A Scoping Review of the Evidence on Health Promotion Interventions for Reducing Waterpipe Smoking: Implications for Practice

Abstract

Background: Waterpipe tobacco smoking is a traditional method of tobacco use, especially in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR), but its prevalence is growing worldwide, especially among young people. Although often perceived as less harmful than other methods of tobacco use because the smoke passes through water, accumulating evidence shows harmful effects and that some smokers become addicted. Interventions that deglamourise and denormalise use have been recommended but little is known about the range and impact of different health prevention and promotion interventions.Methods: A scoping review of literature was undertaken to explore the breadth of literature and assess the range and impact of community based health promotion interventions for waterpipe smoking. Searches were conducted in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Psychinfo, and the Cochrane database of systematic reviews. Interventions were classified using a health promotion framework and data extracted on the aspects of prevention/promotion addressed; key strategies employed, evidence of effectiveness or impact on behavior change as well as barriers to implementation and perceived success factors.Results: Ten studies were included in the review. They include brief interventions to increase quit rates; community campaigns to raise awareness and increase knowledge; web based health education and skill development to increase perceived risks and intention to quit; as well as studies that evaluated product labeling and opportunities for policy interventions to create healthy environments.Conclusions: The evidence base is small but growing. Brief interventions for waterpipe users, community campaigns, and web based tailored information can modify perceptions of addiction and increase intentions to quit. Product labeling may be an effective policy tool to curb waterpipe smoking. A range of policy interventions have been identified but not evaluated.

Evaluation of ‘Shisha No Thanks’ – A Codesign Social Marketing Campaign on the Harms of Waterpipe Smoking

“…2 In the context of other waterpipe smoking interventions, our results are similar to those of a communitybased education and awareness intervention in Egypt 28 that had no impact on waterpipe smoking behaviours, but did have an effect on the awareness of the harms of waterpipe smoking. This suggests that future campaigns could be more effective if run in conjunction with other strategies, 13 which is in line with the comprehensive approach found to be most effective for tobacco control. 29 For example, our evaluation showed consistent low levels of awareness of support services for people who would like to quit smoking shisha, demonstrating the need for greater provision and promotion of support services for people who would like to reduce or quit waterpipe smoking.…”

“…A scoping review of health promotion interventions targeting waterpipe smoking found only 10 published intervention studies -5 policy interventions, 3 web-based educational interventions, 1 behavioural intervention, and only 1 community-level awareness campaign. 13,14 Given the lack of evidence-based interventions targeting waterpipe smoking, the 'Shisha No Thanks' project was a novel intervention that drew upon practices that have been used in other areas of tobacco control. The 'Shisha No Thanks' project was a codesign, social marketing health promotion campaign targeting waterpipe smoking among young people of Arabic speaking background in Sydney, Australia.…”

A framework for preferred practices in conducting culturally competent health research in a multicultural society

“…The use of clinician researchers, able to respond to identified health needs and provide culturally responsive and supported referrals, enhanced safety for these vulnerable families. In the Chinese Get Healthy Service (GHS) [ 41 , 42 ] and waterpipe smoking studies [ 43 , 44 ] (Tables 3 and 4 ), the research teams included one or more BRAs with established community networks who were trained in recruitment, consent and conduct of focus groups. BRAs also contributed to the validation and contextualization of research findings.…”

“…Shaping interventions to address waterpipe smoking in Arabic-speaking communities in Sydney, Australia: a qualitative study [ 43 , 44 ]…”

Revisiones Sistemáticas Exploratorias como metodología para la síntesis del conocimiento científico

“…Finalmente, en la Fase Cinco, los resultados se resumen, se cotejan y se reportan [10][11] [18][19] , rehabilitación física [20][21] , sobrepeso y obesidad 22 , adicciones 23 , salud laboral 24 , cuidados intensivos 25 .…”