ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Whether men find it easier to quit smoking than women is still controversial. Different studies have reported that the efficacy of pharmacological treatments could be different between men and women. This study conducted a secondary analysis of 'Subsidized pharmacological treatment for smoking cessation by the Spanish public health system' (FTFT-AP study) to evaluate the effectiveness of a drug-funded intervention for smoking cessation by gender. METHODS: A pragmatic randomized clinical trial by clusters was used. The population included smokers aged ≥18 years, smoking >10 cigarettes per day, randomly assigned to an intervention group receiving regular practice and financed pharmacological treatment, or to a control group receiving only regular practice. The main outcome was continued abstinence at 12 months, self-reported and validated with CO-oximetry. The percentage, with 95% confidence intervals, of continued abstinence was compared between both groups at 12 months post-intervention, by gender and the pharmacological treatment used. Multilevel logistic regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 1154 patients from 29 healthcare centers were included. The average age was 46 years (SD=11.78) and 51.7% were men. Overall, the self-reported abstinence at 12 months was 11.1% (62) in women and 15.7% (93) in men (AOR=1.4; 95% CI: 1.0-2.0), and abstinence validated by CO-oximetry was 4.6% (26) and 5.9% (35) in women and men, respectively (OR=1.3; 95% CI: 0.7-2.2). In the group of smokers receiving nicotine replacement treatment, self-reported abstinence was higher in men compared to women (29.5% vs 13.5%, OR=2.7; 95% CI: 1.3-5.8). CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of a drug-financed intervention for smoking cessation was greater in men, who also showed better results in self-reported abstinence with nicotine replacement treatment.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Among chronic diseases, cognitive, neurological, and cardiovascular impairments are becoming increasingly prevalent, generating a shift in health and social needs. Technology can create an ecosystem of care integrated with microtools based on biosensors for motion, location, voice, and expression detection that can help people with chronic diseases. A technological system capable of identifying symptoms, signs, or behavioral patterns could provide notification of the development of complications of disease. This would help the self-care of patients with chronic disease and save health care costs, promoting the autonomy and empowerment of patients and their caregivers, improving their quality of life (QoL), and providing health professionals with monitoring tools. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a technological system (the TeNDER system) to improve quality of life in patients with chronic diseases: Alzheimer disease, Parkinson disease, and cardiovascular disease. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized, parallel-group clinical trial will be conducted with a follow-up of 2 months. The scope of the study will be the primary care health centers of the Community of Madrid belonging to the Spanish public health system. The study population will be patients diagnosed with Parkinson disease, Alzheimer disease, and cardiovascular disease; their caregivers; and health professionals. The sample size will be 534 patients (380 in the intervention group). The intervention will consist of the use of the TeNDER system. The system will monitor the patients by means of biosensors, and their data will be integrated into the TeNDER app. With the information provided, the TeNDER system will generate health reports that can be consulted by patients, caregivers, and health professionals. Sociodemographic variables and technological affinity will be measured, as will views on the usability of and satisfaction with the TeNDER system. The dependent variable will be the mean difference in QoL score between the intervention and control groups at 2 months. To study the effectiveness of the TeNDER system in improving QoL in patients, an explanatory linear regression model will be constructed. All analyses will be performed with the 95% CI and robust estimators. RESULTS: Ethics approval for this project was received on September 11, 2019. The trial was registered on August 14, 2020. Recruitment commenced in April 2021, and the expected results will be available during 2023 or 2024. CONCLUSIONS: This clinical trial among patients with highly prevalent chronic illnesses and the people most involved in their care will provide a more realistic view of the situation experienced by people with long-term illness and their support networks. The TeNDER system is in continuous development based on a study of the needs of the target population and on feedback during its use from the users: patients, caregivers, and primary care health professionals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05681065; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05681065. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/47331.