Oral health 4 life: Design and methods of a semi-pragmatic randomized trial to promote oral health care and smoking abstinence among tobacco quitline callers

Impact of a novel oral health promotion program on routine oral hygiene among socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers: results from a randomized semi-pragmatic trial

Smokers are at high risk of oral disease and report sub-optimal oral hygiene. Improving smokers’ oral hygiene could reduce their future disease risk. The purpose of this study is to assess the effects of a novel, multi-modal oral health promotion program (Oral Health 4 Life; OH4L) targeted to socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers and delivered through state-funded tobacco quitlines. Smokers (n = 718) were randomized to standard quitline care or standard care plus OH4L. OH4L recipients received a comprehensive behavioral intervention and were advised of the benefits of routine oral hygiene, encouraged to brush and floss daily (for better oral health and to manage cigarette cravings), and provided a toothbrush and floss. Participants were followed for 6 months to assess the intervention effects on routine oral hygiene (brushing and flossing) and changes in motivation and self-efficacy. Data were collected between 2015 and 2017. At 2-month follow-up, OH4L participants were more likely to meet the American Dental Association (ADA) recommendations for brushing twice daily (adjusted RR = 1.15 [1.04, 1.27], p = .006), flossing daily (adjusted RR = 1.20 [1.03, 1.39], p = .02), and for both brushing and flossing (adjusted RR = 1.33 [1.10, 1.61], p = .003). Daily flossing was more likely at 6-month follow-up (adjusted RR = 1.21 [1.04, 1.42], p = .02) among OH4L participants. The change in self-efficacy and motivation for daily flossing from baseline to 2 months was significantly greater among OH4L participants and mediated the intervention effect on flossing at 6 months. Integrating oral hygiene promotion with standard tobacco quitline services improved oral health self-care.

Bayesian Network Meta-analysis of Multiple Outcomes in Dental Research

OBJECTIVES

Dental research typically targets multiple outcomes. Interdental cleaning devices such as interdental brushes (IB) and water jet devices (WJ) share a sizable portion of the medical device market. However, recommendations for device selection are limited by the conflicting evidence from multiple outcomes in available studies and the lack of an appropriate synthesis approach to summarize evidences taken from multiple outcomes. In particular, both pairwise meta-analyses and single-outcome network meta-analyses can give discordant results. The purpose of this multioutcome, Bayesian network meta-analysis is to introduce this innovative method to the dental research community using data from interdental cleaning device studies for illustrative purposes.

METHODS

We reanalyzed a network meta-analysis of interproximal oral hygiene methods in the reduction of clinical indices of inflammation, which included 22 trials assessing 10 interproximal oral hygiene aids. We focused on the primary outcome of gingival inflammation, which was measured by 2 correlated outcome variables, the Gingival Index (GI) and bleeding on probing (BOP).

RESULTS

In our previous single-outcome analysis, we concluded that IB and WJ rank high for reducing gingival inflammation while toothpick and flossing rank last. In this multioutcome Bayesian network meta-analysis with equal weight on GI and BOP, the surface under the cumulative ranking curve was 0.87 for WJ and 0.85 for IB. WJ and IB remained ranked as the 2 best devices across different sets of weightings for the GI and BOP.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, multioutcome Bayesian network meta-analysis naturally takes the correlations among multiple outcomes into account, which in turn can provide more comprehensive evidence.

