1
|
Carroll C, Tattersall A. Research and Policy Impact of Trials Published by the UK National Institute of Health Research (2006-2015). VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2020; 23:727-733. [PMID: 32540230 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.01.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/21/2019] [Revised: 01/17/2020] [Accepted: 01/25/2020] [Indexed: 06/11/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Health technology assessment aims to inform and support healthcare decision making, and trials are part of that process. The purpose of this study was to measure the impact of a sample of trials in a meaningful but robust fashion. METHODS All randomized controlled trials funded and published by the UK National Institute of Health Research in the Health Technology Assessment journal series and other peer-reviewed journals were identified for 2006 to 2015. Citation analysis was performed for all trials, and quantitative content analysis was undertaken on a purposive sample to determine whether impact could be categorized as "instrumental" (ie, having a clear influence on key research and policy publications). RESULTS The search identified 133 relevant trials. The citation rate per trial was 102.97. Of the 133 trials, 129 (98%) were cited in 1 or more systematic reviews or meta-analyses (mean per trial = 7.18, range = 0-44). Where they were cited, the trials were used in some form of synthesis 63% of the time. Ninety-one of the 133 (68%) trials were found to be cited in 1 or more guidance or policy document (mean per trial = 2.75, range = 0-26) and had an instrumental influence 41% of the time. The publication of these trials' results in journals other than the Health Technology Assessment journal appears to enhance the discoverability of the trial data. Altmetric.com proved to be very useful in identifying unique policy and guidance documents. CONCLUSION These trials have impressive citation rates, and a sizeable proportion are certainly being used in key publications in a genuinely instrumental manner.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher Carroll
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England, UK.
| | - Andy Tattersall
- School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Livingstone‐Banks J, Norris E, Hartmann‐Boyce J, West R, Jarvis M, Chubb E, Hajek P. Relapse prevention interventions for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 2019:CD003999. [PMID: 31684681 PMCID: PMC6816175 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd003999.pub6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A number of treatments can help smokers make a successful quit attempt, but many initially successful quitters relapse over time. Several interventions have been proposed to help prevent relapse. OBJECTIVES To assess whether specific interventions for relapse prevention reduce the proportion of recent quitters who return to smoking. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the ICTRP in May 2019 for studies mentioning relapse prevention or maintenance in their title, abstracts, or keywords. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of relapse prevention interventions with a minimum follow-up of six months. We included smokers who quit on their own, were undergoing enforced abstinence, or were participating in treatment programmes. We included studies that compared relapse prevention interventions with a no intervention control, or that compared a cessation programme with additional relapse prevention components with a cessation programme alone. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS We included 81 studies (69,094 participants), five of which are new to this update. We judged 22 studies to be at high risk of bias, 53 to be at unclear risk of bias, and six studies to be at low risk of bias. Fifty studies included abstainers, and 30 studies helped people to quit and then tested treatments to prevent relapse. Twenty-eight studies focused on special populations who were abstinent because of pregnancy (19 studies), hospital admission (six studies), or military service (three studies). Most studies used behavioural interventions that tried to teach people skills to cope with the urge to smoke, or followed up with additional support. Some studies tested extended pharmacotherapy. We focused on results from those studies that randomised abstainers, as these are the best test of relapse prevention interventions. Of the 12 analyses we conducted in abstainers, three pharmacotherapy analyses showed benefits of the intervention: extended varenicline in assisted abstainers (2 studies, n = 1297, risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 1.41, I2 = 82%; moderate-certainty evidence), rimonabant in assisted abstainers (1 study, RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.55), and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in unaided abstainers (2 studies, n = 2261, RR 1.24, 95% Cl 1.04 to 1.47, I2 = 56%). The remainder of analyses of pharmacotherapies in abstainers had wide confidence intervals consistent with both no effect and a statistically significant effect in favour of the intervention. These included NRT in hospital inpatients (2 studies, n = 1078, RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.60, I2 = 0%), NRT in assisted abstainers (2 studies, n = 553, RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.40, I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence), extended bupropion in assisted abstainers (6 studies, n = 1697, RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.35, I2 = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence), and bupropion plus NRT (2 studies, n = 243, RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.87, I2 = 66%; low-certainty evidence). Analyses of behavioural interventions in abstainers did not detect an effect. These included studies in abstinent pregnant and postpartum women at the end of pregnancy (8 studies, n = 1523, RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.11, I2 = 0%) and at postpartum follow-up (15 studies, n = 4606, RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.09, I2 = 3%), studies in hospital inpatients (5 studies, n = 1385, RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.47, I2 = 58%), and studies in assisted abstainers (11 studies, n = 5523, RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.11, I2 = 52%; moderate-certainty evidence) and unaided abstainers (5 studies, n = 3561, RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.16, I2 = 1%) from the general population. