[Smoking prevention in the school: results of a 3-year program]

Prevention of tobacco use in an adolescent population through a multi-personal intervention model

INTRODUCTION

The study aimed to assess the impact of a new intervention proposal involving students, teachers, and parents on smoking prevalence in secondary school adolescents.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental study was conducted, in which the response to a preventive multi-personal intervention model (intervention) against tobacco consumption was compared with a standard anti-smoking activity carried out by the local government administration (control). The study was carried out during the 2017-2018 academic year. The study population included 306 students (intervention 151, control 155) with a mean age of 13.4 years. The model involved the parents, the students (aged 15-17 years), and the teachers. The primary outcome was the change in smoking status one year after the intervention.

RESULTS

The percentage of non-smokers increased from 84.1% to 88.7% in the intervention group and remained almost unchanged among controls (89.3% vs 89.9%). After one year, there was an increase in the prevalence of non-smokers of 4.6% and a decrease in the prevalence of smokers of 4.7% among students who received the multi-personal intervention, whereas changes among controls were almost negligible (there was in fact a slight increase in the prevalence of smokers of 0.9%). The students who received the intervention smoked less or quit smoking more than those in the control group (OR=0.135; 95% CI: 0.019-0.973, p=0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

The multi-personal model developed in the study with the participation of teachers and parents focused on students was feasible, and effectively reduced the prevalence of smoking among high school adolescents.

School-based programmes for preventing smoking

BACKGROUND

Helping young people to avoid starting smoking is a widely endorsed public health goal, and schools provide a route to communicate with nearly all young people. School-based interventions have been delivered for close to 40 years.

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim of this review was to determine whether school smoking interventions prevent youth from starting smoking. Our secondary objective was to determine which interventions were most effective. This included evaluating the effects of theoretical approaches; additional booster sessions; programme deliverers; gender effects; and multifocal interventions versus those focused solely on smoking.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, ERIC, CINAHL, Health Star, and Dissertation Abstracts for terms relating to school-based smoking cessation programmes. In addition, we screened the bibliographies of articles and ran individual MEDLINE searches for 133 authors who had undertaken randomised controlled trials in this area. The most recent searches were conducted in October 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where students, classes, schools, or school districts were randomised to intervention arm(s) versus a control group, and followed for at least six months. Participants had to be youth (aged 5 to 18). Interventions could be any curricula used in a school setting to deter tobacco use, and outcome measures could be never smoking, frequency of smoking, number of cigarettes smoked, or smoking indices.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Based on the type of outcome, we placed studies into three groups for analysis: Pure Prevention cohorts (Group 1), Change in Smoking Behaviour over time (Group 2) and Point Prevalence of Smoking (Group 3).

MAIN RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-four studies involving 428,293 participants met the inclusion criteria. Some studies provided data for more than one group.Pure Prevention cohorts (Group 1) included 49 studies (N = 142,447). Pooled results at follow-up at one year or less found no overall effect of intervention curricula versus control (odds ratio (OR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85 to 1.05). In a subgroup analysis, the combined social competence and social influences curricula (six RCTs) showed a statistically significant effect in preventing the onset of smoking (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.87; seven arms); whereas significant effects were not detected in programmes involving information only (OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.00 to 14.87; one study), social influences only (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.13; 25 studies), or multimodal interventions (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.08; five studies). In contrast, pooled results at longest follow-up showed an overall significant effect favouring the intervention (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.96). Subgroup analyses detected significant effects in programmes with social competence curricula (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.88), and the combined social competence and social influences curricula (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.87), but not in those programmes with information only, social influence only, and multimodal programmes.Change in Smoking Behaviour over time (Group 2) included 15 studies (N = 45,555). At one year or less there was a small but statistically significant effect favouring controls (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.04, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.06). For follow-up longer than one year there was a statistically nonsignificant effect (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.02).Twenty-five studies reported data on the Point Prevalence of Smoking (Group 3), though heterogeneity in this group was too high for data to be pooled.We were unable to analyse data for 49 studies (N = 152,544).Subgroup analyses (Pure Prevention cohorts only) demonstrated that at longest follow-up for all curricula combined, there was a significant effect favouring adult presenters (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.96). There were no differences between tobacco-only and multifocal interventions. For curricula with booster sessions there was a significant effect only for combined social competence and social influences interventions with follow-up of one year or less (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.96) and at longest follow-up (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.96). Limited data on gender differences suggested no overall effect, although one study found an effect of multimodal intervention at one year for male students. Sensitivity analyses for Pure Prevention cohorts and Change in Smoking Behaviour over time outcomes suggested that neither selection nor attrition bias affected the results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Pure Prevention cohorts showed a significant effect at longest follow-up, with an average 12% reduction in starting smoking compared to the control groups. However, no overall effect was detected at one year or less. The combined social competence and social influences interventions showed a significant effect at one year and at longest follow-up. Studies that deployed a social influences programme showed no overall effect at any time point; multimodal interventions and those with an information-only approach were similarly ineffective.Studies reporting Change in Smoking Behaviour over time did not show an overall effect, but at an intervention level there were positive findings for social competence and combined social competence and social influences interventions.

