A cluster-randomized effectiveness trial of smoking cessation modified for at-risk smoker subgroups

Cigarette craving in virtual reality cue exposure in abstainers and relapsed smokers

Cue exposure therapy (CET) in substance-use disorders aims to reduce craving and ultimately relapse rates. Applying CET in virtual reality (VR) was proposed to increase its efficacy, as VR enables the presentation of social and environmental cues along with substance-related stimuli. However, limited success has been reported so far when applying VR-CET for smoking cessation. Understanding if effects of VR-CET differ between future abstainers and relapsing smokers may help to improve VR-CET. Data from 102 participants allocated to the intervention arm (VR-CET) of a recent RCT comparing VR-CET to relaxation in the context of smoking cessation was analyzed with respect to tolerability, presence, and craving during VR-CET. Cue exposure was conducted in four VR contexts (Loneliness/Rumination, Party, Stress, Café), each presented twice. Relapsed smokers compared to abstainers experienced higher craving during VR-CET and stronger craving responses especially during the Stress scenario. Furthermore, lower mean craving during VR-CET positively predicted abstinence at 6-month follow-up. Attempts to improve smoking cessation outcomes of VR-CET should aim to identify smokers who are more at risk of relapse based on high craving levels during VR-CET. Specifically measuring craving responses during social stress seems to be well suited to mark relapse. We propose to investigate individualized treatment approaches accordingly.

Hypnotherapy compared to cognitive-behavioral therapy for smoking cessation in a randomized controlled trial

Worldwide, more than eight million people die each year as a result of tobacco use. A large proportion of smokers who want to quit are interested in alternative smoking cessation methods, of which hypnotherapy is the most popular. However, the efficacy of hypnotherapy as a tobacco cessation intervention cannot be considered sufficiently proven due to significant methodological limitations in the studies available to date. The aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy of a hypnotherapeutic group program for smoking cessation with that of an established cognitive-behavioral group program in a randomized controlled trial. A total of 360 smokers who were willing to quit were randomly assigned to either hypnotherapy (HT) or cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) at two study sites, without regard to treatment preference. They each underwent a 6 weeks smoking cessation course (one 90 min group session per week) and were followed up at regular intervals over a 12 months period. The primary outcome variable was defined as continuous abstinence from smoking according to the Russell standard, verified by a carbon monoxide measurement at three measurement time points. Secondary outcome variables were 7 days point prevalence abstinence during the 12 months follow up and the number of cigarettes the non-quitters smoked per smoking day (smoking intensity). Generalized estimating equations were used to test treatment condition, hypnotic suggestibility, and treatment expectancy as predictors of abstinence. The two interventions did not differ significantly in the proportion of participants who remained continuously abstinent throughout the follow-up period (CBT: 15.6%, HT: 15.0%) and also regarding the 7 days abstinence rates during the 12 months follow-up (CBT: 21.2%, HT: 16.7%). However, when controlling for hypnotic suggestibility, CBT showed significantly higher 7 days abstinence rates. In terms of the continuous abstinence rates, it can be concluded that the efficacy of hypnotherapeutic methods for smoking cessation seem to be comparable to established programs such as CBT.

Clinical trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT01129999.