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Behavioural interventions that teach people to recognise situations that are high risk for relapse along with strategies to cope with them provided no worthwhile benefit in preventing relapse in assisted abstainers, although unexplained statistical heterogeneity means we are only moderately certain of this. In people who have successfully quit smoking using pharmacotherapy, there were mixed results regarding extending pharmacotherapy for longer than is standard. Extended treatment with varenicline helped to prevent relapse; evidence for the effect estimate was of moderate certainty, limited by unexplained statistical heterogeneity. Moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, did not detect a benefit from extended treatment with bupropion, though confidence intervals mean we could not rule out a clinically important benefit at this stage. Low-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, did not show a benefit of extended treatment with nicotine replacement therapy in preventing relapse in assisted abstainers. More research is needed in this area, especially as the evidence for extended nicotine replacement therapy in unassisted abstainers did suggest a benefit.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Emma Norris
- University College LondonCentre for Behaviour ChangeLondonUK
| | | | - Robert West
- University College LondonDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health1‐19 Torrington PlaceLondonUKWC1E 6BT
| | - Martin Jarvis
- University College LondonHealth Behavior Research Centre of Cancer Research UK, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health2‐16 Torrington PlaceLondonUKWC1E 6BT
| | - Emma Chubb
- Cardiff UniversitySchool of PsychologyCardiffUK
| | - Peter Hajek
- Barts & The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of LondonWolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine55 Philpot StreetLondonUKE1 2HJ
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Okoli CTC, El-Mallakh P, Seng S. Which Types of Tobacco Treatment Interventions Work for People with Schizophrenia? Provider and Mental Health Consumer Perspectives. Issues Ment Health Nurs 2019; 40:870-879. [PMID: 30388915 DOI: 10.1080/01612840.2018.1490833] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
People with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders (PWS) consume tobacco at high rates, resulting in disproportionate tobacco-related morbidity and mortality. Conventional tobacco treatment (TT) approaches may not adequately address unique affective, cognitive, and social challenges of PWS during cessation. This study sought to obtain provider and mental health consumer perspectives on effective, desirable, applicable, and acceptable components of TT for PWS. This convergent mixed-method study used structured interviews and a cross-sectional survey to obtain data. Eighteen mental health consumers and six mental health providers were engaged in face-to-face or telephone interviews. The qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis and theme identification and descriptive statistics were used for the analysis of quantitative data. In the qualitative analysis, consumers endorsed education, counseling, social support, and pharmacotherapy as key TT components. Consumers further stressed the need for flexible interventions that are available at any point in a quit attempt. Both providers and consumers endorsed targeting TT interventions to consider learning needs, potential cognitive issues, and motivation for behavioral change. Providers encouraged a recovery-driven TT framework with peer support and health promotion activities. Quantitative findings mirrored the qualitative findings with support sessions, relapse prevention, and skills training having the highest desirability, applicability, and acceptability TT component scores. Providers and consumers agreed on components of an effective TT program targeted to PWS. Given these findings, it is crucial to further investigate successful TT approaches for PWS and to test whether targeted or tailored programs are more effective than conventional approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chizimuzo T C Okoli
- Tobacco Treatment and Prevention Division, Tobacco Policy Research Program, University of Kentucky College of Nursing , Lexington , Kentucky , USA
| | - Peggy El-Mallakh
- Tobacco Treatment and Prevention Division, Tobacco Policy Research Program, University of Kentucky College of Nursing , Lexington , Kentucky , USA
| | - Sarret Seng
- Tobacco Treatment and Prevention Division, Tobacco Policy Research Program, University of Kentucky College of Nursing , Lexington , Kentucky , USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Song F, Elwell-Sutton T, Naughton F. Impact of the NHS Stop Smoking Services on smoking prevalence in England: a simulation modelling evaluation. Tob Control 2019; 29:200-206. [PMID: 30952692 PMCID: PMC7042976 DOI: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2018-054879] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2018] [Revised: 01/31/2019] [Accepted: 02/09/2019] [Indexed: 11/05/2022]
Abstract
Background The English National Health Service NHS Stop Smoking Services (SSS), established in 2001, were the first such services in the world. An appropriate evaluation of the SSS has national and international significance. This modelling study sought to evaluate the impact of the SSS on changes in smoking prevalence in England. Methods A discrete time state-transition model was developed to simulate changes in smoking status among the adult population in England during 2001–2016. Input parameters were based on data from national statistics, population representative surveys and published literature. The main outcome was the percentage point reduction in smoking prevalence attributable to the SSS. Results Smoking prevalence was reduced by 10.8 % in absolute terms during 2001–2016 in England, and 15.3 % of the reduction could be attributable to the SSS. The percentage point reduction in smoking prevalence each year was on average 0.72%, and 0.11 % could be attributable to the SSS. The proportion of SSS supported quit attempts increased from 5.5 % in 2001, to as high as 18.9 % in 2011, and then reduced to 8.2 % in 2016. Quit attempts with SSS support had a higher success rate than those without SSS support (15.1% vs 11.3%). Smoking prevalence in England continued to decline after the SSS was much reduced from 2013 onwards. Conclusions Approximately 15% of the percentage point reduction in smoking prevalence during 2001–2016 in England may be attributable to the NHS SSS, although uncertainty remains regarding the actual impact of the formal smoking cessation services.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fujian Song
