A randomized controlled trial of a smoking cessation self-help intervention for Spanish-speaking Hispanic/Latinx smokers: Study design and baseline characteristics

Development and evaluation of health education resources for culturally and linguistically diverse populations: a systematic review

People from culturally and linguistically diverse (CaLD) backgrounds in Australia generally experience poorer health outcomes, explained in part by low levels of health literacy. We conducted a systematic review to examine the development and evaluation of health education resources designed for CaLD populations. Five electronic databases were searched for English language, peer-reviewed studies published between 1980 and 2020. Thirty-four studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-four different health education resources were described and broadly categorized into four types: media campaigns (n = 10), text-based materials (n = 5), films (n = 8) and radio (n = 1). Studies were assessed against domains adapted from a health literacy guideline incorporating: need, collaboration, audience, health literacy, theory, test and process and impact evaluation. All but one study met the majority of the domains. All studies reported positive evaluation outcomes; this may be due to studies involving community early in resource design and including health literacy considerations in their design. Reporting resource design and evaluation against standard practice controls is recommended to build a more robust evidence base for developing effective health education resources for use by audiences from CaLD backgrounds.

Interventions for improving health literacy in migrants

BACKGROUND

Health literacy (HL) is a determinant of health and important for autonomous decision-making. Migrants are at high risk for limited HL. Improving HL is important for equitable promotion of migrants' health.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions for improving HL in migrants. To assess whether female or male migrants respond differently to the identified interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We ran electronic searches to 2 February 2022 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo and CINAHL. We also searched trial registries. We used a study filter for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (RCT classifier).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs and cluster-RCTs addressing HL either as a concept or its components (access, understand, appraise, apply health information).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane and followed the PRISMA-E guidelines. Outcome categories were: a) HL, b) quality of life (QoL), c) knowledge, d) health outcomes, e) health behaviour, f) self-efficacy, g) health service use and h) adverse events. We conducted meta-analysis where possible, and reported the remaining results as a narrative synthesis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 28 RCTs and six cluster-RCTs (8249 participants), all conducted in high-income countries. Participants were migrants with a wide range of conditions. All interventions were adapted to culture, language and literacy. We did not find evidence that HL interventions cause harm, but only two studies assessed adverse events (e.g. anxiety). Many studies reported results for short-term assessments (less than six weeks after total programme completion), reported here. For several comparisons, there were also findings at later time points, which are presented in the review text. Compared with no HL intervention (standard care/no intervention) or an unrelated HL intervention (similar intervention but different information topic) Self-management programmes (SMP) probably improve self-efficacy slightly (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 0.50; 2 studies, 333 participants; moderate certainty). SMP may improve HIV-related HL (understanding (mean difference (MD) 4.25, 95% CI 1.32 to 7.18); recognition of HIV terms (MD 3.32, 95% CI 1.28 to 5.36)) (1 study, 69 participants). SMP may slightly improve health behaviours (3 studies, 514 participants), but may have little or no effect on knowledge (2 studies, 321 participants) or subjective health status (MD 0.38, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.89; 1 study, 69 participants) (low certainty). We are uncertain of the effects of SMP on QoL, health service use or adverse events due to a lack of evidence. HL skills building courses (HLSBC) may improve knowledge (MD 10.87, 95% CI 5.69 to 16.06; 2 studies, 111 participants) and any generic HL (SMD 0.48, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.75; 2 studies, 229 participants), but may have little or no effect on depression literacy (MD 0.17, 95% CI -1.28 to 1.62) or any health behaviour (2 studies, 229 participants) (low certainty). We are uncertain if HLSBC improve QoL, health outcomes, health service use, self-efficacy or adverse events, due to very low-certainty or a lack of evidence. Audio-/visual education without personal feedback (AVE) probably improves depression literacy (MD 8.62, 95% CI 7.51 to 9.73; 1 study, 202 participants) and health service use (MD -0.59, 95% CI -1.11 to -0.07; 1 study, 157 participants), but probably has little or no effect on health behaviour (risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.25; 1 study, 135 participants) (moderate certainty). AVE may improve self-efficacy (MD 3.51, 95% CI 2.53 to 4.49; 1 study, 133 participants) and may slightly improve knowledge (MD 8.44, 95% CI -2.56 to 19.44; 2 studies, 293 participants) and intention to seek depression treatment (MD 1.8, 95% CI 0.43 to 3.17), with little or no effect on depression (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.10) (low certainty). No evidence was found for QoL and adverse events. Adapted medical instruction may improve understanding of health information (3 studies, 478 participants), with little or no effect on medication adherence (MD 0.5, 95% CI -0.1 to 1.1; 1 study, 200 participants) (low certainty). No evidence was found for QoL, health outcomes, knowledge, health service use, self-efficacy or adverse events. Compared with written information on the same topic SMP probably improves health numeracy slightly (MD 0.7, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.25) and probably improves print literacy (MD 9, 95% CI 2.9 to 15.1; 1 study, 209 participants) and self-efficacy (SMD 0.47, 95% CI 0.3 to 0.64; 4 studies, 552 participants) (moderate certainty). SMP may improve any disease-specific HL (SMD 0.67, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.07; 4 studies, 955 participants), knowledge (MD 11.45, 95% CI 4.75 to 18.15; 6 studies, 1101 participants) and some health behaviours (4 studies, 797 participants), with little or no effect on health information appraisal (MD 1.15, 95% CI -0.23 to 2.53; 1 study, 329 participants) (low certainty). We are uncertain whether SMP improves QoL, health outcomes, health service use or adverse events, due to a lack of evidence or low/very low-certainty evidence. AVE probably has little or no effect on diabetes HL (MD 2, 95% CI -0.15 to 4.15; 1 study, 240 participants), but probably improves information appraisal (MD -9.88, 95% CI -12.87 to -6.89) and application (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.77) (1 study, 608 participants; moderate certainty). AVE may slightly improve knowledge (MD 8.35, 95% CI -0.32 to 17.02; low certainty). No short-term evidence was found for QoL, depression, health behaviour, self-efficacy, health service use or adverse events. AVE compared with another AVE We are uncertain whether narrative videos are superior to factual knowledge videos as the evidence is of very low certainty. Gender differences Female migrants' diabetes HL may improve slightly more than that of males, when receiving AVE (MD 5.00, 95% CI 0.62 to 9.38; 1 study, 118 participants), but we do not know whether female or male migrants benefit differently from other interventions due to very low-certainty or a lack of evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Adequately powered studies measuring long-term effects (more than six months) of HL interventions in female and male migrants are needed, using well-validated tools and representing various healthcare systems.