Additional behavioural support as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation increase the likelihood of achieving abstinence in a quit attempt. It is plausible that providing support, or, if support is offered, offering more intensive support or support including particular components may increase abstinence further.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of adding or increasing the intensity of behavioural support for people using smoking cessation medications, and to assess whether there are different effects depending on the type of pharmacotherapy, or the amount of support in each condition. We also looked at studies which directly compare behavioural interventions matched for contact time, where pharmacotherapy is provided to both groups (e.g. tests of different components or approaches to behavioural support as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the ICTRP in June 2018 for records with any mention of pharmacotherapy, including any type of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, nortriptyline or varenicline, that evaluated the addition of personal support or compared two or more intensities of behavioural support.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in which all participants received pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation and conditions differed by the amount or type of behavioural support. The intervention condition had to involve person-to-person contact (defined as face-to-face or telephone). The control condition could receive less intensive personal contact, a different type of personal contact, written information, or no behavioural support at all. We excluded trials recruiting only pregnant women and trials which did not set out to assess smoking cessation at six months or longer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For this update, screening and data extraction followed standard Cochrane methods. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically-validated rates, if available. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Eighty-three studies, 36 of which were new to this update, met the inclusion criteria, representing 29,536 participants. Overall, we judged 16 studies to be at low risk of bias and 21 studies to be at high risk of bias. All other studies were judged to be at unclear risk of bias. Results were not sensitive to the exclusion of studies at high risk of bias. We pooled all studies comparing more versus less support in the main analysis. Findings demonstrated a benefit of behavioural support in addition to pharmacotherapy. When all studies of additional behavioural therapy were pooled, there was evidence of a statistically significant benefit from additional support (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.22, I² = 8%, 65 studies, n = 23,331) for abstinence at longest follow-up, and this effect was not different when we compared subgroups by type of pharmacotherapy or intensity of contact. This effect was similar in the subgroup of eight studies in which the control group received no behavioural support (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.43, I² = 20%, n = 4,018). Seventeen studies compared interventions matched for contact time but that differed in terms of the behavioural components or approaches employed. Of the 15 comparisons, all had small numbers of participants and events. Only one detected a statistically significant effect, favouring a health education approach (which the authors described as standard counselling containing information and advice) over motivational interviewing approach (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.94, n = 378).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is high-certainty evidence that providing behavioural support in person or via telephone for people using pharmacotherapy to stop smoking increases quit rates. Increasing the amount of behavioural support is likely to increase the chance of success by about 10% to 20%, based on a pooled estimate from 65 trials. Subgroup analysis suggests that the incremental benefit from more support is similar over a range of levels of baseline support. More research is needed to assess the effectiveness of specific components that comprise behavioural support.

Effectiveness of pharmacological or psychological interventions for smoking cessation in smokers with major depression or depressive symptoms: A systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Smokers with major depressive disorder (MDD) or depressive symptoms (DS) represent a subgroup in need of attention, since they have specific clinical features and prognosis.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature (Cochrane, MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Web of Science databases from inception to June 2017) of randomized clinical trials assessing the effectiveness of pharmacological, psychological, or combined interventions for smoking cessation in subjects with current or past MDD/DS without medical or comorbid psychiatric disorder(s) was run following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Nicotine, varenicline, and staged-care intervention were more effective in smokers with current MDD; nicotine and fluoxetine plus nicotine were more effective in smokers with DS; naltrexone and nicotine plus fluoxetine were more effective in smokers with severe current DS. Cognitive-behavioral therapy and cognitive and behavioral cessation and relapse prevention skills training were superior to placebo in smokers with past MDD.

CONCLUSIONS

More research is needed into effectively addressing smoking in people with concurrent mental disorder. Data currently available need to be confirmed in randomized trials aimed at replicating the results and disentangling the effects of each therapeutic ingredient when a combination therapy is proposed. Studies on tolerability of treatments are warranted, as well as those aimed at identifying factors of vulnerability to adverse effects.

Group behaviour therapy programmes for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Group therapy offers individuals the opportunity to learn behavioural techniques for smoking cessation, and to provide each other with mutual support.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effect of group-delivered behavioural interventions in achieving long-term smoking cessation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register, using the terms 'behavior therapy', 'cognitive therapy', 'psychotherapy' or 'group therapy', in May 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials that compared group therapy with self-help, individual counselling, another intervention or no intervention (including usual care or a waiting-list control). We also considered trials that compared more than one group programme. We included those trials with a minimum of two group meetings, and follow-up of smoking status at least six months after the start of the programme. We excluded trials in which group therapy was provided to both active therapy and placebo arms of trials of pharmacotherapies, unless they had a factorial design.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data in duplicate on the participants, the interventions provided to the groups and the controls, including programme length, intensity and main components, the outcome measures, method of randomization, and completeness of follow-up. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up in participants smoking at baseline. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each trial, and biochemically-validated rates where available. We analysed participants lost to follow-up as continuing smokers. We expressed effects as a risk ratio for cessation. Where possible, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect (Mantel-Haenszel) model. We assessed the quality of evidence within each study and comparison, using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool and GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-six trials met our inclusion criteria for one or more of the comparisons in the review. Thirteen trials compared a group programme with a self-help programme; there was an increase in cessation with the use of a group programme (N = 4395, risk ratio (RR) 1.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52 to 2.33, I2 = 0%). We judged the GRADE quality of evidence to be moderate, downgraded due to there being few studies at low risk of bias. Fourteen trials compared a group programme with brief support from a health care provider. There was a small increase in cessation (N = 7286, RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.43, I2 = 59%). We judged the GRADE quality of evidence to be low, downgraded due to inconsistency in addition to risk of bias. There was also low quality evidence of benefit of a group programme compared to no-intervention controls, (9 trials, N = 1098, RR 2.60, 95% CI 1.80 to 3.76 I2 = 55%). We did not detect evidence that group therapy was more effective than a similar intensity of individual counselling (6 trials, N = 980, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.28, I2 = 9%). Programmes which included components for increasing cognitive and behavioural skills were not shown to be more effective than same-length or shorter programmes without these components.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Group therapy is better for helping people stop smoking than self-help, and other less intensive interventions. There is not enough evidence to evaluate whether groups are more effective, or cost-effective, than intensive individual counselling. There is not enough evidence to support the use of particular psychological components in a programme beyond the support and skills training normally included.

