A randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of a letter from a consultant surgeon in causing smokers to stop smoking pre-operatively

The effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions prior to surgery: A systematic review

“…Table 1 summarises the studies included in this review. Of the nine studies, three were conducted the UK, (Andrews et al, 2006;McHugh et al, 2001;Molyneux et al, 2003) three in Australia, (Myles et al, 1996;Myles et al, 2004;Wolfenden et al, 2005) two in Denmark (Moller, et al, 2002;Sorensen, & Jorgensen, Key: CABG = Coronary Artery Bypass Graft surgery; Exp = Experimental Group; Con = Control Group; n.s. = non significant; sig.…”

“…= non significant; sig. = statistically significant * = post-operatively abstinence or reduction by more than half or normal daily rate A number of different intervention methods were used in the papers: six studies used some form of counselling (McHugh et al, 2001;Moller, et al, 2002;Molyneux et al, 2003;Ratner et al, 2004;Sorensen, & Jorgensen, 2003;Wolfenden et al, 2005), five studies used counselling together with Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) (Moller, et al, 2002;Molyneux et al, 2003;Ratner et al, 2004;Sorensen, & Jorgensen, 2003;Wolfenden et al, 2005), one study used only NRT (bupropion) (Myles et al, 2004), one study used a letter offering smoking cessation advice (Andrews et al, 2006), one study delivered smoking cessation advice via an audio cassette (Myles et al, 1996) and one study used counselling, NRT and offered self-help material tailored to individual needs (Wolfenden et al, 2005). Thus most interventions used a multifaceted behavioural approach.…”

“…Three studies used self-report as the sole method of eliciting smoking status (Andrews et al, 2006;McHugh et al, 2001;Wolfenden et al, 2005) four used self-report together with CO readings (Myles et al, 1996;Myles et al, 2004;Ratner et al, 2004;Sorensen, & Jorgensen, 2003), with two of these also using cotinine to verify smoking status, (Ratner et al, 2004;Sorensen, & Jorgensen, 2003), and two studies used CO readings only (Moller, et al, 2002;Molyneux et al, 2003). The preoperative period varied between studies and in one study this was not reported (Myles et al, 2004), but in the remainder time ranged from during surgery (Myles et al, 1996) to 8.5 months.…”

“…The preoperative period varied between studies and in one study this was not reported (Myles et al, 2004), but in the remainder time ranged from during surgery (Myles et al, 1996) to 8.5 months. (McHugh et al, 2001) The follow-up period ranged from 1 day before surgery (Wolfenden et al, 2005), to 12 months after surgery (Ratner et al, 2004; The overwhelming majority, approximately 89%, of the studies reviewed revealed that the smoking cessation intervention offered was effective (Andrews et al, 2006;McHugh et al, 2001;Moller, et al, 2002;Molyneux et al, 2003;Myles et al, 2004;Ratner et al, 2004;Sorensen, & Jorgensen, 2003;Wolfenden et al, 2005). Success rates varied between studies, from 18% (Andrews et al, 2006) to 93% Sorensen, & Jorgensen, 2003;, with a mean success rate of 55%.…”

“…(McHugh et al, 2001) The follow-up period ranged from 1 day before surgery (Wolfenden et al, 2005), to 12 months after surgery (Ratner et al, 2004; The overwhelming majority, approximately 89%, of the studies reviewed revealed that the smoking cessation intervention offered was effective (Andrews et al, 2006;McHugh et al, 2001;Moller, et al, 2002;Molyneux et al, 2003;Myles et al, 2004;Ratner et al, 2004;Sorensen, & Jorgensen, 2003;Wolfenden et al, 2005). Success rates varied between studies, from 18% (Andrews et al, 2006) to 93% Sorensen, & Jorgensen, 2003;, with a mean success rate of 55%. Success rates for individuals allocated to the control condition (those receiving usual care) ranged from 2% (McHugh et al, 2001) to 65% (Wolfenden et al, 2005) with a mean of 26.5%.…”