Hispanic/Latinx individuals' attributions for abstinence and smoking: A content analysis of open-ended responses from a randomized cessation trial

Introduction

Little is known about facilitators and barriers to smoking cessation among Hispanics seeking treatment. This secondary analysis examined attributions for abstinence or smoking among participants in a nationwide randomized controlled trial testing a self-help smoking cessation intervention among Spanish-speaking Hispanics in the United States (US).

Methods

At each follow-up assessment (6, 12, 18, and 24 months), participants (N = 1,417) responded to open-ended items regarding reasons for either abstinence or smoking. A content analysis was conducted using NVivo on the responses from 1,035 participants.

Results

Mood Management (e.g., stress and anxiety) was the most frequent reason for smoking across all timepoints. Concern for personal health and wellbeing was the most frequent reason cited for abstinence across all timepoints. Important barriers (e.g., financial stressors, environmental disasters) and facilitators (e.g., family, faith) were also identified. Quantitative subgroup analyses revealed differences in the frequency of abstinence and smoking attributions by sex, marital status, and annual household income.

Conclusion

The identified facilitators and barriers to abstinence support and expand findings from previous studies by using a geographically and ethnically diverse sample of treatment seeking, Spanish-preferring smokers. They also provide specific targets for tailoring cessation and relapse prevention interventions designed to improve cessation outcomes and reduce tobacco-related health disparities among Hispanics in the US.

Ask-Advise-Connect: Differential Enrollment and Smoking Cessation Outcomes Between Primary Care Patients Who Received Quitline-Delivered Treatment in Spanish vs English

PURPOSE

This study examined differences in Quitline treatment enrollment, engagement, and smoking cessation outcomes among primary care patients preferring Spanish and English using the evidence-based tobacco treatment Ask-Advise-Connect.

