [150 mg] vs 28% [placebo]) and 1 trial of nicotine replacement therapy at 12 months (n = 257; 8.1% vs 8.2%). One trial each (n = 2586 and n = 1645) found no beneficial intervention effect on health outcomes or on adult smoking. No trials of prevention in young adults were identified. Few trials addressed prevention or cessation of tobacco products other than cigarettes; no trials evaluated effects of interventions on e-cigarette use. There were few trials of pharmacotherapy, and they had small sample sizes.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Behavioral interventions may reduce the likelihood of smoking initiation in nonsmoking children and adolescents. Research is needed to identify effective behavioral interventions for adolescents who smoke cigarettes or who use other tobacco products and to understand the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy.

Primary Care Interventions for Prevention and Cessation of Tobacco Use in Children and Adolescents: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Tobacco use is the leading cause of preventable death in the US. An estimated annual 480 000 deaths are attributable to tobacco use in adults, including from secondhand smoke. It is estimated that every day about 1600 youth aged 12 to 17 years smoke their first cigarette and that about 5.6 million adolescents alive today will die prematurely from a smoking-related illness. Although conventional cigarette use has gradually declined among children in the US since the late 1990s, tobacco use via electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) is quickly rising and is now more common among youth than cigarette smoking. e-Cigarette products usually contain nicotine, which is addictive, raising concerns about e-cigarette use and nicotine addiction in children. Exposure to nicotine during adolescence can harm the developing brain, which may affect brain function and cognition, attention, and mood; thus, minimizing nicotine exposure from any tobacco product in youth is important.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2013 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on the benefits and harms of primary care interventions for tobacco use prevention and cessation in children and adolescents. The current systematic review newly included e-cigarettes as a tobacco product.

POPULATION

This recommendation applies to school-aged children and adolescents younger than 18 years.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that primary care-feasible behavioral interventions, including education or brief counseling, to prevent tobacco use in school-aged children and adolescents have a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that there is insufficient evidence to determine the balance of benefits and harms of primary care interventions for tobacco cessation among school-aged children and adolescents who already smoke, because of a lack of adequately powered studies on behavioral counseling interventions and a lack of studies on medications.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends that primary care clinicians provide interventions, including education or brief counseling, to prevent initiation of tobacco use among school-aged children and adolescents. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of primary care-feasible interventions for the cessation of tobacco use among school-aged children and adolescents. (I statement).

Motivational interviewing for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Motivational Interviewing (MI) is a directive patient-centred style of counselling, designed to help people to explore and resolve ambivalence about behaviour change. It was developed as a treatment for alcohol abuse, but may help people to a make a successful attempt to stop smoking.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of MI for smoking cessation compared with no treatment, in addition to another form of smoking cessation treatment, and compared with other types of smoking cessation treatment. We also investigated whether more intensive MI is more effective than less intensive MI for smoking cessation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register for studies using the term motivat* NEAR2 (interview* OR enhanc* OR session* OR counsel* OR practi* OR behav*) in the title or abstract, or motivation* as a keyword. We also searched trial registries to identify unpublished studies. Date of the most recent search: August 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in which MI or its variants were offered to smokers to assist smoking cessation. We excluded trials that did not assess cessation as an outcome, with follow-up less than six months, and with additional non-MI intervention components not matched between arms. We excluded trials in pregnant women as these are covered elsewhere.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods. Smoking cessation was measured after at least six months, using the most rigorous definition available, on an intention-to-treat basis. We calculated risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for smoking cessation for each study, where possible. We grouped eligible studies according to the type of comparison. We carried out meta-analyses where appropriate, using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models. We extracted data on mental health outcomes and quality of life and summarised these narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 37 eligible studies involving over 15,000 participants who smoked tobacco. The majority of studies recruited participants with particular characteristics, often from groups of people who are less likely to seek support to stop smoking than the general population. Although a few studies recruited participants who intended to stop smoking soon or had no intentions to quit, most recruited a population without regard to their intention to quit. MI was conducted in one to 12 sessions, with the total duration of MI ranging from five to 315 minutes across studies. We judged four of the 37 studies to be at low risk of bias, and 11 to be at high risk, but restricting the analysis only to those studies at low or unclear risk did not significantly alter results, apart from in one case - our analysis comparing higher to lower intensity MI.We found low-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias and imprecision, comparing the effect of MI to no treatment for smoking cessation (RR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.12; I² = 0%; adjusted N = 684). One study was excluded from this analysis as the participants recruited (incarcerated men) were not comparable to the other participants included in the analysis, resulting in substantial statistical heterogeneity when all studies were pooled (I² = 87%). Enhancing existing smoking cessation support with additional MI, compared with existing support alone, gave an RR of 1.07 (95% CI 0.85 to 1.36; adjusted N = 4167; I² = 47%), and MI compared with other forms of smoking cessation support gave an RR of 1.24 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.69; I² = 54%; N = 5192). We judged both of these estimates to be of low certainty due to heterogeneity and imprecision. Low-certainty evidence detected a benefit of higher intensity MI when compared with lower intensity MI (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.37; adjusted N = 5620; I² = 0%). The evidence was limited because three of the five studies in this comparison were at risk of bias. Excluding them gave an RR of 1.00 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.54; I² = n/a; N = 482), changing the interpretation of the results.Mental health and quality of life outcomes were reported in only one study, providing little evidence on whether MI improves mental well-being.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to show whether or not MI helps people to stop smoking compared with no intervention, as an addition to other types of behavioural support for smoking cessation, or compared with other types of behavioural support for smoking cessation. It is also unclear whether more intensive MI is more effective than less intensive MI. All estimates of treatment effect were of low certainty because of concerns about bias in the trials, imprecision and inconsistency. Consequently, future trials are likely to change these conclusions. There is almost no evidence on whether MI for smoking cessation improves mental well-being.

