A randomized controlled trial of smoking cessation in Government out-patient clinics in Hong Kong

Betson, Carol; Lam, Tai‐Hing; Chung, Twh; Chung, Seung Yun

doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-0769-9_327

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In seven trials, participants' smoking status was identified while waiting to see the physician and communicated to the physician to prompt intervention [25–31]. Doctors themselves identified smokers in two trials [32,33]. In the remainder, the process was unclear [34–37].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nine studies reported prolonged abstinence. Biochemical validation of abstinence was attempted in six studies [25,27,29,32,36,37], although investigators validated a sample of abstainers in only four [25,27,29,32], and therefore data without biochemical validation were used in these analyses. Six trials reported either that outcome assessors were blind or were collected by questionnaire and therefore effectively blind [25,27–32].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Brief opportunistic smoking cessation interventions: a systematic review and meta‐analysis to compare advice to quit and offer of assistance

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brief opportunistic smoking cessation interventions: a systematic review and meta‐analysis to compare advice to quit and offer of assistance

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Systematic reviews showed that physicians’ brief intervention for smoking cessation increased abstinence rates by 47–78% [10,11,22]. From these reviews, we identified five randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which the interventions are brief, taking less than 2 minutes [23–27], and two of the five trials showed the effectiveness of the intervention on promoting abstinence outcomes at 1‐year follow‐up, with risk ratios (RRs) from 1.42 to 1.62 [23,24]. The five RCTs are either too dated or on relatively small samples.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physicians’ very brief (30‐sec) intervention for smoking cessation on 13 671 smokers in China: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial

Cheung

Jiang

et al. 2020

Addiction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and aims Three to 10 minutes of smoking cessation advice by physicians is effective to increase quit rates, but is not routinely practised. We examined the effectiveness of physicians’ very brief (approximately 30 sec) smoking cessation intervention on quit rates among Chinese outpatient smokers. Design A pragmatic, open‐label, individually randomized controlled trial. Setting Seventy‐two medical outpatient departments of hospitals and/or community health centers in Guangdong, China. Participants Chinese adults who were daily cigarette smokers (n = 13 671, 99% males) were invited by their physician to participate during outpatient consultation. Smokers who were receiving smoking cessation treatment or were judged to need specialist treatment for cessation were excluded. Interventions The intervention group (n = 7015) received a 30‐sec intervention including physician's very brief advice, a leaflet with graphic warnings and a card with contact information of available cessation services. The control group (n = 6656) received a very brief intervention on consuming vegetables and fruit. A total of 3466 participants in the intervention group were further randomized to receive a brief booster advice from trained study personnel via telephone 1 month following their doctor visit. Measurements The primary outcome was self‐reported 7‐day point prevalence abstinence (PPA) in the intervention and control groups at the 12‐month follow‐up. Secondary outcomes included self‐reported 30‐day abstinence and biochemically validated abstinence at 12‐month follow‐up. Findings By intention‐to‐treat, the intervention (versus control) group had greater self‐reported 7‐day abstinence [9.1 versus 7.8%, odds ratio (OR) = 1.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.03–1.26, P = 0.008] and 30‐day abstinence (8.0 versus 6.9%, OR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.03–1.27, P = 0.01) at 12‐month follow‐up. The effect size increased when only participants who received the intervention from compliant physicians were included (7‐day PPA, OR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.11–1.74). The group difference in biochemically validated abstinence was small (0.8 versus 0.8%, OR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.71–1.42, P = 0.99). Conclusion A 30‐sec smoking cessation intervention increased self‐reported abstinence among mainly male smokers in China at 12‐month follow‐up (risk difference = 1.3%), and should be feasible to provide in most settings and delivered by all health‐care professionals.

show abstract

Effectiveness of Very Brief Advice on Tobacco Cessation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Cheng,

He,

Gouda

et al. 2024

J GEN INTERN MED

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Very brief advice (VBA; ≤ 3 min) on quitting is practical and scalable during brief medical interactions with patients who smoke. This study aims to synthesize the effectiveness of VBA for smoking cessation and summarize the implementation strategies. Methods We searched randomized controlled trials aiming at tobacco abstinence and comparing VBA versus no smoking advice or no contact from Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, PsycInfo databases, six Chinese databases, two trial registries ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO-ICTRP from inception to September 30, 2023. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations framework was used to assess the certainty of the evidence of the meta-analytic findings. The outcomes were self-reported long-term tobacco abstinence at least 6 months after treatment initiation, earlier than 6 months after treatment initiation, and quit attempts. Effect sizes were computed as risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI using frequentist random-effect models. Data Synthesis Thirteen randomized controlled trials from 15 articles (n = 26,437) were included. There was moderate-certainty evidence that VBA significantly increased self-reported tobacco abstinence at ≥ 6 months in the adjusted model (adjusted risk ratio ARR 1.17, 95% CI: 1.07–1.27) compared with controls. The sensitivity analysis showed similar results when abstinence was verified by biochemical validation (n = 6 studies, RR 1.53, 95% CI 0.98–2.40). There was high-certainty evidence that VBA significantly increased abstinence at < 6 months (ARR 1.22, 95% CI: 1.01–1.47). Evidence of effect on quit attempts (ARR 1.03, 95% CI 0.97–1.08) was of very low certainty. Discussion VBA delivered in a clinical setting is effective in increasing self-reported tobacco abstinence, which provides support for wider adoption in clinical practice.

show abstract

A randomized controlled trial of smoking cessation in Government out-patient clinics in Hong Kong

Cited by 4 publications

References 6 publications

Brief opportunistic smoking cessation interventions: a systematic review and meta‐analysis to compare advice to quit and offer of assistance

Brief opportunistic smoking cessation interventions: a systematic review and meta‐analysis to compare advice to quit and offer of assistance

Physicians’ very brief (30‐sec) intervention for smoking cessation on 13 671 smokers in China: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial

Effectiveness of Very Brief Advice on Tobacco Cessation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About