Effectiveness of multicomponent interventions in primary healthcare settings to promote continuous smoking cessation in adults: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present review is to evaluate multicomponent/complex primary care (PC) interventions for their effectiveness in continuous smoking abstinence by adult smokers. DESIGN: A systematic review of randomised and non-randomised controlled trials was undertaken. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR INCLUDED STUDIES: Selected studies met the following criteria: evaluated effects of a multicomponent/complex intervention (with 2 or more intervention components) in achieving at least 6-month abstinence in adult smokers who visited a PC, biochemical confirmation of abstinence, intention-to-treat analysis and results published in English/Spanish. METHODS: We followed PRISMA statement to report the review. We searched the following data sources: MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus (from inception to February 2014), 3 key journals and a tobacco research bulletin. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network checklists were used to evaluate methodological quality. Data selection, evaluation and extraction were done independently, using a paired review approach. Owing to the heterogeneity of interventions in the studies included, a meta-analysis was not conducted. RESULTS: Of 1147 references identified, 9 studies were selected (10,204 participants, up to 48 months of follow-up, acceptable methodological quality). Methodologies used were mainly individual or group sessions, telephone conversations, brochures or quit-smoking kits, medications and economic incentives for doctors and no-cost medications for smokers. Complex interventions achieved long-term continuous abstinence ranging from 7% to 40%. Behavioural interventions were effective and had a dose-response effect. Both nicotine replacement and bupropion therapy were safe and effective, with no observed differences. CONCLUSIONS: Multicomponent/complex interventions in PC are effective and safe, appearing to achieve greater long-term continuous smoking cessation than usual care and counselling alone. Selected studies were heterogeneous and some had significant losses to follow-up. Our results show that smoking interventions should include more than one component and a strong follow-up of the patient to maximise results.

Continued smoking abstinence in diabetic patients in primary care: a cluster randomized controlled multicenter study.

AIMS: To assess the effectiveness of an intensive smoking cessation intervention based on the transtheoretical model of change (TTM) in diabetic smokers attending primary care. METHODS: A cluster randomized controlled clinical trial was designed in which the unit of randomization (intervention vs. usual care) was the primary care team. An intensive, individualized intervention using motivational interview and therapies and medications adapted to the patient's stage of change was delivered. The duration of the study was 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 722 people with diabetes who were smokers (345 in the intervention group and 377 in the control group) completed the study. After 1 year, continued abstinence was recorded in 90 (26.1%) patients in the intervention group and in 67 (17.8%) controls (p=0.007). In patients with smoking abstinence, there was a higher percentage in the precontemplation and contemplation stages at baseline in the intervention group than in controls (21.2% vs. 13.7%, p=0.024). When the precontemplation stage was taken as reference (OR=1.0), preparation/action stage at baseline showed a protective effect, decreasing 3.41 times odds of continuing smoking (OR=0.293 95% CI 0.179-0.479, p<0.001). Contemplation stage at baseline also showed a protective effect, decreasing the odds of continuing smoking (OR=0.518, 95% CI 0.318-0.845, p=0.008). CONCLUSIONS: An intensive intervention adapted to the individual stage of change delivered in primary care was feasible and effective, with a smoking cessation rate of 26.1% after 1 year.

Risk levels for suffering a traffic injury in primary health care. The LESIONAT project.

BACKGROUND: Literature shows that not only are traffic injuries due to accidents, but that there is also a correlation between different chronic conditions, the consumption of certain types of drugs, the intake of psychoactive substances and the self perception of risk (Health Belief Model) and the impact/incidence of traffic accidents. There are few studies on these aspects in primary health care. THE OBJECTIVES of our study are: Main aim: To outline the distribution of risk factors associated with Road Traffic Injuries (RTI) in a driving population assigned to a group of primary health care centres in Barcelona province. Secondly, we aim to study the distribution of diverse risk factors related to the possibility of suffering an RTI according to age, sex and population groups, to assess the relationship between these same risk factors and self risk perception for suffering an RTI, and to outline the association between the number of risk factors and the history of reported collisions. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, multicentre study. SETTING: 25 urban health care centres. STUDY POPULATION: Randomly selected sample of Spanish/Catalan speakers age 16 or above with a medical register in any of the 25 participating primary health care centres. N = 1540.Unit of study: Basic unit of care, consisting of a general practitioner and a nurse, both of whom caring for the same population (1,500 to 2,000 people per unit). Instruments of measurement: Data collection will be performed using a survey carried out by health professionals, who will use the clinical registers and the information reported by the patient during the visit to collect the baseline data: illnesses, medication intake, alcohol and psychoactive consumption, and self perception of risk. DISCUSSION: We expect to obtain a risk profile of the subjects in relation to RTI in the primary health care field, and to create a group for a prospective follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT00778440.

Cluster randomized trial in smoking cessation with intensive advice in diabetic patients in primary care. ITADI Study.

BACKGROUND: It is a priority to achieve smoking cessation in diabetic smokers, given that this is a group of patients with elevated cardiovascular risk. Furthermore, tobacco has a multiplying effect on micro and macro vascular complications. Smoking abstinence rates increase as the intensity of the intervention, length of the intervention and number and diversity of contacts with the healthcare professional during the intervention increases. However, there are few published studies about smoking cessation in diabetics in primary care, a level of healthcare that plays an essential role in these patients. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to evaluate the effectiveness of an intensive smoking cessation intervention in diabetic patients in primary care. METHODS/DESIGN: Cluster randomized trial, controlled and multicentric. Randomization unit: Primary Care Team. STUDY POPULATION: 546 diabetic smokers older than 14 years of age whose disease is controlled by one of the primary care teams in the study. OUTCOME MEASURES: Continuous tobacco abstinence (a person who has not smoked for at least six months and with a CO level of less than 6 ppm measured by a cooximeter) , evolution in the Prochaska and DiClemente's Transtheoretical Model of Change, number of cigarettes/day, length of the visit. Point of assessment: one- year post- inclusion in the study. INTERVENTION: Brief motivational interview for diabetic smokers at the pre-contemplation and contemplation stage, intensive motivational interview with pharmacotherapy for diabetic smokers in the preparation-action stage and reinforcing intevention in the maintenance stage. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: A descriptive analysis of all variables will be done, as well as a multilevel logistic regression and a Poisson regression. All analyses will be done with an intention to treatment basis and will be fitted for potential confounding factors and variables of clinical importance. Statistical packages: SPSS15, STATA10 y HLM6. DISCUSSION: The present study will try to describe the profile of a diabetic smoker who receives the most benefit from an intensive intervention in primary care. The results will be useful for primary care professionals in their usual clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT00954967.