Personalizing substance use treatment based on pre-treatment impulsivity and sensation seeking: A review

BACKGROUND

Theoretically, substance use disorder (SUD) treatment that matches an individual's etiology and/or maintaining factors should be more effective than a treatment that does not directly address these factors. Impulsivity and sensation/reward seeking may contribute to the development and maintenance of SUDs, and are potential candidate variables for assigning patients to treatment. The goal is to identify whether current research can provide insight into which treatments may be most effective for individuals high in impulsivity or sensation seeking, relative to other treatments. A secondary goal is to provide recommendations for personalizing SUD treatment based on etiology or maintaining factors.

METHOD

This review summarizes clinical trials that speak to the differential effectiveness of two or more treatments for alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use disorders, based on pre-treatment impulsivity, sensation seeking, or related constructs.

RESULTS

Few studies examine the differential effectiveness of two or more treatments for individuals high in impulsivity or sensation seeking. Very preliminary evidence suggests that contingency management may hold promise for individuals high in impulsivity. Pharmacological trials were under-represented in the current review, despite evidence that the effectiveness of some pharmacological interventions may be moderated by impulsivity.

CONCLUSIONS

Potential reasons for slow rate of progress to date are provided. Given slow accumulation of evidence, an alternative method for personalizing treatment based on pre-treatment psychosocial factors, including impulsivity and sensation/reward seeking, is proposed. Future research may explore the role of contingency management for SUD among individuals with high pre-treatment impulsivity or sensation seeking. Finally, novel, technology-enhanced behavioral mechanisms are discussed as an adjunct to SUD treatment for these high-risk populations.

Cognitive Dysfunction, Affective States, and Vulnerability to Nicotine Addiction: A Multifactorial Perspective

Although smoking prevalence has declined in recent years, certain subpopulations continue to smoke at disproportionately high rates and show resistance to cessation treatments. Individuals showing cognitive and affective impairments, including emotional distress and deficits in attention, memory, and inhibitory control, particularly in the context of psychiatric conditions, such as attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, schizophrenia, and mood disorders, are at higher risk for tobacco addiction. Nicotine has been shown to improve cognitive and emotional processing in some conditions, including during tobacco abstinence. Self-medication of cognitive deficits or negative affect has been proposed to underlie high rates of tobacco smoking among people with psychiatric disorders. However, pre-existing cognitive and mood disorders may also influence the development and maintenance of nicotine dependence, by biasing nicotine-induced alterations in information processing and associative learning, decision-making, and inhibitory control. Here, we discuss the potential forms of contribution of cognitive and affective deficits to nicotine addiction-related processes, by reviewing major clinical and preclinical studies investigating either the procognitive and therapeutic action of nicotine or the putative primary role of cognitive and emotional impairments in addiction-like features.

