IntroductionSmoking is a major risk factor for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and for many types of cancers. Despite recent policies, 1.1 billion people are active smokers and tobacco is the leading cause of mortality and illness throughout the world. The aim of this work was to identify smoking cessation interventions which could be implemented in primary care and/or at a community level.MethodsA systematic review of CVDs prevention guidelines was realized using the ADAPTE Process. These were identified on G-I-N and TRIP databases. Additionally, a purposive search for national guidelines was successfully undertaken. Guidelines focusing on non-pharmacological lifestyle interventions, published or updated after 2011, were included. Exclusion criteria were specific populations, management of acute disease and exclusive focus on pharmacological or surgical interventions. After appraisal with the AGREE II tool, high-quality guidelines were included for analysis. High-grade recommendations and the supporting bibliographic references were extracted. References had to be checked in detail where sufficient information was not available in the guidelines.ResultsNine hundred and ten guidelines were identified, 47 evaluated with AGREE II and 26 included. Guidelines recommended that patients quit smoking and that health care professionals provided advice to smokers but failed to propose precise implementation strategies for such recommendations. Only two guidelines provided specific recommendations. In the guideline bibliographic references, brief advice (BA) and multiple session strategies were identified as effective interventions. These interventions used Prochaska theory, motivational interviewing or cognitive-behavioral therapies. Self-help documentation alone was less effective than face-to-face counseling. Community-based or workplace public interventions alone did not seem effective.DiscussionBehavioral change strategies were effective in helping patients to give up smoking. BA alone was less effective than multiple session strategies although it required fewer resources. Evidence for community-based interventions effectiveness was weak, mainly due to the lack of robust studies.

Background: The gambling industry has developed many types of gambling on Internet in recent years. Gambling is a social activity for a majority of the world population, but problem gambling (PG) can emerge. The trajectories of gamblers from initiation to PG development are influenced by many variables, including individual and environmental variables and also variables linked to the gambling characteristics. Marketing has been reported to influence gamblers' perceptions and behaviors, but this is not as clear for digital marketing. Digital gambling marketing is broad, ranging from the marketing of gambling websites to communication and advertising on the social media and networks. The objective of this article was to fill this gap by conducting a systematic literature review in order to answer the following questions: (1) What are the strategies of digital gambling marketing? (2) What is the effect of this exposure on gambling representations, intentions and practices?Method: A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines on Pubmed database (Medline) from February 2020 to March 2020 and Scopus. Existing papers published between January 2000 and February 2020 were identified by searching with this algorithm: (((“internet”[MeSH Major Topic] OR (communications[All Fields] AND media[All Fields])) OR (“social media”[MeSH Terms] OR (“social”[All Fields] AND “media”[All Fields]) OR “social media”[All Fields])) AND “gambling”[MeSH Major Topic]) AND (“marketing”[MeSH Terms] OR “marketing”[All Fields]), in title, keywords or abstract.Results: Ninety-one candidate studies were selected, 21 studies were selected for the systematic review. Sport appeared as a specific target of online gambling marketing. A growing range of platforms for online sport betting and the development of strategies on the social media were identified. Regarding content, a systematic association between sport and gambling was highlighted. Vulnerable populations, such as young people, appeared to be at high risk of exposure to gambling marketing.Conclusion: Little data is available on the strategies of digital gambling marketing or on exposure to it. Sport could be the first target for future research to understand how the industry is targeting specific populations, and what influence these strategies could have on PG development.

