Effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions among persons with cancer: A systematic review

Author:

Yingst Jessica M.12ORCID,Carrillo Matthew1,Chan Kimberly H.3ORCID,Choi Karen24,Dao Joseph3,Kulkarni Pallavi3,Bordner Candace1,Goyal Neerav24,Foulds Jonathan12,Bascom Rebecca125

Affiliation:

1. Department of Public Health Sciences Penn State College of Medicine Hershey Pennsylvania USA

2. Penn State Cancer Institute Hershey Pennsylvania USA

3. Penn State College of Medicine Hershey Pennsylvania USA

4. Department of Otolaryngology Penn State College of Medicine Hershey Pennsylvania USA

5. Department of Medicine Penn State College of Medicine Hershey Pennsylvania USA

Abstract

AbstractObjectivesContinued smoking after cancer diagnosis is associated with worse outcomes, however, many persons diagnosed with cancer who smoke are unable to quit successfully. Effective interventions are needed to promote quitting in this population. The purpose of this systematic review is to understand the most effective interventions for smoking cessation among persons with cancer and to identify gaps in knowledge and methodology to suggest directions for future research.MethodsThree electronic databases (The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials, MEDLINE, and EMBASE) were searched for studies of smoking cessation interventions among persons with cancer, published up to 1 July 2021. Title and abstract screening, full‐text review, and data extraction was completed by two independent reviewers, via Covalence software, with any discordance resolved by a third reviewer. A quality assessment was completed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Version 2.ResultsThirty‐six articles were included in the review, including 17 randomized‐controlled trials (RCTs) and 19 non‐RCT studies. Of the 36 studies, 28 (77.8%) utilized an intervention that included both counseling and medication, with 24 (85.7%) providing medication to participants at no cost. Abstinence rates in the RCT intervention groups (n = 17) ranged from 5.2% to 75%, while the non‐RCTs found abstinence rates ranging from 15% to 46%. Overall, studies met a mean of 2.28 out of seven quality items, ranging from 0 to 6.ConclusionsOur study highlights the importance of utilizing intensive combined behavioral and pharmacological interventions for persons with cancer. While combined therapy interventions seem to be the most effective, more research is needed, as current studies have several quality issues, including the lack of biochemical verification for abstinence.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health,Oncology,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3