Additional behavioural support as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Effective pharmacotherapies are available to help people who are trying to stop smoking, but quitting can still be difficult and providing higher levels of behavioural support may increase success rates further.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of increasing the intensity of behavioural support for people using smoking cessation medications, and to assess whether there are different effects depending on the type of pharmacotherapy, or the amount of support in each condition.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register in May 2015 for records with any mention of pharmacotherapy, including any type of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, nortriptyline or varenicline that evaluated the addition of personal support or compared two or more intensities of behavioural support.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials in which all participants received pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation and conditions differed by the amount of behavioural support. The intervention condition had to involve person-to-person contact. The control condition could receive less intensive personal contact, or just written information. We did not include studies that used a contact-matched control to evaluate differences between types or components of support. We excluded trials recruiting only pregnant women, trials recruiting only adolescents, and trials with less than six months follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One author prescreened search results and two authors agreed inclusion or exclusion of potentially relevant trials. One author extracted data and another checked them.The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically-validated rates if available. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria with over 18,000 participants in the relevant arms. There was little evidence of statistical heterogeneity (I² = 18%) so we pooled all studies in the main analysis. There was evidence of a small but statistically significant benefit from more intensive support (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.24) for abstinence at longest follow-up. All but four of the included studies provided four or more sessions of support to the intervention group. Most trials used NRT. We did not detect significant effects for studies where the pharmacotherapy was nortriptyline (two trials) or varenicline (one trial), but this reflects the absence of evidence.In subgroup analyses, studies that provided at least four sessions of personal contact for the intervention and no personal contact for the control had slightly larger estimated effects (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.45; 6 trials, 3762 participants), although a formal test for subgroup differences was not significant. Studies where all intervention counselling was via telephone (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.41; 6 trials, 5311 participants) also had slightly larger effects, and the test for subgroup differences was significant, but this subgroup analysis was not prespecified. In this update, the benefit of providing additional behavioural support was similar for the subgroup of trials in which all participants, including controls, had at least 30 minutes of personal contact (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.32; 21 trials, 5166 participants); previously the evidence of benefit in this subgroup had been weaker. This subgroup was not prespecified and a test for subgroup differences was not significant. We judged the quality of the evidence to be high, using the GRADE approach. We judged a small number of trials to be at high risk of bias on one or more domains, but findings were not sensitive to their exclusion.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Providing behavioural support in person or via telephone for people using pharmacotherapy to stop smoking has a small but important effect. Increasing the amount of behavioural support is likely to increase the chance of success by about 10% to 25%, based on a pooled estimate from 47 trials. Subgroup analysis suggests that the incremental benefit from more support is similar over a range of levels of baseline support.

Smoking history, and not depression, is related to deficits in detection of happy and sad faces

INTRODUCTION

Previous research has demonstrated that chronic cigarette smoking and major depressive disorder (MDD) are each associated with cognitive decrements. Further, these conditions co-occur commonly, though mechanisms in the comorbid condition are poorly understood. There may be distinct, additive, or overlapping factors underlying comorbid cigarette smoking and MDD. The present study investigated the impact of smoking and MDD on executive function and emotion processing.

METHODS

Participants (N=198) were grouped by diagnostic category (MDD and healthy controls, HC) and smoking status (ever-smokers, ES and never-smokers, NS). Participants completed the Facial Emotion Perception Test (FEPT), a measure of emotional processing, and the parametric Go/No-go task (PGNG), a measure of executive function.

RESULTS

FEPT performance was analyzed using ANCOVA with accuracy and reaction time as separate dependent variables. Repeated measures MANCOVA was conducted for PGNG with performance measure and task level as dependent variables. Analyses for each task included diagnostic and smoking group as independent variables, and gender was controlled for. Results for FEPT reveal that lower overall accuracy was found for ES relative to NS, though MDD did not differ from HC. Post-hoc analyses revealed that ES were poorer at identifying happy and sad, but not fearful or angry, faces. For PGNG, poorer performance was observed in MDD relative to HC in response time to Go targets, but there were no differences for ES and NS. Interaction of diagnosis and smoking group was not observed for performance on either task.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study provide preliminary evidence for distinctive cognitive decrements in smokers and individuals with depression.

Temperament and impulsivity predictors of smoking cessation outcomes

AIMS

Temperament and impulsivity are powerful predictors of addiction treatment outcomes. However, a comprehensive assessment of these features has not been examined in relation to smoking cessation outcomes.

METHODS

Naturalistic prospective study. Treatment-seeking smokers (n = 140) were recruited as they engaged in an occupational health clinic providing smoking cessation treatment between 2009 and 2013. Participants were assessed at baseline with measures of temperament (Temperament and Character Inventory), trait impulsivity (Barratt Impulsivity Scale), and cognitive impulsivity (Go/No Go, Delay Discounting and Iowa Gambling Task). The outcome measure was treatment status, coded as "dropout" versus "relapse" versus "abstinence" at 3, 6, and 12 months endpoints. Participants were telephonically contacted and reminded of follow-up face to face assessments at each endpoint. The participants that failed to answer the phone calls or self-reported discontinuation of treatment and failed to attend the upcoming follow-up session were coded as dropouts. The participants that self-reported continuing treatment, and successfully attended the upcoming follow-up session were coded as either "relapse" or "abstinence", based on the results of smoking behavior self-reports cross-validated with co-oximetry hemoglobin levels. Multinomial regression models were conducted to test whether temperament and impulsivity measures predicted dropout and relapse relative to abstinence outcomes.