(1) Background: Chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP) remains a public health challenge around the world. Opioids (PO) have been increasingly used in the treatment of CNCP in the last 20 years. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of opioid misuse and prescribed-opioid use disorder (p-OUD) among patients with CNCP in a pain centre in France, and to analyse risk factors for moderate or severe p-OUD. (2) Method: A cross-sectional study was conducted, including patients consulting for pain management in the pain centre of Brest University Hospital. A self-questionnaire was administered (sociodemographic data, medical data, PO misuse, and p-OUD according the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5 (DSM 5) criteria). Descriptive, univariate, and multivariate analyses were conducted, together with a principal component analysis, in order to identify factors associated with p-OUD. (3) Results: In total, 115 patients were included, the majority of whom were women, with a mean age of 52 years old [18–82]; 64.3% (n = 74) had a current prescription for opioid analgesics (weak or strong). In this group, 56.7% (n = 42) had no or only mild p-OUD and 43.3% (n = 32) had current moderate or severe p-OUD. Patients with moderate or severe p-OUD were more likely to have a current antidepressant prescription, to have had psychotherapy, to currently use strong opioids and oxycodone, and to report taking more frequent doses than prescribed and feeling dependent. (4) Conclusions: We showed that the prevalence of current moderate/severe p-OUD concerned 43.3% of the patients with a CNCP seeking treatment in a pain centre. According to these results, several measures are relevant in managing p-OUD among patients with CNCP.

ObjectivesTo explore care experiences in multidisciplinary primary healthcare centres from the patients, carers and healthcare professionals perspectives.DesignThis qualitative study used face-to-face, in-depth interviews and focus groups. Patients with multimorbidity monitored by a General Practitioner (GP) and another professional from the health centre were recruited through purposive sampling and included with their carer. They were interviewed together while professionals were interviewed separately. Verbatims were coded with subsequent blind analysis, using an inductive approach, to find aspects and features. The constant comparative method highlighted data consistencies and variations.ParticipantsTwenty-six patients, 23 family carers and 57 healthcare professionals.SettingFive multidisciplinary primary healthcare centres, in France, between March 2017 and December 2018.ResultsThis unique study grouped perspectives into nine core quality of primary care aspects: having accessible, available, and varied care; feeling welcome and enjoying comfortable, well-equipped, and clean premises; having quality medicotechnical care (medical knowledge and technical skills); having a reliable GP; receiving appropriate care from healthcare professionals other than the GP; maintaining an efficient relationship with healthcare professionals; benefiting from organised and coordinated care; being an informed, supported and involved patient; having an informed, supported and involved carer. New areas of interest include the multidisciplinary nature of the centres, appreciation of other professionals within the centre, medicotechnical dimensions of care and the carer’s role in maintaining patient autonomy.ConclusionsThis is the first study to interview patients and carers alongside healthcare professionals. This enhanced knowledge improves understanding of these aspects and can guide implementation of evaluation tools that truly reflect patient and carer needs and enable an efficient experience in terms of quality. To address deficiencies in existing questionnaires, the new perspectives found will be added to former aspects to create a comprehensive quality of primary care evaluation tool.Trial registration numberNCT02934711, Results.

Background Cardiovascular diseases are the world’s leading cause of morbidity and mortality. An active lifestyle is one of the cornerstones in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. An initial step in guiding primary prevention programs is to refer to clinical guidelines. We aimed to systematically review clinical practice guidelines on primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and their recommendations regarding physical activity. Methods We systematically searched Trip Medical Database, PubMed and Guidelines International Network from January 2012 up to December 2020 using the following search strings: ‘cardiovascular disease’, ‘prevention’, combined with specific cardiovascular disease risk factors. The identified records were screened for relevance and content. We methodologically assessed the selected guidelines using the AGREE II tool. Recommendations were summarized using a consensus-developed extraction form. Results After screening, 27 clinical practice guidelines were included, all of which were developed in Western countries and showed consistent rigor of development. Guidelines were consistent about the benefit of regular, moderate-intensity, aerobic physical activity. However, recommendations on strategies to achieve and sustain behavior change varied. Multicomponent interventions, comprising education, counseling and self-management support, are recommended to be delivered by various providers in primary health care or community settings. Guidelines advise to embed patient-centered care and behavioral change techniques in prevention programs. Conclusions Current clinical practice guidelines recommend similar PA lifestyle advice and propose various delivery models to be considered in the design of such interventions. Guidelines identify a gap in evidence on the implementation of these recommendations into practice.