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
| | | | - Felix Naughton
- School of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Livingstone‐Banks J, Norris E, Hartmann‐Boyce J, West R, Jarvis M, Hajek P. Relapse prevention interventions for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 2:CD003999. [PMID: 30758045 PMCID: PMC6372978 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd003999.pub5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A number of treatments can help smokers make a successful quit attempt, but many initially successful quitters relapse over time. Several interventions have been proposed to help prevent relapse. OBJECTIVES To assess whether specific interventions for relapse prevention reduce the proportion of recent quitters who return to smoking. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the ICTRP in February 2018 for studies mentioning relapse prevention or maintenance in their title, abstracts, or keywords. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of relapse prevention interventions with a minimum follow-up of six months. We included smokers who quit on their own, were undergoing enforced abstinence, or were participating in treatment programmes. We included studies that compared relapse prevention interventions with a no intervention control, or that compared a cessation programme with additional relapse prevention components with a cessation programme alone. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS We included 77 studies (67,285 participants), 15 of which are new to this update. We judged 21 studies to be at high risk of bias, 51 to be at unclear risk of bias, and five studies to be at low risk of bias. Forty-eight studies included abstainers, and 29 studies helped people to quit and then tested treatments to prevent relapse. Twenty-six studies focused on special populations who were abstinent because of pregnancy (18 studies), hospital admission (five studies), or military service (three studies). Most studies used behavioural interventions that tried to teach people skills to cope with the urge to smoke, or followed up with additional support. Some studies tested extended pharmacotherapy.We focused on results from those studies that randomised abstainers, as these are the best test of relapse prevention interventions. Of the 12 analyses we conducted in abstainers, three pharmacotherapy analyses showed benefits of the intervention: extended varenicline in assisted abstainers (2 studies, n = 1297, risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 1.41, I² = 82%; moderate certainty evidence), rimonabant in assisted abstainers (1 study, RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.55), and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in unaided abstainers (2 studies, n = 2261, RR 1.24, 95% Cl 1.04 to 1.47, I² = 56%). The remainder of analyses of pharmacotherapies in abstainers had wide confidence intervals consistent with both no effect and a statistically significant effect in favour of the intervention. These included NRT in hospital inpatients (2 studies, n = 1078, RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.60, I² = 0%), NRT in assisted abstainers (2 studies, n = 553, RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.40, I² = 0%; low certainty evidence), extended bupropion in assisted abstainers (6 studies, n = 1697, RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.35, I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence), and bupropion plus NRT (2 studies, n = 243, RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.87, I² = 66%; low certainty evidence). Analyses of behavioural interventions in abstainers did not detect an effect. These included studies in abstinent pregnant and postpartum women at end of pregnancy (8 studies, n = 1523, RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.11, I² = 0%) and at postpartum follow-up (15 studies, n = 4606, RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.09, I² = 3%), studies in hospital inpatients (4 studies, n = 1300, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.11, I² = 0%), and studies in assisted abstainers (10 studies, n = 5408, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.13, I² = 56%; moderate certainty evidence) and unaided abstainers (5 studies, n = 3561, RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.16, I² = 1%) from the general population. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Behavioural interventions that teach people to recognise situations that are high risk for relapse along with strategies to cope with them provided no worthwhile benefit in preventing relapse in assisted abstainers, although unexplained statistical heterogeneity means we are only moderately certain of this. In people who have successfully quit smoking using pharmacotherapy, there were mixed results regarding extending pharmacotherapy for longer than is standard. Extended treatment with varenicline helped to prevent relapse; evidence for the effect estimate was of moderate certainty, limited by unexplained statistical heterogeneity. Moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, did not detect a benefit from extended treatment with bupropion, though confidence intervals mean we could not rule out a clinically important benefit at this stage. Low-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, did not show a benefit of extended treatment with nicotine replacement therapy in preventing relapse in assisted abstainers. More research is needed in this area, especially as the evidence for extended nicotine replacement therapy in unassisted abstainers did suggest a benefit.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Emma Norris
- University College LondonCentre for Behaviour ChangeLondonUK
| | | | - Robert West
- University College LondonDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health1‐19 Torrington PlaceLondonUKWC1E 6BT
| | - Martin Jarvis
- University College LondonHealth Behavior Research Centre of Cancer Research UK, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health2‐16 Torrington PlaceLondonUKWC1E 6BT
| | - Peter Hajek
- Barts & The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of LondonWolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine55 Philpot StreetLondonUKE1 2HJ
