Assessing the impact of a nurse-led health education intervention for people with peripheral vascular disease who smoke: the use of physiological markers, nicotine dependence and withdrawal

A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of smoking cessation interventions in people with peripheral artery disease

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to systematically pool evidence from randomised clinical trials (RCT) on the efficacy of interventions in assisting smoking cessation in participants with PAD.

METHODS

Publicly available databases were searched for RCTs testing the effect of interventional programs in achieving smoking cessation in participants with PAD who were current smokers. The primary outcome was smoking cessation at the end of follow-up. Meta-analyses were performed using random effect models and reported as risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Risk of bias and publication bias were assessed using a modified version of the Cochrane Collaboration's tool and funnel plots respectively.

RESULTS

Six RCTs testing smoking cessation programs comprising physician advice, behavioural counselling from an expert delivered in-person or over the telephone and provision of nicotine replacement therapy and/or varenicline in 558 smokers with PAD were included. Meta-analysis suggested that overall these interventions did not significantly increase the chance of quitting smoking (RR: 1.48 [95% CI 0.84, 2.61]), with low heterogeneity between studies (I²=20%) which were robust in sensitivity analyses. Risk of bias was high, moderate, and low in one, three and two studies respectively. A funnel plot suggested a low risk of publication bias.

CONCLUSION

Overall previously tested smoking cessation interventions have not been effective in achieving smoking cessation in people with PAD. Further research is needed to develop and test interventions which can effectively help current smokers with PAD quit.

Peripheral Vascular Disease and Implication of Nursing Practice: A Brief Literature Review

Nowadays nurse practitioners are working in several acute hospital settings in different specialized departments. For decades, studies have shown the implications of nurse practice in peripheral vascular disease (PVD) and peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) to have several major benefits. However, there are very limited studies and data on this particular aspect. In this literature review, we briefly discuss the implication of nursing practice in PVD/PVI. This review briefly shows that nursing practice has a major contribution and implication in the treatment of patients with PVD or PVI, especially in patients with diabetes mellitus. From available research, we briefly discuss the implication of nursing practice pre- and postoperatively for PVI. Nurses also contribute significantly in catheter-directed thrombolytic therapy, in smoking cessation programs organized for patients with PVD, and in screening patients for PVD. The vascular nurse practitioners are also involved in providing healthcare advice in order to reduce the risk of disease progression. The major lack of research in this particular field should further inspire scientists to develop and carry out research to further investigate and demonstrate the contribution of nurses in the treatment and management of PVD or PVI, which is gradually becoming a major issue.

Nursing interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Healthcare professionals, including nurses, frequently advise people to improve their health by stopping smoking. Such advice may be brief, or part of more intensive interventions.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of nursing-delivered smoking cessation interventions in adults. To establish whether nursing-delivered smoking cessation interventions are more effective than no intervention; are more effective if the intervention is more intensive; differ in effectiveness with health state and setting of the participants; are more effective if they include follow-ups; are more effective if they include aids that demonstrate the pathophysiological effect of smoking.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register and CINAHL in January 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials of smoking cessation interventions delivered by nurses or health visitors with follow-up of at least six months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data independently. 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. Where statistically and clinically appropriate, we pooled studies using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model and reported the outcome as a risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria, nine of which are new for this update. Pooling 44 studies (over 20,000 participants) comparing a nursing intervention to a control or to usual care, we found the intervention increased the likelihood of quitting (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.38); however, statistical heterogeneity was moderate (I² = 50%) and not explained by subgroup analysis. Because of this, we judged the quality of evidence to be moderate. Despite most studies being at unclear risk of bias in at least one domain, we did not downgrade the quality of evidence further, as restricting the main analysis to only those studies at low risk of bias did not significantly alter the effect estimate. Subgroup analyses found no evidence that high-intensity interventions, interventions with additional follow-up or interventions including aids that demonstrate the pathophysiological effect of smoking are more effective than lower intensity interventions, or interventions without additional follow-up or aids. There was no evidence that the effect of support differed by patient group or across healthcare settings.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate quality evidence that behavioural support to motivate and sustain smoking cessation delivered by nurses can lead to a modest increase in the number of people who achieve prolonged abstinence. There is insufficient evidence to assess whether more intensive interventions, those incorporating additional follow-up, or those incorporating pathophysiological feedback are more effective than one-off support. There was no evidence that the effect of support differed by patient group or across healthcare settings.

