Insomnia and parasomnia induced by validated smoking cessation pharmacotherapies and electronic cigarettes: a network meta-analysis.

We aim to assess the relationship between validated smoking cessation pharmacotherapies and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and insomnia and parasomnia using a systematic review and a network meta-analysis. A systematic search was performed until August 2022 in the following databases: PUBMED, COCHRANE, CLINICALTRIAL. Randomized controlled studies against placebo or validated therapeutic smoking cessation methods and e-cigarettes in adult smokers without unstable or psychiatric comorbidity were included. The primary outcome was the presence of "insomnia" and "parasomnia." A total of 1261 studies were selected. Thirty-seven studies were included in the quantitative analysis (34 for insomnia and 23 for parasomnia). The reported interventions were varenicline (23 studies), nicotine replacement therapy (NRT, 10 studies), bupropion (15 studies). No studies on e-cigarettes were included. Bayesian analyses found that insomnia and parasomnia are more frequent with smoking cessation therapies than placebo except for bupropion. Insomnia was less frequent with nicotine substitutes but more frequent with bupropion than the over pharmacotherapies. Parasomnia are less frequent with bupropion but more frequent with varenicline than the over pharmacotherapies. Validated smoking cessation pharmacotherapies can induce sleep disturbances with different degrees of frequency. Our network meta-analysis shows a more favorable profile of nicotine substitutes for insomnia and bupropion for parasomnia. It seems essential to systematize the assessment of sleep disturbances in the initiation of smoking cessation treatment. This could help professionals to personalize the choice of treatment according to sleep parameters of each patient. Considering co-addictions, broadening the populations studied and standardizing the measurement are additional avenues for future research.

Duration of the effectiveness of nicotine electronic cigarettes on smoking cessation and reduction: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: The success of pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation in real-life remains limited, with a significant number of long-term relapses. Despite first promising results, the duration of the effectiveness of electronic cigarettes is still unknown. Our objective was to assess the duration of the effectiveness of electronic cigarettes on smoking cessation and reduction in daily smokers. Methods: The databases EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), ClinicalTrials.gov and PUBMED were consulted until March 23, 2022. We selected only randomized controlled trials with daily adult smokers. The intervention was the nicotinic electronic cigarette vs. non-nicotine electronic cigarette or other validated pharmacotherapies (varenicline, bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy). The minimum duration of the intervention was 3 months, with a follow-up of at least 6 months. Two independent reviewers used the PRISMA guidelines. The primary endpoint was smoking cessation at the end of the intervention and follow-up periods confirmed by a reduction in expired CO < 10 ppm. The reduction was defined as at least 50% of the initial consumption or by a decrease of daily mean cigarette consumption at the end of the intervention and follow-up periods. Results: Abstinence at the end of the intervention and follow-up periods was significantly higher in the nicotine electronic cigarette group, compared to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) [respectively: RR: 1.37 (CI 95%: 1.32-2.93) and RR: 1.49 (CI 95%: 1.14-1.95)] and to the non-nicotine electronic cigarette condition [respectively: RR: 1.97 (CI 95%: 1.18-2.68) and RR: 1.66 (CI 95%: 1.01-2.73)]. With regard to smoking reduction, the electronic cigarette with nicotine is significantly more effective than NRT at the end of the intervention and follow-up periods [respectively RR: 1.48 (CI 95%: 1.04-2.10) and RR: 1.47 (CI 95%: 1.18-1.82)] and non-nicotine electronic cigarette in the long term [RR: 1.31 (CI 95%: 1.02-1.68)]. Conclusions: This meta-analysis shows the duration of the effectiveness of the nicotine electronic cigarette vs. non-nicotine electronic cigarette and NRT on smoking cessation and reduction. There are still uncertainties about the risks of its long-term use and its potential role as a gateway into smoking, particularly among young people.

Sexual risk behaviour reduction interventions in primary care in Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development countries. A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Sexually transmitted infections are a major public health issue, both in France and worldwide. Primary healthcare professionals play a key role in sexual health and prevention, but few take on this subject. Prevention strategies are diverse, thus risk reduction strategies focussing on behavioural changes are still needed. PURPOSE: We conducted a systematic review to analyse risk reduction interventions focussing on behavioural change in OECD countries in primary healthcare settings to help develop a prevention tool easy to apply in primary care. METHODS: We searched for English- or French-language controlled trials in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, PsycINFO, PsycArticle, PBSC, SocINDEX, Google Scholar, and CAIRN, supplemented with the bibliographies of previous systematic reviews. Thirty controlled, randomized, or nonrandomized trials were included in the systematic review. We did not conduct any meta-analysis due to the diversity of populations, outcomes and study designs. RESULTS: There are efficient interventions in primary healthcare settings for reducing sexual risk behaviours and/or incident STI. Their efficiency seems to grow with the length and intensity of the intervention. Most interventions target only young, high-risk patients, and their long-term impact is uncertain. Most included studies had an overall risk of bias estimated as high or with some concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Some tools could be used in primary care, with possible efficiency though results are difficult to generalize, and value should be assessed in daily practice. Future research should also focus on older population given the epidemiological evolutions, but also lower-risk population to target all patients seen in primary care settings.

Perceptions, professional responsibility and management experiences of patients with alcohol, tobacco and opioid use disorder by residents in general practice and teaching general practitioners.