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Livingstone‐Banks J, Ordóñez‐Mena JM, Hartmann‐Boyce J. Print-based self-help interventions for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 1:CD001118. [PMID: 30623970 PMCID: PMC7112723 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd001118.pub4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many smokers give up smoking on their own, but materials that provide a structured programme for smokers to follow may increase the number who quit successfully. OBJECTIVES The aims of this review were to determine the effectiveness of different forms of print-based self-help materials that provide a structured programme for smokers to follow, compared with no treatment and with other minimal contact strategies, and to determine the comparative effectiveness of different components and characteristics of print-based self-help, such as computer-generated feedback, additional materials, tailoring of materials to individuals, and targeting of materials at specific groups. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). The date of the most recent search was March 2018. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised trials of smoking cessation with follow-up of at least six months, where at least one arm tested print-based materials providing self-help compared with minimal print-based self-help (such as a short leaflet) or a lower-intensity control. We defined 'self-help' as structured programming for smokers trying to quit without intensive contact with a therapist. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We extracted data in accordance with standard methodological procedures set out by Cochrane. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months' follow-up in people smoking at baseline. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each study and biochemically validated rates when available. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model. MAIN RESULTS We identified 75 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Many study reports did not include sufficient detail to allow judgement of risk of bias for some domains. We judged 30 studies (40%) to be at high risk of bias for one or more domains.Thirty-five studies evaluated the effects of standard, non-tailored self-help materials. Eleven studies compared self-help materials alone with no intervention and found a small effect in favour of the intervention (n = 13,241; risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.37; I² = 0%). We judged the evidence to be of moderate certainty in accordance with GRADE, downgraded for indirect relevance to populations in low- and middle-income countries because evidence for this comparison came from studies conducted solely in high-income countries and there is reason to believe the intervention might work differently in low- and middle-income countries. This analysis excluded two studies by the same author team with strongly positive outcomes that were clear outliers and introduced significant heterogeneity. Six further studies of structured self-help compared with brief leaflets did not show evidence of an effect of self-help materials on smoking cessation (n = 7023; RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.07; I² = 21%). We found evidence of benefit from standard self-help materials when there was brief contact that did not include smoking cessation advice (4 studies; n = 2822; RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.88; I² = 0%), but not when self-help was provided as an adjunct to face-to-face smoking cessation advice for all participants (11 studies; n = 5365; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.28; I² = 32%).Thirty-two studies tested materials tailored for the characteristics of individual smokers, with controls receiving no materials, or stage-matched or non-tailored materials. Most of these studies used more than one mailing. Pooling studies that compared tailored self-help with no self-help, either on its own or compared with advice, or as an adjunct to advice, showed a benefit of providing tailored self-help interventions (12 studies; n = 19,190; RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.49; I² = 0%) with little evidence of difference between subgroups (10 studies compared tailored with no materials, n = 14,359; RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.51; I² = 0%; two studies compared tailored materials with brief advice, n = 2992; RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.49; I² = 0%; and two studies evaluated tailored materials as an adjunct to brief advice, n = 1839; RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.53; I² = 10%). When studies compared tailored self-help with non-tailored self-help, results favoured tailored interventions when the tailored interventions involved more mailings than the non-tailored interventions (9 studies; n = 14,166; RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.68; I² = 0%), but not when the two conditions were contact-matched (10 studies; n = 11,024; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.30; I² = 50%). We judged the evidence to be of moderate certainty in accordance with GRADE, downgraded for risk of bias.Five studies evaluated self-help materials as an adjunct to nicotine replacement therapy; pooling three of these provided no evidence of additional benefit (n = 1769; RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.30; I² = 0%). Four studies evaluating additional written materials favoured the intervention, but the lower confidence interval crossed the line of no effect (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.58; I² = 73%). A small number of other studies did not detect benefit from using targeted materials, or find differences between different self-help programmes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Moderate-certainty evidence shows that when no other support is available, written self-help materials help more people to stop smoking than no intervention. When people receive advice from a health professional or are using nicotine replacement therapy, there is no evidence that self-help materials add to their effect. However, small benefits cannot be excluded. Moderate-certainty evidence shows that self-help materials that use data from participants to tailor the nature of the advice or support given are more effective than no intervention. However, when tailored self-help materials, which typically involve repeated assessment and mailing, were compared with untailored materials delivered similarly, there was no evidence of benefit.Available evidence tested self-help interventions in high-income countries, where more intensive support is often available. Further research is needed to investigate effects of these interventions in low- and middle-income countries, where more intensive support may not be available.