RESULTS

Higher scores on temperament dimensions of novelty seeking and reward dependence predicted poorer retention across endpoints, whereas only higher scores on persistence predicted greater relapse. Higher scores on the trait dimension of non-planning impulsivity but not performance on cognitive impulsivity predicted poorer retention. Higher non-planning impulsivity and poorer performance in the Iowa Gambling Task predicted greater relapse at 3 and 6 months and 6 months respectively.

CONCLUSION

Temperament measures, and specifically novelty seeking and reward dependence, predict smoking cessation treatment retention, whereas persistence, non-planning impulsivity and poor decision-making predict smoking relapse.

A Case Series of a Behavioral Activation−Enhanced Smoking Cessation Program for Inpatient Substance Users With Elevated Depressive Symptoms

Smoking is the leading preventable cause of death and disease in the world and represents a critical public health problem. Smokers with substance use disorders and depressive symptoms have particular difficulties quitting smoking and represent an underserved population. The current study utilized a novel behavioral activation (BA)−enhanced smoking cessation treatment with three clients in residential substance use treatment who had elevated depressive symptoms. We present detailed descriptions of the treatment they received and the challenges they faced. Our clients, who received five individual BA-enhanced smoking cessation sessions and two follow-up booster sessions, benefited significantly from the BA treatment. Over an 8-week follow-up period, they did not relapse to smoking and experienced significant decreases in depressive symptoms. This suggests BA may be a beneficial treatment strategy for this particularly challenging population.

Smoking cessation interventions for smokers with current or past depression

BACKGROUND

Individuals with current or past depression are often smokers who are more nicotine dependent, more likely to suffer from negative mood changes after nicotine withdrawal, and more likely to relapse to smoking after quitting than the general population, which contributes to their higher morbidity and mortality from smoking-related illnesses. It remains unclear what interventions can help them to quit smoking.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions, with and without specific mood management components, in smokers with current or past depression.

SEARCH METHODS

In April 2013, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, other reviews, and asked experts for information on trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Criteria for including studies in this review were that they had to be randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing smoking cessation interventions in adult smokers with current or past depression. Depression was defined as major depression or depressive symptoms. We included studies where subgroups of participants with depression were identified, either pre-stated or post hoc. The outcome was abstinence from smoking after six months or longer follow-up. We preferred prolonged or continuous abstinence and biochemically validated abstinence where available.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

When possible, we estimated pooled risk ratios (RRs) with the Mantel-Haenszel method (fixed-effect model). We also performed subgroup analyses, by length of follow-up, depression measurement, depression group in study, antidepressant use, published or unpublished data, format of intervention, level of behavioural support, additional pharmacotherapy, type of antidepressant medication, and additional nicotine replacement therapy (NRT).

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-nine RCTs were included of which 33 trials investigated smoking cessation interventions with specific mood management components for depression. In smokers with current depression, meta-analysis showed a significant positive effect for adding psychosocial mood management to a standard smoking cessation intervention when compared with standard smoking cessation intervention alone (11 trials, N = 1844, RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.92). In smokers with past depression we found a similar effect (13 trials, N = 1496, RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.77). Meta-analysis resulted in a positive effect, although not significant, for adding bupropion compared with placebo in smokers with current depression (5 trials, N = 410, RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.83 to 2.27). There were not enough trial data to evaluate the effectiveness of fluoxetine and paroxetine for smokers with current depression. Bupropion (4 trials, N = 404, RR 2.04, 95% CI 1.31 to 3.18) might significantly increase long-term cessation among smokers with past depression when compared with placebo, but the evidence for bupropion is relatively weak due to the small number of studies and the post hoc subgroups for all the studies. There were not enough trial data to evaluate the effectiveness of fluoxetine, nortriptyline, paroxetine, selegiline, and sertraline in smokers with past depression.Twenty-three of the 49 trials investigated smoking cessation interventions without specific components for depression. There was heterogeneity between the trials which compared psychosocial interventions with standard smoking cessation counselling for both smokers with current and past depression. Therefore, we did not estimate a pooled effect. One trial compared nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) versus placebo in smokers with current depression and found a positive, although not significant, effect (N = 196, RR 2.64, 95% CI 0.93 to 7.45). Meta-analysis also found a positive, although not significant, effect for NRT versus placebo in smokers with past depression (3 trials, N = 432, RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.60). Three trials compared other pharmacotherapy versus placebo and six trials compared other interventions in smokers with current or past depression. Due to heterogeneity between the interventions of the included trials we did not estimate pooled effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests that adding a psychosocial mood management component to a standard smoking cessation intervention increases long-term cessation rates in smokers with both current and past depression when compared with the standard intervention alone. Pooled results from four trials suggest that use of bupropion may increase long-term cessation in smokers with past depression. There was no evidence found for the use of bupropion in smokers with current depression. There was not enough evidence to evaluate the effectiveness of the other antidepressants in smokers with current or past depression. There was also not enough evidence to evaluate the group of trials that investigated interventions without specific mood management components for depression, including NRT and psychosocial interventions.