BACKGROUND: Substance use disorders (SUDs) are based on pathophysiological mechanisms common to all psychoactive substances. However, general practitioners (GPs) hold different views depending on the substance in question. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether the perceptions that teaching GPs and final-year residents in general practice have of patients with a SUD vary according to the substance involved and explore their professional responsibility and management experiences. METHODS: A cross-sectional observational study was carried out by asking residents and teaching GPs from eight faculties of medicine about their perceptions, professional responsibility and management experience of patients with tobacco, alcohol and opioid use disorders, using an online questionnaire between June and September 2017. RESULTS: The responses of 238 teaching GPs (mean age 50 years SD 3.5; 58% men) and 327 residents (mean age 28 years SD 9.9; 67% women) were analysed (response rates: 9 and 15% respectively). Tobacco smokers were considered to be more responsible for their acts than the other users. Teaching GPs and residents considered that it was their responsibility to discuss substance use. They did not feel able to manage alcohol and opioid use disorders. Tobacco cessation was mainly managed alone (78%). The results were quite similar among teaching GPs and residents. CONCLUSION: The majority of practitioners had no difficulty managing smoking cessation. During the management of alcohol and particularly opioid use disorders, practitioners did not feel competent. The gap between their perceived responsibility and competencies should be addressed by training and promoting collaborative care.

Arrêt du tabac : une personnalisation nécessaire des programmes de sevrage.

OBJECTIVE: With 13 million smokers in France in 2019, smoking remains a major health issue. The LAST (Lieux d'accompagnement à la santé sans tabac [Locations for Health Support without Tobacco]) project set up in New-Aquitaine aims to encourage smokers to get help to quit smoking. METHOD: In order to identify the barriers and levers to be mobilized to encourage smokers to seek help and then build with them the ideal cessation program, an individual qualitative study based on semi-structured interviews was conducted in May 2019 with 19 smokers at the contemplation or preparation step (transtheo-retical model). RESULTS: Smokers interviewed were unfamiliar with the cessation aids available and use them infrequently. Reasons include lack of information about their effectiveness, perceived cost, and fear of developing another form of addiction. Regarding the ideal program for them, using a health professional was cited by the majority, followed by physical activity (to avoid weight gain), nicotine replacement therapy and other drug treatments. The need to combine aids and to personalize the withdrawal offer is a strong demand. CONCLUSION: The development of the "ideal", personalized cessation aid program seems to be an opportunity for each smoker to choose the aids that are most in line with his or her needs and values. First-line professionals, because of their proximity, appear to be a key entry point to accompany cessation attempts.

Nalmefene, Given as Needed, in the Routine Treatment of Patients with Alcohol Dependence: An Interventional, Open-Label Study in Primary Care.

AIMS: This 12-week, open-label, primary care study (NCT02195817) evaluated the efficacy and safety of nalmefene, taken as needed, to reduce alcohol consumption in adults with a diagnosis of alcohol dependence and drinking at least at high drinking risk levels (DRL, > 60 g/day for men, > 40 g/day for women). METHODS: Following the Screening Visit, patients recorded their daily alcohol consumption for 2 weeks. Patients were then categorised by their self-reported drinking levels; those who maintained at least a high DRL in the 2-week period were included in Cohort-A, and those who reduced their alcohol consumption below high DRL were included in Cohort-B. Cohort-A received simple psychosocial interventions and were supplied with nalmefene 18 mg to be taken on days when they perceived a risk of drinking alcohol. Patients in Cohort-B received a simple psychosocial intervention and were treated per normal practice. RESULTS: Of the 378 enrolled patients, 330 were included in Cohort-A and 48 in Cohort-B. For patients in Cohort-A, the mean change from screening to Week-12 in the number of heavy drinking days/month was -13.1 days/month (95% CI -14.4 to -11.9, p < 0.0001). Overall, 55% of patients reduced their DRL by ≥2 risk levels and 44% of patients reduced to a low DRL. The most common adverse events were nausea (18.3%) and dizziness (17.7%). Patients in Cohort-B maintained their lower level alcohol consumption at the 12-week follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with alcohol dependence treated in primary care with nalmefene, taken as needed, in conjunction with simple psychosocial support, significantly reduced their alcohol consumption. Treatment was well tolerated.

Factors and motivations associated with use of e-cigarette among primary care patients in a prospective cohort study: e-TAC study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: While the relationship between electronic cigarette use and smoking has often been studied, the association between electronic cigarette use and socioeconomic factors has received less attention. This is a study protocol aiming to describe the relationship between the consumption of psychoactive products (in particular: smoking) or some socioeconomic factors and the evolution of the use of electronic cigarette in primary healthcare over 1 year. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Electronic cigarette, Tobacco, Alcohol and Cannabis (e-TAC) is a prospective multisite cohort study, including 473 patients at baseline and carrying out in general practices in the Aquitaine area (France). The volunteer patients participated in the study regardless of their initial reason for consultation. They filled out a self-administered questionnaire at baseline and will also do so after 12 months by phone, email or letter. The study will focus on the factors that explain the experimentation with or the current use of the electronic cigarette, as well as factors associated with their evolutions over time using multivariate logistic regression modelling or Cox regression modelling. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study received ethical approval from the University of Bordeaux Committee for the protection of persons. It was also approved by the National Commission for Data Processing and Freedoms. Findings will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals and we will disseminate them by presentations at national or international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: RCB: 2015-A00778-41; Pre-results.