[Lung function and exposure to tobacco smoke among adolescents]

OBJECTIVE

To study lung function in adolescents in relation to smoking (active and passive smokers) and to investigate the repercussion on spirometric parameters.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

We studied 301 healthy adolescents with no history of bronchial asthma or colds in the month prior to the study. A questionnaire on tobacco exposure was administered and spirometry (Datospir-92) was performed.

RESULTS

There were 165 boys (54.5%) and 136 girls (45.5%) aged between 14 and 20 years old (16.40+/-1.32). A total of 27.2% were non-smokers and were not exposed to tobacco smoke (NS), 31.3% were passive smokers, with household exposure of 10 cigarettes per day during at least the previous year (PS), and 41.5% were current smokers who had been smoking>or=10 cigarettes/day for at least 1 year (CS). Significant differences were found between age and smoking habits (p=0.0001) and between smoking habits and female sex (girls CS: 33.9% vs boys CS: 21.8 %) (p=0.007). A significant association was found between smoking (NS, PS and CS) and spirometric parameters (ANOVA): forced vital capacity (FVC) (p=0.001), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) (p=0.0001), FEV1/FVC (p=0.004), peak expiratory flow (PEF) (p=0.0001), midexpiratory flow at 25% of forced vital capacity (MEF25%) (p=0.01), MEF50% (p=0.0001) and MEF25-75% (p=0.0001); CS in relation to NS was as follows: FEV1, PEF, MEF50%, MEF25-50% (p=0.0001) and FVC, FEV1/FVC, MEF25% (p=0.01); CS in relation to PS: FEV1/ FVC (p=0.02), PEF (p=0.004), MEF50% and MEF25-75% (p=0.003), PS in relation to NS: FVC and FEV1 (p=0.02). Significant differences in FVC, FEV1 and MEF25-75% were found in female CS in comparison with boys.

CONCLUSIONS

The CS group showed a significant decrease in spirometric parameters in relation to the NS group. The airway was affected sooner in the female group of smokers than in the male group, even though the intensity and time of exposure were the same in both groups.

[Benefit of brief interventions and pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation in teenagers]

Management of smoking includes approaches such as health advice against smoking, brief or intensive interventions, and pharmacotherapy. However, we do not have enough information on the use of such approaches in teenagers. School programs aimed at children and adolescents are perhaps the most widely used intervention and the one for which we have the most experience. Such programs should meet a series of well-defined criteria, but in recent years their effectiveness has been questioned. Currently, information is lacking on how effective these interventions are in young smokers who wish to stop. Several clinical guidelines recommend advice and a brief intervention in adolescents but are less specific regarding pharmacotherapy. By integrating advice and a brief intervention into existing smoking prevention and control programs in schools, such approaches could be used to combat smoking in children and adolescents. However, the information available on the use of such interventions in children and adolescents is insufficient and more research needs to be done, particularly by health care professionals specialized in the identification of susceptible individuals and treatment of smoking.