Two decades of smoking cessation treatment research on smokers with depression: 1990-2010

INTRODUCTION

Adults with depression smoke at higher rates than other adults leaving a large segment of this population, who already incur increased health-related risks, vulnerable to the enormous harmful consequences of smoking. Yet, the impact that depression has on smoking cessation is not clear due to the mixed results of past research. The primary aims of this review were to synthesize the research examining the relationship of depression to smoking cessation outcomes over a 20-year period, to examine the gender and racial composition of these studies, and to identify directions for future research.

METHODS

Potential articles published between January 1, 1990 and December 31, 2010 were identified through a MEDLINE search of the terms "clinical trial," "depression," and "smoking cessation." 68 studies used all three terms and met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

The majority of studies examined either a past diagnosis of major depression or current depression symptoms. Within the few studies that examined the interaction of gender and depression on smoking cessation, depression had a greater impact on treatment outcomes for women than men. No study reported examining the interactive impact of race and depression on treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Although attention to the relationship of depression and smoking cessation outcomes has increased over the past 20 years, little information exists to inform a treatment approach for smokers with Current Major Depressive Disorder, Dysthymia, and Minor Depression and few studies report gender and racial differences in the relationship of depression and smoking cessation outcomes, thus suggesting major areas for targeted research.

Smoking cessation, depression, and exercise: empirical evidence, clinical needs, and mechanisms

INTRODUCTION

Smoking is significantly more common among persons with major depressive disorders (MDDs). Furthermore, smokers with MDD report more difficulties when they quit smoking (greater withdrawal symptoms, higher probability of relapse). The aim of this narrative review is to describe research on exercise and depression and exercise and smoking cessation.

METHODS

We have critically reviewed various smoking cessation intervention programs for depressive smokers examining (a) the protective effect of exercise against relapse for smokers with MDD and (b) the benefits of exercise for treating withdrawal symptoms. We have also reviewed the current literature investigating the mechanisms between exercise-depression and exercise-smoking.

RESULTS

This review suggests that exercise may reduce depressive symptoms following cessation and provide a useful strategy for managing withdrawal symptoms in smokers with MDD. Various psychological, biological, and genetic hypotheses have been tested (e.g., distraction hypothesis, expectations hypothesis, cortisol hypothesis) and few have obtained significant results.

CONCLUSIONS

It might be beneficial for health professionals to recommend physical activity and promote supervised exercise sessions for smokers with MDD during smoking cessation. Future research needs to examine relationships between exercise, smoking, and depression with transdisciplinary and ecological momentary assessment.

Understanding treatment-seeking smokers' motivation to change: content analysis of the decisional balance worksheet

