Behavioral interventions for smoking cessation among adolescents: a rapid review and meta-analysis for the Korea Preventive Services Task Force.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of behavioral smoking cessation interventions among adolescents.Methods
MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, CINAHL, KoreaMed, and KMbase were searched from inception to June 2020. Systematic reviews (SRs) or meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were initially searched to perform a rapid SR. After selecting the final SR, RCTs after the publication year of the selected SR were searched. The primary outcome was smoking status after at least 6 months of follow-up, and the secondary outcome was smoking status at 4 weeks. Two reviewers independently assessed the selected studies' quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The meta-analysis utilized a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model reporting the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The subgroup analysis utilized Cochrane's Q.Results
Thirty-two RCTs (11,637 participants) from a single SR were meta-analyzed. After 6 months of follow-up, the intervention group had significantly higher abstinence rates (RR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.20-1.41; I2=26.46%). At 4 weeks of follow-up, the intervention group also had significantly higher abstinence rates (RR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.49-2.47; I2=0.00%). The subgroup analysis indicated a significant difference in the abstinence rate according to the study setting and the period between intervention completion and follow-up.Conclusion
This review showed that adolescent behavioral smoking cessation intervention programs significantly increased abstinence rates compared to the usual care.
SUBMITTER: Choi Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8256302 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Prior studies suggest overuse of nonrecommended lung cancer screening tests in U.S. community practice and underuse of recommended tests. METHODS:Data from the 2010 and 2015 National Health Interview Surveys was analyzed from 2016 to 2018. Prevalence, populations, and number of chest computed tomography (CT) and chest x-ray tests were estimated for people who did and did not meet U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria for lung cancer screening, among people aged ?40 years without lung cancer. RESULTS:In 2015, among those who met USPSTF criteria, 4.4% (95% CI=3.0%, 6.6%), or 360,000 (95% CI=240,000, 535,000) people reported lung cancer screening with a chest CT; and 8.5% (95% CI=6.5%, 11.1%), or 689,000 (95% CI=526,000, 898,000) people reported a chest x ray. Among those who did not meet USPSTF criteria, 2.3% (95% CI=2.0%, 2.6%), or 3,259,000 (95% CI=2,850,000, 3,724,000) people reported a chest x ray; and 1.3% (95% CI=1.1%, 1.5%), or 1,806,000 (95% CI=1,495,000, 2,173,000) people reported a chest CT. The estimated population meeting USPSTF criteria for lung cancer screening in 2015 was 8,098,000 (95% CI=7,533,000, 8,702,000), which was smaller than the 9,620,000 people (95% CI=8,960,000, 10,325,000) in 2010. CONCLUSIONS:The number of adults inappropriately screened for lung cancer greatly exceeds the number screened according to USPSTF recommendations, the prevalence of appropriate lung cancer screening is low, and the population meeting USPSTF criteria is shrinking. To realize the potential benefits of screening, better processes to appropriately triage eligible individuals to screening, plus screening with a USPSTF-recommended test, would be beneficial.
| S-EPMC6319382 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis systematic review is an update of evidence since the 2002 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation on breast cancer screening.PurposeTo determine the effectiveness of mammography screening in decreasing breast cancer mortality among average-risk women aged 40 to 49 years and 70 years or older, the effectiveness of clinical breast examination and breast self-examination, and the harms of screening.Data sourcesCochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through the fourth quarter of 2008), MEDLINE (January 2001 to December 2008), reference lists, and Web of Science searches for published studies and Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium for screening mammography data.Study selectionRandomized, controlled trials with breast cancer mortality outcomes for screening effectiveness, and studies of various designs and multiple data sources for harms.Data extractionRelevant data were abstracted, and study quality was rated by using established criteria.Data synthesisMammography screening reduces breast cancer mortality by 15% for women aged 39 to 49 years (relative risk, 0.85 [95% credible interval, 0.75 to 0.96]; 8 trials). Data are lacking for women aged 70 years or older. Radiation exposure from mammography is low. Patient adverse experiences are common and transient and do not affect screening practices. Estimates of overdiagnosis vary from 1% to 10%. Younger women have more false-positive mammography results and additional imaging but fewer biopsies than older women. Trials of clinical breast examination are ongoing; trials for breast self-examination showed no reductions in mortality but increases in benign biopsy results.LimitationStudies of older women, digital mammography, and magnetic resonance imaging are lacking.ConclusionMammography screening reduces breast cancer mortality for women aged 39 to 69 years; data are insufficient for older women. False-positive mammography results and additional imaging are common. No benefit has been shown for clinical breast examination or breast self-examination.
