Commentary on Banham & Gilbody (2010): The scandal of smoking and mental illness

Inequity in smoking cessation clinical trials testing pharmacotherapies: exclusion of smokers with mental health disorders

OBJECTIVES

People suffering from mental health disorder (MHDs) are often under-represented in clinical research though the reasons for their exclusion are rarely recorded. As they have higher rates of smoking and nicotine dependence, it is crucial that they are adequately represented in clinical trials of established pharmacotherapy interventions for smoking cessation. This review aims to examine the practice of excluding smokers with MHDs and reasons for such exclusion in clinical trials evaluating pharmacotherapy treatments for smoking cessation.

DATA SOURCE

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews was searched until September 2020 for reviews on smoking cessation using pharmacotherapies.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) within the selected Cochrane reviews were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Conducted by one author and independently verified by three authors.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We included 279 RCTs from 13 Cochrane reviews. Of all studies, 51 (18.3%) explicitly excluded participants with any MHDs, 152 (54.5%) conditionally excluded based on certain MHD criteria and 76 (27.2%) provided insufficient information to ascertain either inclusion or exclusion. Studies of antidepressant medications used for smoking cessation were found to be 3.33 times more likely (95% CI 1.38 to 8.01, p=0.007) to conditionally exclude smokers with MHDs than explicitly exclude compared with studies of nicotine replacement therapy.

CONCLUSION

Smokers with MHDs are not sufficiently represented in RCTs examining the safety and effectiveness of smoking cessation medications. Greater access to clinical trial participation needs to be facilitated for this group to better address access to appropriate pharmacotherapeutic interventions in this vulnerable population.

The exclusion of people with psychiatric disorders from medical research

People with psychiatric disorders are excluded from medical research to an unknown degree with unknown effects. We examined the prevalence of reported psychiatric exclusion criteria using a sample of 400 highly-cited randomized trials (2002-2010) across 20 common chronic disorders (6 psychiatric and 14 other medical disorders). Two coders rated the presence of psychiatric exclusion criteria for each trial. Half of all trials (and 84% of psychiatric disorder treatment trials) reported possible or definite psychiatric exclusion criteria, with significant variation across disorders (p < .001). Non-psychiatric conditions with high rates of reported psychiatric exclusion criteria included low back pain (75%), osteoarthritis (57%), COPD (55%), and diabetes (55%). The most commonly reported type of psychiatric exclusion criteria were those related to substance use disorders (reported in 48% of trials reporting at least one psychiatric exclusion criteria). General psychiatric exclusions (e.g., "any serious psychiatric disorder") were also prevalent (38% of trials). Psychiatric disorder trials were more likely than other medical disorder trials to report each specific type of psychiatric exclusion (p's < .001). Because published clinical trial reports do not always fully describe exclusion criteria, this study's estimates of the prevalence of psychiatric exclusion criteria are conservative. Clinical trials greatly influence state-of-the-art medical care, yet individuals with psychiatric disorders are often actively excluded from these trials. This pattern of exclusion represents an under-recognized and worrisome cause of health inequity. Further attention should be paid to how individuals with psychiatric disorders can be safely included in medical research to address this important clinical and social justice issue.

A call to include people with mental illness and substance use disorders alongside 'regular' smokers in smoking cessation research

This commentary points out that smoking is increasingly concentrated among people with psychiatric problems and other substance use disorders (eg, alcohol use disorder), and argues that for clinical, ethical and efficiency reasons, such individuals should be routinely enrolled in smoking cessation research.

Factors affecting smoking cessation efforts of people with severe mental illness: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

People with severe mental illness are much more likely to smoke than are members of the general population. Smoking cessation interventions that combine counseling and medication have been shown to be moderately effective, but quit rates remain low and little is known about the experiences of people with severe mental illness in smoking cessation interventions. To address this gap in knowledge, we conducted a qualitative study to investigate factors that help or hinder the smoking cessation efforts of people with severe mental illness.

METHODS

We recruited 16 people with severe mental illness who had participated in a clinical trial of two different smoking cessation interventions, one involving nicotine replacement therapy only and the other nicotine replacement therapy combined with motivational interviewing and a peer support group. We conducted open-ended, semi-structured interviews with participants, who ranged in age from 20 to 56 years old, were equally distributed by gender (eight men and eight women), and were predominantly Caucasian (n = 13, 81%). Primary mental illness diagnoses included schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder (n = 6, 38%), depression (n = 5, 31%), bipolar disorder (n = 4, 25%), and anxiety disorder (n = 1, 6%). At entry into the clinical trial, participants smoked an average of 22.6 cigarettes per day (SD = 13.0).

RESULTS

RESULTS indicated that people with mental illness have a diverse range of experiences in the same smoking cessation intervention. Smoking cessation experiences were influenced by factors related to the intervention itself (such as presence of smoking cessation aids, group supports, and emphasis on individual choice and needs), as well as individual factors (such as mental health, physical health, and substance use), and social-environmental factors (such as difficult life events and social relationships).

CONCLUSIONS

An improved understanding of the smoking cessation experiences of people with severe mental illness can inform the delivery of future smoking cessation interventions for this population. The results of this study suggest the importance of smoking cessation interventions that offer a variety of treatment options, incorporating choice and flexibility, so as to be responsive to the evolving needs and preferences of individual clients.