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Tobacco addiction is the leading cause of preventable morbidity and mortality worldwide, but only 1 in 20 cessation attempts is supervised by a health professional. The potential advantages of mobile health (mHealth) can circumvent this problem and facilitate tobacco cessation interventions for public health systems. Given its easy scalability to large populations and great potential, chatbots are a potentially useful complement to usual treatment. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the effectiveness of an evidence-based intervention to quit smoking via a chatbot in smartphones compared with usual clinical practice in primary care. METHODS: This is a pragmatic, multicenter, controlled, and randomized clinical trial involving 34 primary health care centers within the Madrid Health Service (Spain). Smokers over the age of 18 years who attended on-site consultation and accepted help to quit tobacco were recruited by their doctor or nurse and randomly allocated to receive usual care (control group [CG]) or an evidence-based chatbot intervention (intervention group [IG]). The interventions in both arms were based on the 5A's (ie, Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, and Arrange) in the US Clinical Practice Guideline, which combines behavioral and pharmacological treatments and is structured in several follow-up appointments. The primary outcome was continuous abstinence from smoking that was biochemically validated after 6 months by the collaborators. The outcome analysis was blinded to allocation of patients, although participants were unblinded to group assignment. An intention-to-treat analysis, using the baseline-observation-carried-forward approach for missing data, and logistic regression models with robust estimators were employed for assessing the primary outcomes. RESULTS: The trial was conducted between October 1, 2018, and March 31, 2019. The sample included 513 patients (242 in the IG and 271 in the CG), with an average age of 49.8 (SD 10.82) years and gender ratio of 59.3% (304/513) women and 40.7% (209/513) men. Of them, 232 patients (45.2%) completed the follow-up, 104/242 (42.9%) in the IG and 128/271 (47.2%) in the CG. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the biochemically validated abstinence rate at 6 months was higher in the IG (63/242, 26%) compared with that in the CG (51/271, 18.8%; odds ratio 1.52, 95% CI 1.00-2.31; P=.05). After adjusting for basal CO-oximetry and bupropion intake, no substantial changes were observed (odds ratio 1.52, 95% CI 0.99-2.33; P=.05; pseudo-R2=0.045). In the IG, 61.2% (148/242) of users accessed the chatbot, average chatbot-patient interaction time was 121 (95% CI 121.1-140.0) minutes, and average number of contacts was 45.56 (SD 36.32). CONCLUSIONS: A treatment including a chatbot for helping with tobacco cessation was more effective than usual clinical practice in primary care. However, this outcome was at the limit of statistical significance, and therefore these promising results must be interpreted with caution. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03445507; https://tinyurl.com/mrnfcmtd. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s12911-019-0972-z.
Subject(s)
Smoking Cessation , Telemedicine , Tobacco Use Cessation , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Primary Health Care , Smoking Cessation/methods , Tobacco Use Cessation/methods , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Research has shown that financing drug therapy increases smoking abstinence rates, although most of these studies have been carried out in the private healthcare setting. The aim of this work is to assess the effect of subsidized pharmacological treatment on smoking cessation rates by the Spanish public healthcare system. METHODS: A pragmatic, randomized, clinical trial was performed by clusters. Randomization unit was the primary healthcare center and the analysis unit was the patient. Smokers consuming ≥10 cigarettes/day were randomly assigned to an intervention group that received financed pharmacological treatment or to a control group that followed usual care. The main outcome was self-reported or CO-confirmed continuous abstinence at 12 months. The main outcome, continuous abstinence rates (%), were compared between groups at 12 months post-intervention. A model was adjusted using mixed-effect logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 1154 patients were included from 23 healthcare centers. In the intention-to-treat analysis, self-reported abstinence after 12 months in the control and intervention groups, respectively, was 9.6% (37/387) and 15.4% (118/767) (gender-adjusted OR=1.75; 95% CI: 1.1-2.8); for CO-confirmed abstinence the corresponding values were 3.1% (12/387) and 6.4% (49/767) (gender-adjusted OR=1.72; 95% CI: 0.7-4.0). Pharmacological treatment use was 35.1% (136/387) in the control group, and 58.3% (447/767) in the intervention group (adjusted OR=4.25; 95% CI: 1.8-9.9). CONCLUSIONS: Subsidizing pharmacological treatment for smoking cessation increases self-reported or CO-confirmed abstinence rates under realistic conditions in the primary care setting of the Spanish public health system.