School-based programmes for preventing smoking

BACKGROUND

Smoking rates in adolescents are rising in some countries. Helping young people to avoid starting smoking is a widely endorsed goal of public health, but there is uncertainty about how to do this. Schools provide a route for communicating with a large proportion of young people, and school-based programmes for smoking prevention have been widely developed and evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To review all randomized controlled trials of behavioural interventions in schools to prevent children (aged 5 to12) and adolescents (aged 13 to18) starting smoking.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsyclNFO, ERIC, CINAHL, Health Star, Dissertation Abstracts and studies identified in the bibliographies of articles. Individual MEDLINE searches were made for 133 authors who had undertaken randomized controlled trials in this area.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies: those in which individual students, classes, schools, or school districts were randomized to the intervention or control groups and followed for at least six months.

TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

Children (aged 5 to12) or adolescents (aged 13 to18) in school settings. Types of interventions: Classroom programmes or curricula, including those with associated family and community interventions, intended to deter use of tobacco. We included programmes or curricula that provided information, those that used social influences approaches, those that taught generic social competence, and those that included interventions beyond the school into the community. We included programmes with a drug or alcohol focus if outcomes for tobacco use were reported. Types of outcome measures: Prevalence of non-smoking at follow up among those not smoking at baseline. We did not require biochemical validation of self-reported tobacco use for study inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed whether identified citations were randomized controlled trials. We assessed the quality of design and execution, and abstracted outcome data. Because of the marked heterogeneity of design and outcomes, we computed pooled estimates only for those trials that could be analyzed together and for which statistical data were available. We predominantly synthesized the data using narrative systematic review. We grouped studies by intervention method (information; social competence; social influences; combined social influences/social competence; multi-modal programmes). Within each group, we placed them into three categories (low, medium and high risk of bias) according to validity using quality criteria for reported study design.

MAIN RESULTS

Of the 94 randomized controlled trials identified, we classified 23 as category one (most valid). There was one category one study of information-giving and two of teaching social comeptence. There were thirteen category one studies of social influences interventions. Of these, nine found some positive effect of intervention on smoking prevalence, and four failed to detect an effect on smoking prevalence. The largest and most rigorous study, the Hutchinson Smoking Prevention Project, found no long-term effect of an intensive eight-year programme on smoking behaviour. There were three category one RCTs of combined social influences and social competence interventions: one provided significant results and one only for instruction by health educators compared to self-instruction. There was a lack of high quality evidence about the effectiveness of combinations of social influences and social competence approaches. There was one category one study providing data on social influences compared with information giving. There were four category one studies of multi-modal approaches but they provided limited evidence about the effectiveness of multi-modal approaches including community initiatives.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is one rigorous test of the effects of information-giving about smoking. There are well-conducted randomized controlled trials to test the effects of social influences interventions: in half of the group of best quality studies those in the intervention group smoke less than those in the control, but many studies failed to detect an effect of the intervention. There are only three high quality RCTs which test the effectiveness of combinations of social influences and social competence interventions, and four which test multi-modal interventions; half showed significant positive results.

[Smoking prevention intervention among secondary school students in the Spanish province of Malaga]

OBJECTIVE

To assess the prevalence of smoking among 13- to 18-year-old students, analyze smoking-related factors in this population, and design an intervention program to reduce smoking.

POPULATION AND METHODS

A 6-month smoking prevention intervention was designed for students at a public secondary school in the Spanish province of Malaga. The objective of the intervention was to inform students of the gravity of smoking and its deleterious effects on health. The efficacy of the intervention was subsequently assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 337 students who completed the questionnaire, 27% declared they were smokers. Smoking prevalence was significantly higher among girls (36.1%) than boys (18.1%) (P<.001) and progressively increased with age. Initiation occurred at 13 to 14 years of age. The most common reason for starting was to try something new (52.2% of students). The greatest risk factor in the family environment was having a smoking sibling. After the program, 78% of smokers admitted that the intervention had not affected their smoking but had made them more aware of its detrimental effects, and 66.8% planned to quit in the future.

CONCLUSIONS

The study shows the high prevalence of smoking among adolescents, particularly among girls. It also shows that health education increases understanding of the problems related to smoking, causing changes of attitude with regard to whether they will smoke in the future.