Nursing interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Healthcare professionals, including nurses, frequently advise people to improve their health by stopping smoking. Such advice may be brief, or part of more intensive interventions.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of nursing-delivered smoking cessation interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group specialized Register and CINAHL in June 2013.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials of smoking cessation interventions delivered by nurses or health visitors with follow-up of at least six months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted data independently. 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. Where statistically and clinically appropriate, we pooled studies using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model and reported the outcome as a risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Pooling 35 studies (over 17,000 participants) comparing a nursing intervention to a control or to usual care, we found the intervention to increase the likelihood of quitting (RR 1.29; 95% CI 1.20 to 1.39). In a subgroup analysis the estimated effect size was similar for the group of seven studies using a particularly low intensity intervention but the confidence interval was wider. There was limited indirect evidence that interventions were more effective for hospital inpatients with cardiovascular disease than for inpatients with other conditions. Interventions in non-hospitalized adults also showed evidence of benefit. Eleven studies comparing different nurse-delivered interventions failed to detect significant benefit from using additional components. Six studies of nurse counselling on smoking cessation during a screening health check or as part of multifactorial secondary prevention in general practice (not included in the main meta-analysis) found nursing intervention to have less effect under these conditions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate the potential benefits of smoking cessation advice and/or counselling given by nurses, with reasonable evidence that intervention is effective. The evidence for an effect is weaker when interventions are brief and are provided by nurses whose main role is not health promotion or smoking cessation. The challenge will be to incorporate smoking behaviour monitoring and smoking cessation interventions as part of standard practice so that all patients are given an opportunity to be asked about their tobacco use and to be given advice and/or counselling to quit along with reinforcement and follow-up.

Interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients

BACKGROUND

Smoking contributes to reasons for hospitalisation, and the period of hospitalisation may be a good time to provide help with quitting.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of interventions for smoking cessation that are initiated for hospitalised patients.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group register which includes papers identified from CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO in December 2011 for studies of interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients, using terms including (hospital and patient*) or hospitali* or inpatient* or admission* or admitted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized and quasi-randomized trials of behavioural, pharmacological or multicomponent interventions to help patients stop smoking, conducted with hospitalised patients who were current smokers or recent quitters (defined as having quit more than one month before hospital admission). The intervention had to start in the hospital but could continue after hospital discharge. We excluded studies of patients admitted to facilities that primarily treat psychiatric disorders or substance abuse, studies that did not report abstinence rates and studies with follow-up of less than six months. Both acute care hospitals and rehabilitation hospitals were included in this update, with separate analyses done for each type of hospital.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted data independently for each paper, with disagreements resolved by consensus.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty trials met the inclusion criteria. Intensive counselling interventions that began during the hospital stay and continued with supportive contacts for at least one month after discharge increased smoking cessation rates after discharge (risk ratio (RR) 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27 to 1.48; 25 trials). A specific benefit for post-discharge contact compared with usual care was found in a subset of trials in which all participants received a counselling intervention in the hospital and were randomly assigned to post-discharge contact or usual care. No statistically significant benefit was found for less intensive counselling interventions. Adding nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) to an intensive counselling intervention increased smoking cessation rates compared with intensive counselling alone (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.34 to 1.79, six trials). Adding varenicline to intensive counselling had a non-significant effect in two trials (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.74). Adding bupropion did not produce a statistically significant increase in cessation over intensive counselling alone (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.45, three trials). A similar pattern of results was observed in a subgroup of smokers admitted to hospital because of cardiovascular disease (CVD). In this subgroup, intensive intervention with follow-up support increased the rate of smoking cessation (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.56), but less intensive interventions did not. One trial of intensive intervention including counselling and pharmacotherapy for smokers admitted with CVD assessed clinical and health care utilization endpoints, and found significant reductions in all-cause mortality and hospital readmission rates over a two-year follow-up period. These trials were all conducted in acute care hospitals. A comparable increase in smoking cessation rates was observed in a separate pooled analysis of intensive counselling interventions in rehabilitation hospitals (RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.14, three trials).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

High intensity behavioural interventions that begin during a hospital stay and include at least one month of supportive contact after discharge promote smoking cessation among hospitalised patients. The effect of these interventions was independent of the patient's admitting diagnosis and was found in rehabilitation settings as well as acute care hospitals. There was no evidence of effect for interventions of lower intensity or shorter duration. This update found that adding NRT to intensive counselling significantly increases cessation rates over counselling alone. There is insufficient direct evidence to conclude that adding bupropion or varenicline to intensive counselling increases cessation rates over what is achieved by counselling alone.