METHODS

Ask-Advise-Connect was implemented April 2013 through February 2016 in a large safety-net health system to connect smokers with treatment via a link in the electronic health record. Rates of treatment enrollment, engagement, acceptance of nicotine replacement therapy, and smoking abstinence (self-reported and biochemically confirmed) were compared at 6 months among patients who received treatment in Spanish and English using χ ² tests. Logistic regression examined language and nicotine replacement therapy and their interaction as predictors of abstinence.

RESULTS

The smoking status of 218,915 patients was assessed and recorded in the electronic health record. Smoking prevalence was 8.4% among patients preferring Spanish and 27.0% among those preferring English. Spanish-preferring patients were less likely to enroll in treatment (10.7% vs 12.0%, χ ² = 12.06, P = .001) yet completed more counseling calls when enrolled (median = 2 vs 1, P <.001). Patients who received treatment in Spanish (vs English) were twice as likely to be abstinent at 6 months (self-reported: 25.1% vs 14.5%, odds ratio [OR] = 1.98, 95% CI, 1.62-2.40; biochemically confirmed: 7.6% vs 3.7%, OR = 2.13, 95% CI, 1.52-2.97). Receipt of nicotine replacement therapy increased abstinence for all patients and language did not interact with nicotine replacement therapy to predict abstinence.

CONCLUSIONS

Automated point-of-care approaches such as Ask-Advise-Connect have great potential to reach Spanish-preferring smokers. Those who received tobacco treatment in Spanish (vs English) demonstrated better engagement and cessation outcomes.

Hispanic/Latinx ethnic subgroup differences in sociodemographic, sociocultural, and smoking characteristics in a cessation trial: An exploratory study

INTRODUCTION

Hispanic/Latinx smokers in the United States are often treated as a homogeneous group. However, population-based studies suggest cigarette use differs among Hispanic/Latinx subgroups by sociodemographic or sociocultural characteristics. This secondary analysis aimed to advance the limited literature by examining differences in smoking-related variables.

METHODS

We used baseline data from a randomized controlled trial testing a self-help Spanish-language smoking cessation intervention. Puerto Rican (PR), Mexican, and Cuban, the three largest Hispanic/Latinx subgroups in the sample (N=1028), were first compared on sociodemographic and sociocultural variables (acculturation and familism). Primary analyses assessed subgroup differences in cigarette use variables [e.g., cigarettes per day (CPD), nicotine dependence (Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence), daily smoking] and smoking-related cognitive constructs (motivation to quit, smoking outcome expectancies and abstinence self-efficacy) controlling for sociodemographic and sociocultural variables. Additional analyses explored differences between men and women within subgroups.

RESULTS

Mexicans exhibited the lowest levels of daily smoking (90% vs. 95% Cubans and 96% PR; p=.001), CPD (M=13.5, SD=9.5 vs. M=20.1, SD=9.9 Cubans and M=16.7, SD=10.1 PR; p=.016), and nicotine dependence (M=4.2, SD=2.3 vs. M=6.0, SD=2.1 Cubans and M=5.7, SD=2.2 PR; p< .001), with no differences between PRs and Cubans. Within-subgroup comparisons between men and women showed the most differences among PRs [e.g., men were more nicotine dependent (M=6.0, SD=1.9) than women (M=5.4, SD=2.3; p=.041)] and Cubans [e.g., men smoked more CPD (M=22.2, SD=12.2) than women (M=19.3, SD=12.0; p=.042)], and the fewest among Mexicans.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings support heterogeneity within Hispanic/Latinx smokers and highlight the potential utility of examining sociodemographic, sociocultural, and smoking characteristics important for developing salient cessation interventions.

IMPLICATIONS

Findings demonstrate that treatment-seeking Hispanic/Latinx smokers in the US differ in sociodemographic, sociocultural, and smoking-related variables (cigarette use and smoking-related cognitive constructs) by subgroup (i.e., Puerto Rican, Mexican, Cuban) and within subgroups by sex. These differences suggest that heterogeneity among subgroups should be considered when developing cessation interventions for Hispanics/Latinxs. Future research should examine how differences in sociodemographic and smoking-related variables impact intervention outcomes and explore the role of sociocultural factors (e.g., acculturation and familism) as determinants of cessation.