Levels and correlates of knowledge about cancer risk factors among 13,293 public school students in Morelos, Mexico

BACKGROUND

Data on young people's knowledge about cancer prevention are not currently available for many populations, including Mexican young people, although cancer is the second most common cause of death among the Mexican population.

METHODS

A questionnaire was applied to 13,293 public school students aged 11-24 years in Morelos, Mexico. A knowledge-based scale was constructed from survey answers about risk factors for cancer. Data were analyzed using multivariate logistic multinomial models.

RESULTS

Knowledge levels were low: 78% of male and 74% of female students had only wrong answers to questions about risk factors for cancer. A significant dose-response gradient was observed between age and knowledge of cancer risk factors (P < 0.001), with a higher prevalence in young women at all ages (female students OR 4.6, 95% CI 3.81-5.66). Students 18 years old and older knew more than 13-year-olds (OR = 2.39; 95% CI 1.89-3.01). Sexually active students (OR 2.10; 95% CI 1.70-2.58), especially those who consistently used condoms (OR 2.84; 95% CI 1.00-8.07), knew more about cancer prevention. Tobacco smoking was the most frequently recognized cancer risk factor, and smokers also recognized this as an important cause of cancer (OR 1.37; 95% CI 1.44-2.52).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results reveal a poor level of knowledge about cancer prevention among adolescents. These data are the first step in the development of an intervention based on empirical findings that will be susceptible to evaluation.

Joinpoint regression analysis of lung cancer mortality, Andalusia 1975–2000

BACKGROUND

Previous analyses of lung cancer mortality were based on models of death rates within one time period, assuming that rates increase or decrease with time at a constant rate. The aim of this work is to analyse recent changes in lung cancer mortality trends in Andalusia (Spain) during the period of 1975-2000 using joinpoint regression models.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Mortality data were obtained from the Death Registry of Andalusia. For each gender, age group-specific and standardised (overall and truncated) rates were calculated by the direct method (using the world standard population). The joinpoint analysis was used to identify the best-fitting points where a statistically significant change in the trend occurred.

RESULTS

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality in men, with an increasing trend up to 1994. After that year, rates began to decrease significantly (-1.8% yearly from 1994 to 2000). Standardised rates in women exhibited a downward trend until the early 1990s, after which they levelled off (overall standardised rates) or increased significantly (truncated rates 35-64 years).

CONCLUSIONS

An increase in lung cancer mortality has been observed in young women. There seems to be a relationship with the prevalence in smoking in men and women.

[Tobacco use among young people in informal education settings: a survey of behaviors and opinions]

OBJECTIVES

To obtain information about the tobacco use of young people in an informal educational setting. To analyze the profile of the young smoker and the associated social and health factors, and to discover the opinion of tobacco held by smokers and non-smokers. POPULATION AND METHODS An anonymous, self-administered, personal questionnaire was completed by volunteers aged 14 to 26 years old taking part in the activities of 3 youth centers. The questionnaire included items about the subjects' smoking habits, their awareness of the harmful effects of cigarette smoking and knowledge of tobacco cessation techniques. The survey also covered the health and social profile of young smokers.

RESULTS

A total of 84 completed questionnaires were received (40 males and 44 females). The mean age of the sample was 18.3 years. Of the total, 15.4% had never smoked, 44% described themselves as smokers, and 16.6% as ex-smokers. Of the smokers, 40% smoked up to 10 cigarettes/day and 60% between 11 and 20. The age of initiation or experimentation was 13.1 years, and that of the onset of regular or daily use, 14.6 years. Only 23.5% of the smokers expressed a desire to stop smoking, and 50% had never tried to quit. Tobacco use was associated with weekend alcohol consumption in 59% of the smokers. None of the respondents were aware of the tobacco cessation aids and therapies available.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the data collected by way of these questionnaires, a high percentage of the young people who participate in these leisure activities are smokers. They report a very early age of initiation and an accurate understanding of the serious consequences of tobacco use. Their lack of awareness about the available aids for tobacco cessation is a cause for concern, and the number of smokers who expressed a desire to quit was minimal. A disturbing increase in the association between alcohol and tobacco consumption was observed.