Health-and disease-related biomarkers in aging research

This article focuses on a synthesis of knowledge about healthy aging research in human beings and then synthesized nurse-led research in gerontology and geriatrics that use biomarkers. Healthy aging research has attracted considerable attention in the biomedical and basic sciences within the context of four major areas: (a) genetic variations as an expression of successful or unsuccessful aging; (b) caloric restriction as an intervention to slow the progression of aging; (c) immunological aging; (d) neurobiology of the aging brain. A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify nurse-led geriatric-related biomarker research. Nurse researchers who have chosen to integrate biomarkers as part of their research studies have been working in six focal areas, which are reviewed: health promotion within risk populations, cancer, vascular disease, Alzheimer's disease, caregiving, and complementary therapies. The article provides a discussion of contributions to date, identifying existing gaps and future research opportunities.

Evaluating screening performances of the Fagerstrom tolerance questionnaire, the Fagerstrom test for nicotine dependence and the heavy smoking index among Taiwanese male smokers

AIM

To compare screening performances of the Fagerstrom Tolerance Questionnaire (FTQ), the Fagerstrom test for nicotine dependence (FTND) and the Heavy Smoking Index (HSI) with a view to determining the optimum cutoff scores using biomarkers as standards.

BACKGROUND

Previous studies proposed inconsistent cutoff scores for the FTQ, the FTND as signalling nicotine dependence and these scores were established by applying diverse standards.

METHOD

Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were used in pursuit of the study's objectives. Two hundred and forty-five male smokers were recruited in 2005 from among those attending public health stations in southern Taiwan. The three self-report measures of nicotine dependence were compared with the saliva cotinine and expired carbon monoxide (CO). The expired CO level was tested by means of a Micro Smokerlyzer, while salivary cotinine was analysed using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

RESULTS

The areas under the ROC curves for the FTQ, the FTND and the HSI were 0.71, 0.76 and 0.76 for the salivary cotinine and 0.71, 0.79 and 0.80 for the exhaled CO respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the FTND and the HSI were slightly greater than those for the FTQ. The optimum cutoff scores for the FTQ, the FTND and the HSI as screening tools to establish nicotine dependence would be 5+, 4+ and 3+ respectively.

CONCLUSION

The results indicate that the FTND and the HSI may be more efficacious than the FTQ in assessing nicotine dependence. Further research is needed to confirm these findings, especially among female smokers and for nicotine substitution trials. Relevance to clinical practice. To decrease tobacco-attributable morbidity and mortality, nurses and healthcare professionals need to implement effective smoking cessation interventions. The FTND and the HSI as well as their cutoff scores will be suitably used to assess nicotine dependence in these interventions.

Nursing interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Healthcare professionals, including nurses, frequently advise patients to improve their health by stopping smoking. Such advice may be brief, or part of more intensive interventions.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of nursing-delivered smoking cessation interventions.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group specialized register and CINAHL in July 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials of smoking cessation interventions delivered by nurses or health visitors with follow up of at least six months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted data independently. 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. Where statistically and clinically appropriate, we pooled studies using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed effect model and reported the outcome as a risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Thirty-one studies comparing a nursing intervention to a control or to usual care found the intervention to significantly increase the likelihood of quitting (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.38). There was heterogeneity among the study results, but pooling using a random effects model did not alter the estimate of a statistically significant effect. In a subgroup analysis there was weaker evidence that lower intensity interventions were effective (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.62). There was limited indirect evidence that interventions were more effective for hospital inpatients with cardiovascular disease than for inpatients with other conditions. Interventions in non-hospitalized patients also showed evidence of benefit. Nine studies comparing different nurse-delivered interventions failed to detect significant benefit from using additional components. Five studies of nurse counselling on smoking cessation during a screening health check, or as part of multifactorial secondary prevention in general practice (not included in the main meta-analysis) found nursing intervention to have less effect under these conditions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate the potential benefits of smoking cessation advice and/or counselling given by nurses to patients, with reasonable evidence that intervention is effective. The evidence of an effect is weaker when interventions are brief and are provided by nurses whose main role is not health promotion or smoking cessation. The challenge will be to incorporate smoking behaviour monitoring and smoking cessation interventions as part of standard practice, so that all patients are given an opportunity to be asked about their tobacco use and to be given advice and/or counselling to quit along with reinforcement and follow up.

Interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients

BACKGROUND

An admission to hospital provides an opportunity to help people stop smoking. Individuals may be more open to help at a time of perceived vulnerability, and may find it easier to quit in an environment where smoking is restricted or prohibited. Initiating smoking cessation services during hospitalisation may help more people to make and sustain a quit attempt.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of interventions for smoking cessation that are initiated for hospitalised patients.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group register which includes papers identified from CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PSYCINFO in January 2007, and CINAHL in August 2006 for studies of interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients, using terms including (hospital and patient*) or hospitali* or inpatient* or admission* or admitted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized and quasi-randomized trials of behavioural, pharmacological or multicomponent interventions to help patients stop smoking, conducted with hospitalised patients who were current smokers or recent quitters (defined as having quit more than one month before hospital admission). The intervention had to start in the hospital but could continue after hospital discharge. We excluded studies of patients admitted for psychiatric disorders or substance abuse, studies that did not report abstinence rates and studies with follow up of less than six months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted data independently for each paper, with disagreements resolved by consensus.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-three trials met the inclusion criteria. Intensive counselling interventions that began during the hospital stay and continued with supportive contacts for at least one month after discharge increased smoking cessation rates after discharge (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.44 to 1.90; 17 trials). No statistically significant benefit was found for less intensive counselling interventions. The one study that tested a single brief (<=15 minutes) in-hospital intervention did not find it to be effective (OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.67). Counselling of longer duration during the hospital stay was not associated with a higher quit rate (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.29, eight trials). Even counselling that began in the hospital but had less than one month of supportive contact after discharge did not show significant benefit (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.31, six trials). Adding nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) did not produce a statistically significant increase in cessation over what was achieved by intensive counselling alone (OR 1.47, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.35, five studies). The one study that tested the effect of adding bupropion to intensive counselling had a similar nonsignificant effect (OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.79 to 3.06). A similar pattern of results was observed in smokers admitted to hospital because of cardiovascular disease (CVD). In this subgroup, intensive intervention with follow-up support increased the odds of smoking cessation (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.54 to 2.15, 11 trials), but less intensive interventions did not. One trial of intensive intervention including counselling and pharmacotherapy for smokers admitted with CVD assessed clinical and health care utilization endpoints, and found significant reductions in all-cause mortality and hospital readmission rates over a two-year follow-up period.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

High intensity behavioural interventions that begin during a hospital stay and include at least one month of supportive contact after discharge promote smoking cessation among hospitalised patients. These interventions are effective regardless of the patient's admitting diagnosis. lnterventions of lower intensity or shorter duration have not been shown to be effective in this setting. There is insufficient direct evidence to conclude that adding NRT or bupropion to intensive counselling increases cessation rates over what is achieved by counselling alone, but the evidence of benefit for NRT has strengthened in this update and the point estimates are compatible with research in other settings showing that NRT and bupropion are effective.

Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the Fagerstrom Tolerance Questionnaire as a measure of cigarette dependence

AIM

The aim of this study is to estimate the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Fagerstrom Tolerance Questionnaire as a measure of nicotine dependence.

BACKGROUND

The Chinese Fagerstrom Tolerance Questionnaire has been used in smoking cessation programmes in Taiwan. However, the psychometric properties of the Chinese version have not been tested.

METHODS

A cross-sectional, descriptive study was conducted from June 2004 to July 2005 with 247 adult smokers. The criterion validity of the Chinese Fagerstrom Tolerance Questionnaire was determined using two biomarkers (exhaled CO and saliva cotinine levels). Because the responses to the items are dichotomous or nominal, the validity and factorial structures were examined using tetrachoric techniques. Construct reliability was evaluated to accommodate the lack of tau-equivalence assumed in computing Cronbach's alpha.

FINDINGS

The item 'smoke more in the morning' was not statistically significantly correlated with either biomarker because many participants expressed the desire to smoke after meals instead of in the morning. The items 'nicotine yield' and 'inhalation' performed poorly in terms of criterion validity and construct validity. This evidence supports modification of the Chinese version of the Fagerstrom Tolerance Questionnaire to the six-item Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence. In addition, the item 'difficulty refraining from smoking in forbidden places' had relatively poor psychometric performance. The reason may be culturally specific, having to do with the relative lack of forbidden places and restrictions on tobacco use in Taiwan. The predictive ability of the Chinese version of the Fagerstrom Tolerance Questionnaire for biomarkers is higher than the English version. The reliability coefficient (0.65) was higher than Cronbach's alpha, but did not meet the satisfactory standard of 0.70.

CONCLUSION

The Chinese version of the Fagerstrom Tolerance Questionnaire is a fairly reliable and valid scale, but needs to be revised to accommodate cross-cultural differences.

The effectiveness of a nursing inpatient smoking cessation program in individuals with cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND

Smoking is an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), and quitting is highly beneficial. Yet, less than 30% of CVD patients stop smoking. Relapse-prevention strategies seem most effective when initiated during the exacerbation of the disease.