Collapse
|
7
|
Song F, Bachmann MO, Aveyard P, Barton GR, Brown TJ, Maskrey V, Blyth A, Notley C, Holland R, Sutton S, Brandon TH. Relapse to smoking and health-related quality of life: Secondary analysis of data from a study of smoking relapse prevention. PLoS One 2018; 13:e0205992. [PMID: 30458010 PMCID: PMC6245517 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205992] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2018] [Accepted: 10/03/2018] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Previous studies have shown that smoking and smoking cessation may be associated with health-related quality of life (HRQoL). In this study, we compared changes in HRQoL in people who maintained abstinence with people who had relapsed to smoking. Methods This was a secondary analysis of data from a trial of a relapse prevention intervention in 1,407 short-term quitters. The European Quality of Life -5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) measured HRQoL at baseline, 3 and 12 months. Smoking outcome was continuous abstinence from 2 to 12 months, and 7-day smoking at 3 and 12 months. We used nonparametric test for differences in EQ-5D utility scores, and chi-square test for dichotomised response to each of the five EQ-5D dimensions. Multivariable regression analyses were conducted to evaluate associations between smoking relapse and HRQoL or anxiety/depression problems. Results The mean EQ-5D tariff score was 0.8252 at baseline. People who maintained abstinence experienced a statistically non-significant increase in the EQ-5D score (mean change 0.0015, P = 0.88), while returning to smoking was associated with a statistically significant decrease in the EQ-5D score (mean change -0.0270, P = 0.004). After adjusting for multiple baseline characteristics, the utility change during baseline and 12 months was statistically significantly associated with continuous abstinence, with a difference of 0.0288 (95% CI: 0.0006 to 0.0571, P = 0.045) between relapsers and continuous quitters. The only difference in quality of life dimensions between those who relapsed and those who maintained abstinence was in the proportion of participants with anxiety/depression problems at 12 months (30% vs. 22%, P = 0.001). Smoking relapse was associated with a simultaneous increase in anxiety/depression problems. Conclusions People who achieve short-term smoking abstinence but subsequently relapse to smoking have a reduced quality of life, which appears mostly due to worsening of symptoms of anxiety and depression. Further research is required to more fully understand the relationship between smoking and health-related quality of life, and to develop cessation interventions by taking into account the impact of anxiety or depression on smoking.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fujian Song
- Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, University of East Anglia, Research Park, Norwich, United Kingdom
- * E-mail:
| | - Max O. Bachmann
- Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, University of East Anglia, Research Park, Norwich, United Kingdom
| | - Paul Aveyard
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Woodstock Road, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Garry R. Barton
- Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, University of East Anglia, Research Park, Norwich, United Kingdom
| | - Tracey J. Brown
- Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, University of East Anglia, Research Park, Norwich, United Kingdom
| | - Vivienne Maskrey
- Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, University of East Anglia, Research Park, Norwich, United Kingdom
| | - Annie Blyth
- Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, University of East Anglia, Research Park, Norwich, United Kingdom
| | - Caitlin Notley
- Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, University of East Anglia, Research Park, Norwich, United Kingdom
| | - Richard Holland
- Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, University of East Anglia, Research Park, Norwich, United Kingdom
| | - Stephen Sutton
- Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Thomas H. Brandon
- Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa FL, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Trapero‐Bertran M, Leidl R, Muñoz C, Kulchaitanaroaj P, Coyle K, Präger M, Józwiak‐Hagymásy J, Cheung KL, Hiligsmann M, Pokhrel S. Estimates of costs for modelling return on investment from smoking cessation interventions. Addiction 2018; 113 Suppl 1:32-41. [PMID: 29532538 PMCID: PMC6033022 DOI: 10.1111/add.14091] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2017] [Revised: 07/20/2017] [Accepted: 11/02/2017] [Indexed: 12/05/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Modelling return on investment (ROI) from smoking cessation interventions requires estimates of their costs and benefits. This paper describes a standardized method developed to source both economic costs of tobacco smoking and costs of implementing cessation interventions for a Europe-wide ROI model [European study on Quantifying Utility of Investment in Protection from Tobacco model (EQUIPTMOD)]. DESIGN Focused search of administrative and published data. A standardized checklist was developed in order to ensure consistency in methods of data collection. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS Adult population (15+ years) in Hungary, Netherlands, Germany, Spain and England. For passive smoking-related costs, child population (0-15 years) was also included. MEASUREMENTS Costs of treating smoking-attributable diseases; productivity losses due to smoking-attributable absenteeism; and costs of implementing smoking cessation interventions. FINDINGS Annual costs (per case) of treating smoking attributable lung cancer were between €5074 (Hungary) and €52 106 (Germany); coronary heart disease between €1521 (Spain) and €3955 (Netherlands); chronic obstructive pulmonary disease between €1280 (England) and €4199 (Spain); stroke between €1829 (Hungary) and €14 880 (Netherlands). Costs (per recipient) of smoking cessation medications were estimated to be: for standard duration of varenicline between €225 (England) and €465 (Hungary); for bupropion between €25 (Hungary) and €220 (Germany). Costs (per recipient) of providing behavioural support were also wide-ranging: one-to-one behavioural support between €34 (Hungary) and €474 (Netherlands); and group-based behavioural support between €12 (Hungary) and €257 (Germany). The costs (per recipient) of delivering brief physician advice were: €24 (England); €9 (Germany); €4 (Hungary); €33 (Netherlands); and €27 (Spain). CONCLUSIONS Costs of treating smoking-attributable diseases as well as the costs of implementing smoking cessation interventions vary substantially across Hungary, Netherlands, Germany, Spain and England. Estimates for the costs of these diseases and interventions can contribute to return on investment estimates in support of national or regional policy decisions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marta Trapero‐Bertran
- Centre of Research in Economics and Health (CRES‐UPF) University Pompeu FabraBarcelonaSpain
- Faculty of Economics and Social SciencesUniversitat Internacional de Catalunya (UIC)BarcelonaSpain
| | - Reiner Leidl
- Institute of Health Economics and Health Care Management, Helmholtz Zentrum München (GmbH) ‐ German Research Center for Environmental Health, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC‐M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL)NeuherbergGermany
- Munich Center of Health SciencesLudwig‐Maximilians‐UniversityMunichGermany
| | - Celia Muñoz
- Centre of Research in Economics and Health (CRES‐UPF) University Pompeu FabraBarcelonaSpain
| | - Puttarin Kulchaitanaroaj
- Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and SocietiesBrunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
| | - Kathryn Coyle
- Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and SocietiesBrunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
- Department of Epidemiology and Community Medicine, Faculty of MedicineUniversity of OttawaOttawaCanada
| | - Maximilian Präger
- Institute of Health Economics and Health Care Management, Helmholtz Zentrum München (GmbH) ‐ German Research Center for Environmental Health, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC‐M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL)NeuherbergGermany
| | - Judit Józwiak‐Hagymásy
- Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Health Policy and Health EconomicsEötvös Loránd University, and Syreon Research InstituteBudapestHungary
| | - Kei Long Cheung
- CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Department of Health Services ResearchMaastricht UniversityMaastrichtthe Netherlands
| | - Mickael Hiligsmann
- CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Department of Health Services ResearchMaastricht UniversityMaastrichtthe Netherlands
| | - Subhash Pokhrel
- Health Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and SocietiesBrunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Trapero‐Bertran M, Muñoz C, Coyle K, Coyle D, Lester‐George A, Leidl R, Németh B, Cheung K, Pokhrel S, Lopez‐Nicolás Á. Cost-effectiveness of alternative smoking cessation scenarios in Spain: results from the EQUIPTMOD. Addiction 2018; 113 Suppl 1:65-75. [PMID: 29532966 PMCID: PMC6032934 DOI: 10.1111/add.14090] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2017] [Revised: 08/07/2017] [Accepted: 11/02/2017] [Indexed: 12/02/2022]
Abstract
AIMS To assess the cost-effectiveness of alternative smoking cessation scenarios from the perspective of the Spanish National Health Service (NHS). DESIGN We used the European study on Quantifying Utility of Investment in Protection from Tobacco model (EQUIPTMOD), a Markov-based state transition economic model, to estimate the return on investment (ROI) of: (a) the current provision of smoking cessation services (brief physician advice and printed self-helped material + smoking ban and tobacco duty at current levels); and (b) four alternative scenarios to complement the current provision: coverage of proactive telephone calls; nicotine replacement therapy (mono and combo) [prescription nicotine replacement therapy (Rx NRT)]; varenicline (standard duration); or bupropion. A rate of 3% was used to discount life-time costs and benefits. SETTING Spain. PARTICIPANTS Adult smoking population (16+ years). MEASUREMENTS Health-care costs associated with treatment of smoking attributable diseases (lung cancer, coronary heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary infection and stroke); intervention costs; quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs and outcomes were summarized using various ROI estimates. FINDINGS The cost of implementing the current provision of smoking cessation services is approximately €61 million in the current year. This translates to 18 quitters per 1000 smokers and a life-time benefit-cost ratio of 5, compared with no such provision. All alternative scenarios were dominant (cost-saving: less expensive to run and generated more QALYs) from the life-time perspective, compared with the current provision. The life-time benefit-cost ratios were: 1.87 (proactive telephone calls); 1.17 (Rx NRT); 2.40 (varenicline-standard duration); and bupropion (2.18). The results remained robust in the sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSIONS According to the EQUIPTMOD modelling tool it would be cost-effective for the Spanish authorities to expand the reach of existing GP brief interventions for smoking cessation, provide pro-active telephone support, and reimburse smoking cessation medication to smokers trying to stop. Such policies would more than pay for themselves in the long run.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marta Trapero‐Bertran