The Decisional Balance Worksheet (DBW), an open-ended measure of motivation to change, may be used to record the pros and cons of smoking versus abstinence among treatment-seeking smokers. Recent findings indicated that the open-ended DBW could be quantified to validly reflect people's level of motivation to stop smoking (Collins, Eck, Torchalla, Schröter, & Batra, 2010). The goal of the current study was to enhance our understanding of these participants' motivation to change by examining the qualitative content of their decisional balance. Participants were treatment-seeking smokers (N=268) who had participated in a larger randomized controlled trial of tailored smoking cessation interventions (Batra et al., 2010). Using the DBW, participants recorded their pros and cons of smoking versus abstinence, and content analysis methods were used to extract common themes. Findings indicated that the physical and psychological effects/functions of smoking and abstinence were most commonly mentioned as both pros and cons. Although the decisional balance categories were substantively similar over time, their relative frequency shifted from pre- to posttreatment. For the sample as a whole, the number of pros of smoking generally decreased, whereas the pros of abstinence increased from pre- to posttreatment. Findings suggest that clinicians can expect certain perceived pros and cons to characterize their clients' decision-making process about smoking and abstinence. At the same time, the use of the decisional balance allows for assessment of individuals' unique motivational set.

Behavioural interventions as adjuncts to pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Effective pharmacotherapies are available to help people who are trying to stop smoking, but quitting can still be difficult and providing higher levels of behavioural support may increase success rates further.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of increasing the intensity of behavioural support for people using smoking cessation medications, and to assess whether there are different effects depending on the type of pharmacotherapy, or the amount of support in each condition.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register in July 2012 for records with any mention of pharmacotherapy, including any type of NRT, bupropion, nortriptyline or varenicline that evaluated the addition of personal support or compared two or more intensities of behavioural support.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials in which all participants received pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation and conditions differed by the amount of behavioural support. Controls could receive less intensive personal contact, or just written information. We did not include studies that used a contact matched control to evaluate differences between types or components of support. We excluded trials recruiting only pregnant women, trials recruiting only adolescents, and trials with less than six months follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Search results were prescreened by one author and inclusion or exclusion of potentially relevant trials was agreed by both authors. Data were extracted by one author and checked by the other.The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria with over 15,000 participants in the relevant arms. There was very little evidence of statistical heterogeneity (I² = 3%) so all studies were pooled in the main analysis. There was evidence of a small but statistically significant benefit from more intensive support (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.24) for abstinence at longest follow-up. All but two of the included studies provided four or more sessions of support. Most trials used nicotine replacement therapy. Significant effects were not detected for studies where the pharmacotherapy was nortriptyline (two trials) or varenicline (one trial), but this reflects the absence of evidence. In subgroup analyses, studies that provided at least four sessions of personal contact for the intervention and no personal contact for the control had slightly larger effects (six trials, RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.45), as did studies where all intervention counselling was via telephone (six trials, RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.41). Weaker evidence for a benefit of providing additional behavioural support was seen in the trials where all participants, including those in the control condition, had at least 30 minutes of personal contact (18 trials, RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.25). None of the differences between subgroups were significant, and the last two subgroup analyses were not prespecified. No trials were judged at high risk of bias on any domain.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Providing behavioural support in person or via telephone for people using pharmacotherapy to stop smoking has a small but important effect. Increasing the amount of behavioural support is likely to increase the chance of success by about 10 to 25%, based on a pooled estimate from 38 trials. A subgroup analysis of a small number of trials suggests the benefit could be a little greater when the contrast is between a no contact control and a behavioural intervention that provides at least four sessions of contact. Subgroup analysis also suggests that there may be a smaller incremental benefit from providing even more intensive support via more or longer sessions over and above some personal contact.

Gender Differences in Smoking Behaviour and Cessation

This article reviews the literature to compare differential outcomes among men and women after smoking cessation, assess barriers they may face during cessation and provide recommendation to address gender-specific challenges in smoking cessation interventions. There is some evidence that women achieve lower abstinence rates than men after a quit attempt with nicotine replacement therapy, as well as without pharmacotherapy, and several underlying mechanisms were discussed to account for these findings. These include: (a) women have specific genetic variants that affect pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the medication, (b) hormonal influences increase nicotine metabolism and withdrawal symptoms, (c) women are more responsive to nonpharmacological aspects of smoking than men, (d) women are more vulnerable to depression and negative mood than men, (e) weight concerns are greater barriers for women than for men and (g) women receive less effective social support than men during a quit attempt. Gender-specific counselling that accounts for these factors and addresses the different needs of men and women may be a promising approach to improve long-term abstinence rates. However, more research is required to identify gender-related underlying mechanisms of differential smoking cessation outcomes, develop tailored interventions that account for gender differences and study the implementation and outcomes of gender-responsive treatment approaches.