[A survey on the relationship between tobacco use and physical exercise among university students]

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence of tobacco use among university students who participate in sports activities. MATERIALS AND METHODS This was a descriptive, cross-sectional study based on a self-administered questionnaire completed by students who participated in activities at a university sports center. The variables studied were age, sex, tobacco use, cigarettes/day, prior history of physical exercise, awareness of the regulations concerning tobacco use in force on the university campus, opinion on the relationship between smoking and reduced physical performance, and desire to quit smoking.

RESULTS

A total of 406 completed questionnaires were received (41.2% of the target population); 71.7% were from women and 28.3% from men. The mean (SD) age of the sample was 22 (3.6) years, and the prevalence of smoking was 30.3%. The mean number of cigarettes smoked per day was 10.5 (6.7) for the sample as a whole, 9.3 (6.1) for women, and 14.7 (7.4) for men; the differences were statistically significant. No significant differences were found with respect to the relationship between exercise and tobacco use. A total of 98.8% of the subjects were of the opinion that smoking reduced physical performance, and 46.3% expressed a desire to quit.

CONCLUSIONS

The practice of physical exercise during adolescence as part of a prevention program might interfere with the factors that lead young people to start smoking and thereby contribute to a reduction in the prevalence of tobacco use in the population as a whole.

School-based programmes for preventing smoking

BACKGROUND

Smoking rates in adolescents are rising. Helping young people to avoid starting smoking is a widely endorsed goal of public health, but there is uncertainty about how to do this. Schools provide a route for communicating with a large proportion of young people, and school-based programmes for smoking prevention have been widely developed and evaluated.

OBJECTIVES

To review all randomised controlled trials of behavioural interventions in schools to prevent children (aged 5 to12) and adolescents (aged 13 to18) starting smoking.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Controlled Trials and Tobacco Review group registers, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Psyclnfo, ERIC, CINAHL, Health Star, Dissertation Abstracts and studies identified in the bibliographies of articles. Individual MEDLINE searches were made for 133 authors who had undertaken randomised controlled trials in this area.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Types of studies: those in which individual students, classes, schools, or school districts were randomised to the intervention or control groups and followed for at least six months.

TYPES OF PARTICIPANTS

Children (aged 5 to12) or adolescents (aged 13 to18) in school settings. Types of interventions: Classroom programmes or curricula, including those with associated family and community interventions, intended to deter use of tobacco. We included programmes or curricula that provided information, those that used social influences approaches, those that taught generic social competence, and those that included interventions beyond the school into the community. We included programmes with a drug or alcohol focus if outcomes for tobacco use were reported. Types of outcome measures: Prevalence of non-smoking at follow-up among those not smoking at baseline. We did not require biochemical validation of self-reported tobacco use for study inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We assessed whether identified citations were randomised controlled trials. We assessed the quality of design and execution, and abstracted outcome data. Because of the marked heterogeneity of design and outcomes, we did not perform a meta-analysis. We synthesised the data using narrative systematic review. We grouped studies by intervention method (information; social competence; social influences; combined social influences/social competence and multi-modal programmes). Within each category, we placed them into three groups according to validity using quality criteria for reported study design.

MAIN RESULTS

Of the 76 randomised controlled trials identified, we classified 16 as category one (most valid). There were no category one studies of information giving alone. There were fifteen category one studies of social influences interventions. Of these, eight showed some positive effect of intervention on smoking prevalence, and seven failed to detect an effect on smoking prevalence. The largest and most rigorous study, the Hutchinson Smoking Prevention Project, found no long-term effect of an intensive 8-year programme on smoking behaviour. There was a lack of high quality evidence about the effectiveness of combinations of social influences and social competence approaches. There was limited evidence about the effectiveness of multi-modal approaches including community initiatives.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There is no rigorous test of the effects of information giving about smoking. There are well-conducted randomised controlled trials to test the effects of social influences interventions: in half of the group of best quality studies those in the intervention group smoke less than those in the control, but many studies showed no effect of the intervention. There is a lack of high-quality evidence about the effectiveness of combinations of social influences and social competence interventions, and of multi-modal programmes that include community interventions.