| S-EPMC2972726 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionAlthough there is general agreement among various guidelines on benefits of routine screening mammography, the age of screening initiation and the optimal frequency of the test remain controversial. In 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended against routine breast cancer screening in women aged younger than 50 years. In this study, screening mammography guideline adherence among U.S. women is explored by examining patterns in rates of mammography age of initiation and utilization in years prior to and following the 2009 USPSTF guideline implementation.MethodsU.S. population-based data from the 2007, 2008, 2010, and 2012 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys were used to measure the overall proportion and rate of change in the proportion of women who underwent screening mammography within the last year, by age and survey year. Data were accessed and analyzed in July 2014.ResultsRates of mammography screening were lower in 2010 and 2012 compared with 2007 and 2008 (p<0.0001). The rate of screening initiation at age 40 years increased over time and was the highest in the years following USPSTF guideline changes (p=0.012).ConclusionsThese data support no perceptible change in U.S. women's patterns of screening mammography age at initiation within 3 years of the USPSTF guideline revision. Whether this finding reflects a delayed effect of guideline revision in population trends or rather health provider practice and patient preference for more frequent screening is unclear and requires further investigation.
| S-EPMC4546897 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPrevious studies reported that prostate cancer incidence rates in the United States declined for local-stage disease and increased for regional- and distant-stage disease following the US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations against prostate-specific antigen-based screening for men aged 75 years and older in 2008 and for all men in 2012. It is unknown, however, whether these patterns persisted through 2016.MethodsBased on the US Cancer Statistics Public Use Research Database, we examined temporal trends in invasive prostate cancer incidence from 2005 to 2016 in men aged 50 years and older stratified by stage (local, regional, and distant), age group (50-74 years and 75 years and older), and race and ethnicity (all races and ethnicities, non-Hispanic Whites, and non-Hispanic Blacks) with joinpoint regression models to estimate annual percent changes. Tests of statistical significance are 2-sided (P < .05).ResultsFor all races and ethnicities combined, incidence for local-stage disease declined beginning in 2007 in men aged 50-74 years and 75 years and older, although the decline stabilized during 2013-2016 in men aged 75 years and older. Incidence decreased by 6.4% (95% CI = 4.9%-9% to 7.9%) per year from 2007 to 2016 in men aged 50-74 years and by 10.7% (95% CI = 6.2% to 15.0%) per year from 2007 to 2013 in men aged 75 years and older. In contrast, incidence for regional- and distant-stage disease increased in both age groups during the study period. For example, distant-stage incidence in men aged 75 years and older increased by 5.2% (95% CI = 4.2% to 6.1%) per year from 2010 to 2016.ConclusionsRegional- and distant-stage prostate cancer incidence continue to increase in the United States in men aged 50 years and older, and future studies are needed to identify reasons for the rising trends.
| S-EPMC7781461 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is updating its 2016 colorectal cancer screening recommendations.ObjectiveTo provide updated model-based estimates of the benefits, burden, and harms of colorectal cancer screening strategies and to identify strategies that may provide an efficient balance of life-years gained (LYG) from screening and colonoscopy burden to inform the USPSTF.Design, setting, and participantsComparative modeling study using 3 microsimulation models of colorectal cancer screening in a hypothetical cohort of 40-year-old US individuals at average risk of colorectal cancer.ExposuresScreening from ages 45, 50, or 55 years to ages 70, 75, 80, or 85 years with fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), multitarget stool DNA testing, flexible sigmoidoscopy alone or with FIT, computed tomography colonography, or colonoscopy. All persons with an abnormal noncolonoscopy screening test result were assumed to undergo follow-up colonoscopy. Screening intervals varied by test. Full adherence with all procedures was assumed.Main outcome and measuresEstimated LYG relative to no screening (benefit), lifetime number of colonoscopies (burden), number of complications from screening (harms), and balance of incremental burden and benefit (efficiency ratios). Efficient strategies were those estimated to require fewer additional colonoscopies per additional LYG relative to other strategies.ResultsEstimated LYG from screening strategies ranged from 171 to 381 per 1000 40-year-olds. Lifetime colonoscopy burden ranged from 624 to 6817 per 1000 individuals, and screening complications ranged from 5 to 22 per 1000 individuals. Among the 49 strategies that were efficient options with all 3 models, 41 specified screening beginning at age 45. No single age to end screening was predominant among the efficient strategies, although the additional LYG from continuing screening after age 75 were generally small. With the exception of a 5-year interval for computed tomography colonography, no screening interval predominated among the efficient strategies for each modality. Among the strategies highlighted in the 2016 USPSTF recommendation, lowering the age to begin screening from 50 to 45 years was estimated to result in 22 to 27 additional LYG, 161 to 784 additional colonoscopies, and 0.1 to 2 additional complications per 1000 persons (ranges are across screening strategies, based on mean estimates across models). Assuming full adherence, screening outcomes and efficient strategies were similar by sex and race and across 3 scenarios for population risk of colorectal cancer.Conclusions and relevanceThis microsimulation modeling analysis suggests that screening for colorectal cancer with stool tests, endoscopic tests, or computed tomography colonography starting at age 45 years provides an efficient balance of colonoscopy burden and life-years gained.