Tabakentwöhnung bei stationären Patienten mit einer Alkohol- abhängigkeit – Motivationsfaktoren und Erfolgsaussichten

Einleitung: Die Raucherprävalenz ist bei alkoholkranken Personen überdurchschnittlich hoch. Die gesundheitliche Bedeutung der Tabakabstinenz, aber auch potentielle synergistische Effekte auf die Alkoholabstinenz legen nahe, während einer stationären Alkoholbehandlung auch eine Tabakentwöhnung anzubieten. Ziel: Untersucht wurden die Aufhörbereitschaft und der Abstinenzerfolg nach einer Raucherentwöhnung während einer sechswöchigen stationären Alkoholismustherapie bei alkoholkranken Personen mit zusätzlicher psychiatrischer Komorbidität. Methodik: 90 von 94 Personen eines Behandlungsjahrgangs nahmen an der Untersuchung teil. Sie durchliefen eine Psychoedukation zur Tabakabhängigkeit und hatten nachfolgend die Gelegenheit, eine Raucherentwöhnungsgruppe zu besuchen. Erfasst wurden soziodemographische Daten, Motivation sowie die Abstinenzquoten von Tabak und Alkohol am Ende und drei Monate nach der Therapie. Ergebnisse: Wichtige Motivationsgründe für eine Tabakabstinenz sind die Vorteile des Nichtrauchens. 40 % (n = 28) der rauchenden Patienten (n = 69) ließen sich zu einer Tabakentwöhnung motivieren, 25 % (n = 7) schlossen die Behandlung abstinent ab. Auch wenn keiner der Patienten über drei Monate tabakabstinent blieb, so war doch der Anteil alkoholrückfälliger Patienten in der Raucherentwöhnungsgruppe niedriger (21,4 %; n = 6/28) als bei den übrigen Patienten (29,3 %; n = 12/41)). Diskussion: Die Tabakentwöhnung im Rahmen einer stationären Alkoholismusbehandlung scheint nicht von Nachteil für die Patienten zu sein. Bei der Einführung eines Therapieangebotes sollten motivationale Faktoren, Bewältigungsfertigkeiten für rückfallgefährliche Situationen sowie Begleitsymptome komorbider Störungen stärker im Vordergrund stehen als bei anderen Rauchern.

Nicotine dependence as a moderator of a quitline-based message framing intervention

High nicotine dependence is a reliable predictor of difficulty quitting smoking and remaining smoke-free. Evidence also suggests that the effectiveness of various smoking cessation treatments may vary by nicotine dependence level. Nicotine dependence, as assessed by Heaviness of Smoking Index baseline total scores, was evaluated as a potential moderator of a message-framing intervention provided through the New York State Smokers' Quitline (free telephone based service). Smokers were exposed to either gain-framed (n=810) or standard-care (n=1222) counseling and printed materials. Those smoking 10 or more cigarettes per day and medically eligible were also offered a free 2-week supply of nicotine patches, gum, or lozenge. Smokers were contacted for follow-up interviews at 3 months by an independent survey group. There was no interaction of nicotine dependence scores and message condition on the likelihood of achieving 7-day point prevalence smoking abstinence at the 3-month follow-up contact. Among continuing smokers at the 3-month follow-up, smokers who reported higher nicotine dependence scores were more likely to report smoking more cigarettes per day and this effect was greater in response to standard-care messages than gain-framed messages. Smokers with higher dependence scores who received standard-care messages also were less likely to report use of nicotine medications compared with less dependent smokers, while there was no difference in those who received gain-framed messages. These findings lend support to prior research demonstrating nicotine dependence heterogeneity in response to message framing interventions and suggest that gain-framed messages may result in less variable smoking outcomes than standard-care messages.

Preventing Relapse Following Smoking Cessation

Cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable deaths worldwide. Long-term smoking cessation can drastically reduce people's risk for developing smoking-related disease. The research literature points to a need for clearer operationalization and differentiation between smoking cessation and relapse prevention interventions and outcomes. That said, extensive meta-analyses and research studies have indicated that there are various efficacious smoking interventions that can both support smoking cessation and relapse prevention efforts. Specifically, behavioral treatments, relapse prevention psychotherapy, pharmacologic interventions, motivational enhancement, smoking reduction to quit, brief advice, alternative intervention modes (telephone, Internet, computer), self-help, and tailored treatments can help prepare smokers for longer-term abstinence. Although these methods vary on reach, they are relatively efficacious, particularly in combined formats.