Telephone counselling for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Telephone services can provide information and support for smokers. Counselling may be provided proactively or offered reactively to callers to smoking cessation helplines.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of telephone support to help smokers quit, including proactive or reactive counselling, or the provision of other information to smokers calling a helpline.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the ICTRP for studies of telephone counselling, using search terms including 'hotlines' or 'quitline' or 'helpline'. Date of the most recent search: May 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials which offered proactive or reactive telephone counselling to smokers to assist smoking cessation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We pooled studies using a random-effects model and assessed statistical heterogeneity amongst subgroups of clinically comparable studies using the I² statistic. In trials including smokers who did not call a quitline, we used meta-regression to investigate moderation of the effect of telephone counselling by the planned number of calls in the intervention, trial selection of participants that were motivated to quit, and the baseline support provided together with telephone counselling (either self-help only, brief face-to-face intervention, pharmacotherapy, or financial incentives).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 104 trials including 111,653 participants that met the inclusion criteria. Participants were mostly adult smokers from the general population, but some studies included teenagers, pregnant women, and people with long-term or mental health conditions. Most trials (58.7%) were at high risk of bias, while 30.8% were at unclear risk, and only 11.5% were at low risk of bias for all domains assessed. Most studies (100/104) assessed proactive telephone counselling, as opposed to reactive forms.Among trials including smokers who contacted helplines (32,484 participants), quit rates were higher for smokers receiving multiple sessions of proactive counselling (risk ratio (RR) 1.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.61; 14 trials, 32,484 participants; I² = 72%) compared with a control condition providing self-help materials or brief counselling in a single call. Due to the substantial unexplained heterogeneity between studies, we downgraded the certainty of the evidence to moderate.In studies that recruited smokers who did not call a helpline, the provision of telephone counselling increased quit rates (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.35; 65 trials, 41,233 participants; I² = 52%). Due to the substantial unexplained heterogeneity between studies, we downgraded the certainty of the evidence to moderate. In subgroup analysis, we found no evidence that the effect of telephone counselling depended upon whether or not other interventions were provided (P = 0.21), no evidence that more intensive support was more effective than less intensive (P = 0.43), or that the effect of telephone support depended upon whether or not people were actively trying to quit smoking (P = 0.32). However, in meta-regression, telephone counselling was associated with greater effectiveness when provided as an adjunct to self-help written support (P < 0.01), or to a brief intervention from a health professional (P = 0.02); telephone counselling was less effective when provided as an adjunct to more intensive counselling. Further, telephone support was more effective for people who were motivated to try to quit smoking (P = 0.02). The findings from three additional trials of smokers who had not proactively called a helpline but were offered telephone counselling, found quit rates were higher in those offered three to five telephone calls compared to those offered just one call (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.44; 2602 participants; I² = 0%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that proactive telephone counselling aids smokers who seek help from quitlines, and moderate-certainty evidence that proactive telephone counselling increases quit rates in smokers in other settings. There is currently insufficient evidence to assess potential variations in effect from differences in the number of contacts, type or timing of telephone counselling, or when telephone counselling is provided as an adjunct to other smoking cessation therapies. Evidence was inconclusive on the effect of reactive telephone counselling, due to a limited number studies, which reflects the difficulty of studying this intervention.

Factors associated with future dental care utilization among low-income smokers overdue for dental visits

BACKGROUND

Smokers are at increased risk of oral disease. While routine dental care can help prevent and treat oral health problems, smokers have far lower rates of dental care utilization compared with non-smokers. We sought to better understand which factors may facilitate or hinder dental care utilization among low-income smokers participating in a randomized intervention trial in order to inform future intervention planning.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of data collected between 2015 and 2017 as part of the OralHealth4Life trial. Participants were eligible callers to the Louisiana, Nebraska, and Oregon state tobacco quitlines who had no dental appointment in the prior or upcoming six months. We examined the association between participants' baseline characteristics and their receiving professional dental care between baseline and the 6-month follow-up survey.

RESULTS

Participants were racially diverse (42% non-White) and two-thirds had an annual household income under $20,000. Most (86.7%) had not had a dental cleaning in more than one year. Commonly cited barriers to dental care included cost (83.7%) and no dental insurance (78.1%). Those with dental insurance were more likely to see a dentist at follow-up (RR 1.66). Similarly, those reporting a dental insurance barrier to care were less likely to see a dentist at follow-up (RR 0.69); however, there was no significant utilization difference between those reporting a cost barrier vs. those who did not. After controlling for these financial factors, the following baseline characteristics were significantly associated with a higher likelihood of dental care utilization at 6 months: higher motivation (RR 2.16) and self-efficacy (RR 1.80) to visit the dentist, having a disability (RR 1.63), having a higher education level (RR 1.52), and having perceived gum disease (RR 1.49). Factors significantly associated with a lower likelihood of dental care utilization included being married (RR 0.68) and not having a last dental cleaning within the past year (RR 0.47).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide important insight into factors that may facilitate or deter use of professional dental care among low-income smokers. This information could inform the development of future interventions to promote dental care utilization.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT02347124 ; registered 27 January 2015.

Oral Health Promotion and Smoking Cessation Program Delivered via Tobacco Quitlines: The Oral Health 4 Life Trial

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of a novel oral health promotion program (Oral Health 4 Life; OH4L) delivered through state-funded tobacco quitlines.

METHODS

Using a semipragmatic design to balance experimental control and generalizability, we randomized US quitline callers (n = 718) to standard care or standard care plus OH4L. We followed participants for 6 months to assess effects on professional dental care and smoking abstinence. We collected data between 2015 and 2017.

RESULTS

Participants were racially diverse (42% non-White) and socioeconomically disadvantaged. Most (71%) reported fair or poor oral health, and all were overdue for routine dental care. At 6 months, professional dental care and abstinence did not significantly differ between arms, but abstinence favored the experimental arm and was significantly higher among experimental participants at 2 months in a complete case sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

OH4L was not effective for promoting dental care, but integrating oral health counseling with quitline counseling may offer some advantage for smoking cessation. Public Health Implications. We offer a model for conducting semipragmatic trials and partnering with tobacco quitlines to evaluate population-level public health interventions.