OBJECTIVE

A nurse-delivered inpatient smoking cessation program based on the Transtheoretical Model with telephone follow-up tailored to levels of readiness to quit smoking was evaluated on smoking abstinence and progress to ulterior stages of change.

METHOD

Participants (N = 168) were randomly assigned by cohorts to inpatient counseling with telephone follow-up, inpatient counseling, and usual care. The inpatient intervention consisted of a 1-hr counseling session, and the telephone follow-up included 6 calls during the first 2 months after discharge. The nursing intervention was tailored to the individual's stage of change. End points at 2 and 6 months included actual and continuous smoking cessation rates (biochemical markers) and increased motivation (progress to ulterior stages of change).

RESULTS

Assuming that surviving patients lost to follow-up were smokers, the 6-month smoking abstinence rate was 41.5% in the inpatient counseling with telephone follow-up group, compared with 30.2% and 20% in the inpatient counseling and usual care groups, respectively (p = .05). Progress to ulterior stages of change was 43.3%, 32.1%, and 18.2%, respectively (p = .02). Stage of change at baseline and intervention predicted smoking status at 6 months.

DISCUSSION

This tailored smoking cessation program with telephone follow-up significantly increased smoking cessation at 6 months, and progression to ulterior stages of change. The telephone follow-up was an important adjunct. It is, therefore, recommended to include such comprehensive smoking cessation programs within hospital settings for individuals with CVD.

Nursing interventions for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Health care professionals, including nurses, frequently advise patients to improve their health by stopping smoking. Such advice may be brief, or part of more intensive interventions.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of nursing-delivered smoking cessation interventions.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group specialized register and CINAHL in June 2003.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials of smoking cessation interventions delivered by nurses or health visitors with follow-up of at least six months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted data independently.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty studies comparing a nursing intervention to a control or to usual care found the intervention to significantly increase the odds of quitting (Peto Odds Ratio 1.47, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.68). There was heterogeneity among the study results, but pooling using a random effects model did not alter the estimate of a statistically significant effect. There was limited evidence that interventions were more effective for hospital inpatients with cardiovascular disease than for inpatients with other conditions. Interventions in non-hospitalized patients also showed evidence of benefit. Five studies comparing different nurse-delivered interventions failed to detect significant benefit from using additional components. Five studies of nurse counselling on smoking cessation during a screening health check, or as part of multifactorial secondary prevention in general practice (not included in the main meta-analysis) found the nursing intervention to have less effect under these conditions.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The results indicate the potential benefits of smoking cessation advice and/or counselling given by nurses to patients, with reasonable evidence that interventions can be effective. The challenge will be to incorporate smoking behaviour monitoring and smoking cessation interventions as part of standard practice, so that all patients are given an opportunity to be asked about their tobacco use and to be given advice and/or counselling to quit along with reinforcement and follow-up.

Interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients

BACKGROUND

An admission to hospital provides an opportunity to help people stop smoking. Individuals may be more open to help at a time of perceived vulnerability, and may find it easier to quit in an environment where smoking is restricted or prohibited. Providing smoking cessation services during hospitalisation may help more people to attempt and sustain a quit attempt.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group register, CINAHL and the Smoking and Health database in March 2002 for studies of interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients, using terms including (hospital and patient*) or hospitali* or inpatient* or admission* or admitted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of behavioural, pharmacological or multicomponent interventions to help patients stop smoking conducted with hospitalised patients who were current smokers or recent quitters. We excluded studies of patients admitted for psychiatric disorders or substance abuse, those that did not report abstinence rates and those with follow-up of less than six months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted data independently for each paper, with disagreements resolved by consensus.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventeen trials met the inclusion criteria. Intensive intervention (inpatient contact plus follow-up for at least one month) was associated with a significantly higher quit rate compared to control (Peto Odds Ratio 1.82, 95% CI 1.49-2.22, six trials). Interventions with less than a month of follow-up did not show evidence of significant benefit (Peto Odds Ratio 1.09, 95% CI 0.91-1.31, seven trials). There was no evidence to judge the effect of very brief (<20 minutes) interventions delivered only during the hospital stay. Longer interventions delivered only during the hospital stay were not significantly associated with a higher quit rate (Peto Odds Ratio 1.07, 95% CI 0.79-1.44, three trials). Although the interventions increased quit rates irrespective of whether nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) was used, the results for NRT were compatible with other data indicating that it increases quit rates. There was no strong evidence that clinical diagnosis affected the likelihood of quitting.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

High intensity behavioural interventions that include at least one month of follow-up contact are effective in promoting smoking cessation in hospitalised patients. The findings of the review were compatible with research in other settings showing that NRT increases quit rates.