| S-EPMC8409520 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThis study aimed to assess the effectiveness of relapse prevention interventions involving behavioral and pharmacological treatment among abstinent smokers.MethodsThis rapid review was conducted using MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, Embase, KMbase, and KoreaMed to identify studies published until June 20, 2020. The participants were abstinent smokers who quit smoking on their own, due to pregnancy, hospitalization, or by participating in a smoking cessation program. We found a systematic review that fit the objective of this study and included 81 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Studies that did not present information on smoking cessation status, had no control group, or used reward-based interventions were excluded. Random effect and fixed effect meta-analyses were used to estimate the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). In subgroup analyses, differences between subgroups were verified based on the participant setting, characteristics, intervention type, and intensity.ResultsFollowing screening, 44 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis. The review reported no differences in the success rate of relapse prevention between the behavioral interventions. Pharmacotherapy interventions showed higher success rates (RR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.05-1.26; I2=40.71%), depending on prior abstinence duration and the drug type.ConclusioThe results indicated that pharmacotherapy has a significant effect on preventing relapse among abstinent smokers.
| S-EPMC8408415 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AbstractMeasuring adherence to the 2015 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) diabetes prevention guidelines can inform implementation efforts to prevent or delay Type 2 diabetes. A retrospective cohort was used to study patients without a diagnosis of diabetes attributed to primary care clinics within two large healthcare systems in our state to study adherence to the following: (1) screening at-risk patients and (2) referring individuals with confirmed prediabetes to participate in an intensive behavioral counseling intervention, defined as a Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-recognized Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP). Among 461,866 adults attributed to 79 primary care clinics, 45.7% of patients were screened, yet variability at the level of the clinic ranged from 14.5% to 83.2%. Very few patients participated in a CDC-recognized DPP (0.52%; range 0%-3.53%). These findings support the importance of a systematic implementation strategy to specifically target barriers to diabetes prevention screening and referral to treatment.
| S-EPMC7878570 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealthcare professionals, including nurses, frequently advise people to improve their health by stopping smoking. Such advice may be brief, or part of more intensive interventions.ObjectivesTo determine the effectiveness of nursing-delivered smoking cessation interventions in adults. To establish whether nursing-delivered smoking cessation interventions are more effective than no intervention; are more effective if the intervention is more intensive; differ in effectiveness with health state and setting of the participants; are more effective if they include follow-ups; are more effective if they include aids that demonstrate the pathophysiological effect of smoking.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register and CINAHL in January 2017.Selection criteriaRandomized trials of smoking cessation interventions delivered by nurses or health visitors with follow-up of at least six months.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors extracted data independently. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically-validated rates if available. Where statistically and clinically appropriate, we pooled studies using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model and reported the outcome as a risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).Main resultsFifty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria, nine of which are new for this update. Pooling 44 studies (over 20,000 participants) comparing a nursing intervention to a control or to usual care, we found the intervention increased the likelihood of quitting (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.38); however, statistical heterogeneity was moderate (I2 = 50%) and not explained by subgroup analysis. Because of this, we judged the quality of evidence to be moderate. Despite most studies being at unclear risk of bias in at least one domain, we did not downgrade the quality of evidence further, as restricting the main analysis to only those studies at low risk of bias did not significantly alter the effect estimate. Subgroup analyses found no evidence that high-intensity interventions, interventions with additional follow-up or interventions including aids that demonstrate the pathophysiological effect of smoking are more effective than lower intensity interventions, or interventions without additional follow-up or aids. There was no evidence that the effect of support differed by patient group or across healthcare settings.Authors' conclusionsThere is moderate quality evidence that behavioural support to motivate and sustain smoking cessation delivered by nurses can lead to a modest increase in the number of people who achieve prolonged abstinence. There is insufficient evidence to assess whether more intensive interventions, those incorporating additional follow-up, or those incorporating pathophysiological feedback are more effective than one-off support. There was no evidence that the effect of support differed by patient group or across healthcare settings.
| S-EPMC6486227 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6819982 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Hospital admission is a unique opportunity for a smoking cessation attempt; smokers may be more motivated to quit as they are distanced from the usual cues they face associated with nicotine consumption, and the effect of poor lifestyle habits on their health are brought to light. With most hospitals employing smoke-free grounds, patients are further inclined to stop smoking. According to NICE guidance, smoking cessation support should be delivered within 1 working day of admission for inpatients, and NRT products should be recommended and offered to all people who smoke. Despite this, many smokers on the cardiology ward at the John Radcliffe Hospital fail to receive smoking cessation advice, and are unable to benefit from Nicotine Replacement Therapy. This leads to missed opportunities to stop smoking, increased morbidity in patients undergoing cardiovascular procedures, and increased costs for the NHS, with patients who continue smoking being re-admitted with more smoking-related illnesses in the future.
| S-EPMC4645803 | biostudies-other