Self-help smoking cessation intervention for Spanish-speaking Hispanics/Latinxs in the United States: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Hispanic/Latinx smokers living in the United States face unique challenges in quitting smoking. This study evaluated the efficacy of a culturally relevant, Spanish-language, extended self-help smoking cessation intervention among Hispanic smokers.

METHODS

A 2-arm parallel randomized controlled trial was conducted with Hispanic/Latinx smokers living in the United States who preferred health information in Spanish and smoked 5 or more cigarettes per week. Participants were randomly allocated to receive Libre del Cigarrillo (LDC), which consisted of 11 booklets and 9 pamphlets mailed monthly over 18 months, or the usual care (UC), which was a single Spanish-language self-help booklet from the National Cancer Institute. The primary outcome was self-reported 7-day point prevalence smoking abstinence assessed 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after the baseline. Eight prespecified moderators of the intervention were evaluated. Cost-effectiveness was also evaluated. All statistical tests were 2-sided.

RESULTS

Data from all participants randomized to LDC (n = 714) or UC (n = 703) were used for analyses after multiple imputation to manage missing data. Generalized estimating equation analyses indicated that LDC abstinence rates were higher (P < .001) across all assessments. Logistic regression analyses revealed that at 24 months, the abstinence rate was greater for LDC (33.1%) than UC (24.3%; odds ratio, 1.54; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-2.02; P = .002). Men exhibited a strong intervention effect at all assessments (P values < .001), whereas the intervention effect for women was observed only at 6 and 12 months (P values < .018). In comparison with UC, the incremental cost per quitter in the LDC arm was $648.43 at 18 months and $683.93 at 24 months.

CONCLUSIONS

A culturally relevant, Spanish-language intervention was efficacious and cost-effective for smoking cessation.

LAY SUMMARY

Research is needed to develop interventions for ethnic minority smokers. The aim of the current study was to test a Spanish-language adaptation of a validated and easily implemented self-help smoking cessation intervention in a nationwide randomized controlled trial. The findings demonstrated that the intervention produced greater smoking abstinence in comparison with a standard self-help booklet. Participants also were more satisfied with the intervention, and it was cost-effective. Efforts aimed at promoting tobacco abstinence in this underserved population could have significant public health implications, including potential reductions in cancer health disparities associated with tobacco smoking.

Comparing Methods of Recruiting Spanish-Preferring Smokers in the United States: Findings from a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

There is a pressing need to address the unacceptable disparities and underrepresentation of racial and ethnic minority groups, including Hispanics or Latinxs, in smoking cessation trials.

Objective

Given the lack of research on recruitment strategies for this population, this study aims to assess effective recruitment methods based on enrollment and cost.

Methods

Recruitment and enrollment data were collected from a nationwide randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a Spanish-language smoking cessation intervention (N=1417). The effectiveness of each recruitment strategy was evaluated by computing the cost per participant (CPP), which is the ratio of direct cost over the number enrolled. More effective strategies yielded lower CPPs. Demographic and smoking-related characteristics of participants recruited via the two most effective strategies were also compared (n=1307).

Results

Facebook was the most effective method (CPP=US $74.12), followed by TV advertisements (CPP=US $191.31), whereas public bus interior card advertising was the least effective method (CPP=US $642.50). Participants recruited via Facebook had lower average age (P=.008) and had spent fewer years in the United States (P<.001). Among the participants recruited via Facebook, a greater percentage of individuals had at least a high school education (P<.001) and an annual income above US $10,000 (P<.001). In addition, a greater percentage of individuals were employed (P<.001) and foreign born (P=.003). In terms of subethnicity, among the subjects recruited via Facebook, a lower percentage of individuals were of Mexican origin (P<.001) and a greater percentage of individuals were of Central American (P=.02), South American (P=.01), and Cuban (P<.001) origin.

Conclusions

Facebook was the most effective method for recruiting Hispanic or Latinx smokers in the United States for this RCT. However, using multiple methods was necessary to recruit a more diverse sample of Spanish-preferring Hispanic or Latinx smokers.