The longitudinal, bidirectional relationships between parent reports of child secondhand smoke exposure and child smoking trajectories

This study examines the longitudinal relationships between child smoking and secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe). Participants were 222 parent-child dyads. The parents smoked, had a child with (48%) or without asthma, and were enrolled in a smoking/health intervention. Parent-reported child SHSe was measured at baseline and 4, 6, and 12-month follow-ups; self-reported child smoking was assessed at these points and at 2-months. A parallel process growth model was used. Baseline child SHSe and smoking were correlated (r = 0.30). Changes in child SHSe and child smoking moved in tandem as evidenced by a correlation between the linear slopes of child smoking and SHSe (r = 0.32), and a correlation between the linear slope of child smoking and the quadratic slope of child SHSe (r = - 0.44). Results may inform interventions with the potential to reduce child SHSe and smoking among children at increased risk due to their exposure to parental smoking.

Smokers who have children with asthma: Perceptions about child secondhand smoke exposure and tobacco use initiation and parental willingness to participate in child-focused tobacco interventions

OBJECTIVE

This study examined, among parents who smoke and have children with asthma, perceptions about child secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe), child tobacco use (TU) initiation, and parent willingness to participate in child-focused tobacco interventions.

METHODS

Participants were 300 caregivers who smoked and had a child with asthma (aged 10-14). Parents completed an online survey and self-reported perceptions about child SHSe elimination, child TU prevention, and willingness to participate in three types of interventions with and without their child (SHSe reduction intervention, tobacco prevention intervention, and the combination of the two). Correlates of perceptions and willingness were examined.

RESULTS

Parents who were ready to quit smoking and who reported home smoking bans (HSBs) were more motivated to eliminate SHSe (p < 0.05). Being white, younger, ready to quit, and having HSBs were associated with greater confidence to eliminate SHSe (p < 0.05). Parents with HSBs reported higher perceived importance about preventing child TU (p < 0.05). Parents were less confident about preventing male children from using tobacco (p = 0.001). Parents were highly willing to participate in all the described intervention approaches, with or without their child.

CONCLUSIONS

Parents were willing to participate in child-focused tobacco interventions, with or without their child with asthma, including interventions that address both child SHSe and TU prevention. This research demonstrates the acceptability of child-focused tobacco interventions among a high-risk population and may be a foundational step for intervention development.

Family-focussed interventions to reduce harm from smoking in primary school-aged children: A systematic review of evaluative studies

Children living in families where adults smoke are exposed to harmful effects of tobacco smoke and risk a predisposition to smoking initiation. Interventions to support families to reduce risk of harm from smoking have been developed and tested. The purpose of this review is to identify effective family-based interventions used to promote smoke-free home environments in families with primary school age children (aged 5-12years). A systematic search of MEDLINE, Cochrane and CINAHL electronic databases was conducted. Narrative synthesis of included articles was completed. Guidelines for reporting behaviour change interventions were used to summarise and compare intervention timing, content, intensity and delivery. Quality of included studies was critiqued using United States Preventative Services Taskforce (USPST) procedures for internal and external validity. Narrative synthesis was based on methods described by Popay and colleagues. Nineteen articles that evaluated 14 intervention studies focussed on child smoking prevention (n=5), parent smoking cessation (n=4) and environmental tobacco smoke reduction (n=6). Interventions and outcomes were heterogeneous, and were rarely informed by theoretical frameworks relating to family, parenting or child development. Family based interventions may be an important strategy to reduce the effects of smoking for children. There is a need for interventions to be informed by theory relevant to children, parenting and families.