The effects of self-regulation strategies following moderate intensity exercise on ad libitum smoking

Assessing the Impact of a Health Education Anti-Smoking Program for Students: A Follow-Up Investigation

In this follow-up study, we aimed to assess the effectiveness of the "I do not smoke, I exercise" anti-smoking preventive health education program. The program was based on the theory of planned behavior supplemented with life skills teaching and targeted at high school students. The intervention comprised ten one-hour online sessions, administered by physical education instructors. The study cohort comprised 222 students (109 boys, 113 girls) from 11 secondary schools, with an average age of 16.42 ± 1.36 years. Data collection involved pre- and post-intervention self-assessment questionnaires. The examined variables included attitudes towards smoking, intention to smoke, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control (PBC), knowledge about smoking, smoking behavior, exercise behavior, attitudes toward the program's implementation, and satisfaction with the program. A separate paired samples t-test revealed a significant improvement in students' knowledge about smoking (t217 = -5.605, p < 0.001, d = 0.38) and perceived behavioral control (t220 = -2.166, p < 0.05, d = 0.15) following the intervention. However, no significant changes were observed in the remaining variables. In addition, students' overall satisfaction with the implementation of the present health education program was high (M = 5.72 ± 1.39). These findings suggest that the health education smoking prevention intervention incorporates techniques and strategies that influence the perceived behavioral control variable, emphasizing students' strong interest in educationally theorized programs integrating technology into their design. Future studies should consider further examination of tobacco control strategies within the high school context.

Short Bouts of Physical Activity Are Associated with Reduced Smoking Withdrawal Symptoms, but Perceptions of Intensity May Be the Key

The primary aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a short bout (10 min) of moderate-intensity exercise to reduce withdrawal symptomatology, craving and negative affect; while the secondary aim was to assess how the effectiveness of a short bout of moderate exercise can be modulated by the perception of intensity in physically active and low-activity smokers. Fifty low-activity and physically active smokers were recruited (24 male and 26 female) and randomized in three different conditions. Prescribed (objective) moderate intensity (OBJ) and perceived moderate intensity (PER), and passive waiting (PW). After the intervention (T3), smokers reported less desire to smoke in the PER (p < 0.001) and OBJ (p < 0.001) conditions, relative to the PW condition. At T3 smokers in the PER condition reported less negative affect than smokers in the PW condition relative to the baseline (T1) (p < 0.007). Further, smokers in the PER condition reported less negative affect than smokers in the PW condition (p < 0.048). Physically active (PA) smokers perceived less exertion than low-activity (LA) smokers, and the effects were stronger in the PER condition relative to OBJ. Generally, our results suggest that a short bout of moderate exercise helps both LA and PA smokers. These findings provided a novel insight into the psychological mechanisms that affect the efficacy of the exercise in smoking cessation and suggest that exercise should be tailored according to individual perception of intensity.

Exercise interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Taking regular exercise, whether cardiovascular-type exercise or resistance exercise, may help people to give up smoking, particularly by reducing cigarette withdrawal symptoms and cravings, and by helping to manage weight gain.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of exercise-based interventions alone, or combined with a smoking cessation programme, for achieving long-term smoking cessation, compared with a smoking cessation intervention alone or other non-exercise intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register for studies, using the term 'exercise' or 'physical activity' in the title, abstract or keywords. The date of the most recent search was May 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that compared an exercise programme alone, or an exercise programme as an adjunct to a cessation programme, with a cessation programme alone or another non-exercise control group. Trials were required to recruit smokers wishing to quit or recent quitters, to assess abstinence as an outcome and have follow-up of at least six months.

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 (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for smoking cessation for each study, where possible. We grouped eligible studies according to the type of comparison, as either smoking cessation or relapse prevention. We carried out meta-analyses where appropriate, using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 24 eligible trials with a total of 7279 adult participants randomised. Two studies focused on relapse prevention among smokers who had recently stopped smoking, and the remaining 22 studies were concerned with smoking cessation for smokers who wished to quit. Eleven studies were with women only and one with men only. Most studies recruited fairly inactive people. Most of the trials employed supervised, group-based cardiovascular-type exercise supplemented by a home-based exercise programme and combined with a multi-session cognitive behavioural smoking cessation programme. The comparator in most cases was a multi-session cognitive behavioural smoking cessation programme alone. Overall, we judged two studies to be at low risk of bias, 11 at high risk of bias, and 11 at unclear risk of bias. Among the 21 studies analysed, we found low-certainty evidence, limited by potential publication bias and by imprecision, comparing the effect of exercise plus smoking cessation support with smoking cessation support alone on smoking cessation outcomes (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.22; I² = 0%; 6607 participants). We excluded one study from this analysis as smoking abstinence rates for the study groups were not reported. There was no evidence of subgroup differences according to the type of exercise promoted; the subgroups considered were: cardiovascular-type exercise alone (17 studies), resistance training alone (one study), combined cardiovascular-type and resistance exercise (one study) and type of exercise not specified (two studies). The results were not significantly altered when we excluded trials with high risk of bias, or those with special populations, or those where smoking cessation intervention support was not matched between the intervention and control arms. Among the two relapse prevention studies, we found very low-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias and imprecision, that adding exercise to relapse prevention did not improve long-term abstinence compared with relapse prevention alone (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.47; I² = 0%; 453 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence that adding exercise to smoking cessation support improves abstinence compared with support alone, but the evidence is insufficient to assess whether there is a modest benefit. Estimates of treatment effect were of low or very low certainty, because of concerns about bias in the trials, imprecision and publication bias. Consequently, future trials may change these conclusions.