ABSTRACT
No disponible
Subject(s)
Humans , Smoking/adverse effects , Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Risk Factors , Secondary Prevention , Smoking Cessation , Tobacco Use Cessation , Health CouncilsABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Our aim was to ascertain how the anti-smoking legislation of 2005/2010 has affected the behavior of primary healthcare center (PHC) personnel (medical and nonmedical) with respect to their attitudes towards tobacco, its consumption and the legislative changes. METHODS: We conducted a multi-center descriptive study of a randomized conglomerate sample of PHC personnel from each Autonomous Community in Spain. The questionnaire covered tobacco consumption, and knowledge/attitudes towards smoking and legislation. The statistical analysis used SPSS software. RESULTS: The sample consisted of 2040 PHC employees (1578 women, 77.4%). Never smokers, ex-smokers, and smokers represented 46.7%, 37.8%, and 15.5% of the sample, respectively. Tobacco prevalence amongst physicians and nurses was 12.3%. Following the introduction of the antismoking legislation, a decrease in consumption was observed. Most of the participants considered that tobacco consumption affected health, was an addictive illness, and passive smoking had an impact on the health of non-smokers. Whilst 91.6% agreed with the current legislation, only 25% felt that it encouraged cessation. CONCLUSIONS: Spanish primary healthcare professionals have a relatively low prevalence of smoking compared to the general population. It is necessary to implement more legislative measures to improve and maintain this outcome.
Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases/etiology , Tobacco Use/adverse effects , Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control , Counseling , Disease Progression , Humans , Plaque, Atherosclerotic/etiology , Plaque, Atherosclerotic/prevention & control , Risk , Risk Factors , Secondary Prevention , Smoking Cessation , Tobacco Use/prevention & controlABSTRACT
Existen intervenciones muy eficaces y eficientes para ayudar a nuestros pacientes a dejar de fumar. La estrategia que goza de mayor evidencia y consenso para atención primaria es la de las 5 aes, es decir, preguntar, aconsejar, valorar la disposición a intentar dejar de fumar, ayudar a aquellos que quieren intentarlo y hacer visitas de seguimiento. Sin embargo, intervenimos menos de lo que deberíamos en nuestros pacientes fumadores. Los protocolos disponibles nos proponen a veces intervenciones sobredimensionadas, sin evidencia científica ni repercusión terapéutica. Creemos que es necesario realizar intervenciones más sencillas, útiles y basadas en la evidencia que nos ayuden en el desempeño de nuestro trabajo, dejando de hacer aquellas que no aporten. En este artículo usaremos como ejemplo una revisión crítica del servicio de Atención al Fumador de la Cartera de Servicios de la Comunidad de Madrid y propondremos una serie de alternativas que permitan una intervención más sencilla, efectiva y basada en pruebas
We do have very effective and efficient interventions to help our patients to stop smoking. The strategy that has more evidence and consensus in primary care is the 5 A's, that is, ask, advise, assess willingness to try to quit smoking, helping those who want to try and make follow-up visits. However, we intervene lot less than we should. The available protocols oversized interventions, and propose elements without scientific evidence or therapeutic effect. It is therefore necessary to develop more simple, useful and evidence-based interventions to assist us in carrying out our work interventions, and stop doing those that don' t contribute. In this article we will use as an example a critical review of Smoker Care Service Portfolio of Madrid Health Service, and we will propose a number of alternatives to allow a simple, effective and evidence-based intervention
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Smoking/epidemiology , Smoking/prevention & control , Smoking Prevention , Primary Health Care/methods , Primary Health Care/organization & administration , Primary Health Care/standards , Basic Health Services , Tobacco Use Cessation/methods , Tobacco Use Cessation/statistics & numerical data , Health Services/standards , Health ServicesABSTRACT
We do have very effective and efficient interventions to help our patients to stop smoking. The strategy that has more evidence and consensus in primary care is the 5 A's, that is, ask, advise, assess willingness to try to quit smoking, helping those who want to try and make follow-up visits. However, we intervene lot less than we should. The available protocols oversized interventions, and propose elements without scientific evidence or therapeutic effect. It is therefore necessary to develop more simple, useful and evidence-based interventions to assist us in carrying out our work interventions, and stop doing those that dont contribute. In this article we will use as an example a critical review of Smoker Care Service Portfolio of Madrid Health Service, and we will propose a number of alternatives to allow a simple, effective and evidence-based intervention.
Subject(s)
Primary Health Care , Smoking Cessation , Humans , Smoking , NicotianaABSTRACT
No disponible