- Centre of Research in Economics and Health (CRES‐UPF) University Pompeu FabraBarcelonaSpain
- Faculty of Economics and Social SciencesUniversitat Internacional de Catalunya (UIC)BarcelonaSpain
| | - Celia Muñoz
- Centre of Research in Economics and Health (CRES‐UPF) University Pompeu FabraBarcelonaSpain
| | - Kathryn Coyle
- Health Economics Research GroupInstitute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
| | - Doug Coyle
- Health Economics Research GroupInstitute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
- School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of MedicineUniversity of OttawaOttawaCanada
| | | | - Reiner Leidl
- Institute of Health Economics and Health Care Management, Helmholtz Zentrum München (GmbH) ‐ German Research Center for Environmental Health, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC‐M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL)NeuherbergGermany
- Munich Center of Health SciencesLudwig‐Maximilians‐UniversityMunichGermany
| | - Bertalan Németh
- Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Health Policy and Health EconomicsEötvös Loránd University, and Syreon Research InstituteBudapestHungary
| | - Kei‐Long Cheung
- Caphri School of Public Health and Primary Care, Health Services ResearchMaastricht UniversityMaastrichtthe Netherlands
| | - Subhash Pokhrel
- Health Economics Research GroupInstitute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
| | - Ángel Lopez‐Nicolás
- Centre of Research in Economics and Health (CRES‐UPF) University Pompeu FabraBarcelonaSpain
- Department of Economics, Faculty of Business ScienceUniversidad Politécnica de Cartagena
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Zampier VSDB, Silva MHD, Jesus RRD, Oliveira PPD, Jesus MCPD, Merighi MAB. Maintenance of tobacco withdrawal by former smokers: a phenomenological study. Rev Gaucha Enferm 2017; 38:e2017-27. [PMID: 29791541 DOI: 10.1590/1983-1447.2017.04.2017-0027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2017] [Accepted: 07/04/2017] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To understand the experience of former smokers maintaining tobacco abstinence. METHODS Qualitative research using the theoretical-methodological reference of the Social Phenomenology, as defined by Alfred Schütz. The phenomenological interview was carried out in 2016 with 12 former smokers from a city in the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil. The statements were organized into categories and discussed based on the literature. RESULTS The maintenance of tobacco abstinence was revealed in the categories: "Health, sociability, and financial gains"; "Living with the urge to smoke and with the increase of body weight"; "Self-determination and use of replacement strategies"; and "Staying away from cigarettes." CONCLUSIONS These results alert health professionals to the need to provide support to former smokers so they can remain smoke-free. This implies considering not only the negative effects of the tobacco abstinence, but also the social context in which former smokers are inserted that might have an impact on the maintenance or not of the cigarette withdrawal.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Rodolfo Ribeiro de Jesus
- Faculdade de Medicina de Juiz de Fora, Universidade Presidente Antônio Carlos, Juiz de Fora, Minas Gerais, Brazil
| | - Paloma Prata de Oliveira
- Faculdade de Enfermagem, Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, Juiz de Fora, Minas Gerais, Brazil
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Maskrey V, Blyth A, Brown TJ, Barton GR, Notley C, Aveyard P, Holland R, Bachmann MO, Sutton S, Leonardi‐Bee J, Brandon TH, Song F. Self-help educational booklets for the prevention of smoking relapse following smoking cessation treatment: a randomized controlled trial. Addiction 2015; 110:2006-14. [PMID: 26235659 PMCID: PMC4832320 DOI: 10.1111/add.13080] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2015] [Revised: 05/06/2015] [Accepted: 07/29/2015] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
AIMS Most people who quit smoking for a short term will return to smoking again in 12 months. We tested whether self-help booklets can reduce relapse in short-term quitters after receiving behavioural and pharmacological cessation treatment. DESIGN A parallel-arm, pragmatic individually randomized controlled trial. SETTING Smoking cessation clinics in England. Participants People who stopped smoking for 4 weeks after receiving cessation treatment in stop smoking clinics. INTERVENTION Participants in the experimental group (n=703) were mailed eight booklets, each of which taught readers how to resist urges to smoke. Participants in the control group (n=704) received a leaflet currently used in practice. MEASUREMENTS The primary outcome was prolonged, carbon monoxide-verified abstinence from months 4 to 12. The secondary outcomes included 7-day self-reported abstinence at 3 and 12 months. Mixed-effects logistic regression was used to estimate treatment effects and to investigate possible effect modifying variables. FINDINGS There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in prolonged abstinence from months 4 to 12 (36.9% versus 38.6%; odds ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.75-1.16; P=0.524). In addition, there were no significant differences between the groups in any secondary outcomes. However, people who reported knowing risky situations for relapse and using strategies to handle urges to smoke were less likely to relapse. CONCLUSIONS In people who stop smoking successfully with behavioural support, a comprehensive self-help educational programme to teach people skills to identify and respond to high-risk situations for return to smoking did not reduce relapse.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vivienne Maskrey
- Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health ScienceUniversity of East AngliaNorwichNorfolkUK
| | - Annie Blyth
- Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health ScienceUniversity of East AngliaNorwichNorfolkUK
| | - Tracey J. Brown
- Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health ScienceUniversity of East AngliaNorwichNorfolkUK
| | - Garry R. Barton
- Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health ScienceUniversity of East AngliaNorwichNorfolkUK,Norwich Clinical Trial UnitUniversity of East AngliaNorwichNorfolkUK
| | - Caitlin Notley
- Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health ScienceUniversity of East AngliaNorwichNorfolkUK
| | - Paul Aveyard
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health SciencesUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
| | - Richard Holland
- Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health ScienceUniversity of East AngliaNorwichNorfolkUK
| | - Max O. Bachmann
- Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health ScienceUniversity of East AngliaNorwichNorfolkUK
| | - Stephen Sutton
- Institute of Public HealthUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
| | - Jo. Leonardi‐Bee
- Division of Epidemiology and Public HealthUniversity of NottinghamNottinghamUK
| | - Thomas H. Brandon
- Department of Health Outcomes and BehaviorMoffitt Cancer CenterTampaFLUSA
| | - Fujian Song
- Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health ScienceUniversity of East AngliaNorwichNorfolkUK
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Song F, Maskrey V, Blyth A, Brown TJ, Barton GR, Aveyard P, Notley C, Holland R, Bachmann MO, Sutton S, Brandon TH. Differences in Longer-Term Smoking Abstinence After Treatment by Specialist or Nonspecialist Advisors: Secondary Analysis of Data From a Relapse Prevention Trial. Nicotine Tob Res 2015; 18:1061-6. [PMID: 26152558 PMCID: PMC4826486 DOI: 10.1093/ntr/ntv148] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2015] [Accepted: 06/27/2015] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Abstract
Introduction: Smokers receiving support in specialist centers tend to have a higher short-term quit rate, compared with those receiving support in other settings from professionals for whom smoking cessation is only a part of their work. We investigated the difference in longer-term abstinence after short-term smoking cessation treatment from specialist and nonspecialist smoking cessation services. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial of self-help booklets for the prevention of smoking relapse. The trial included 1088 short-term quitters from specialist stop smoking clinics and 316 from nonspecialist cessation services (such as general practice, pharmacies, and health trainer services). The difference in prolonged smoking abstinence from months 4 to 12 between specialist and nonspecialist services was compared. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted to investigate the association between continuous smoking abstinence and the type of smoking cessation services, adjusted for possible confounding factors (including demographic, socioeconomic, and smoking history variables). Results: The proportion of continuous abstinence from 4 to 12 months was higher in short-term quitters from specialist services compared with those from nonspecialist services (39% vs. 32%; P = .023). After adjusting for a range of participant characteristics and smoking variables, the specialist service was significantly associated with a higher rate of longer-term smoking abstinence (odds ratio: 1.48, 95% CI = 1.09% to 2.00%; P = .011). Conclusions: People who receive support to stop smoking from a specialist appear to be at lower risk of relapse than those receiving support from a nonspecialist advisor.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fujian Song
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom;
| | - Vivienne Maskrey
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom
| | - Annie Blyth
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom
| | - Tracey J Brown
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom
| | - Garry R Barton
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom; Norwich Clinical Trial Unit, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom
| | - Paul Aveyard
- Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Caitlin Notley
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom
| | - Richard Holland
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom
| | - Max O Bachmann
- Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom
| | - Stephen Sutton
- Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| | - Thomas H Brandon
- Department of Health Outcomes and Behavior, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL
| |
Collapse
|