Biomedical risk assessment as an aid for smoking cessation.

Details

Serval ID
serval:BIB_BBEB7E413C9A
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Biomedical risk assessment as an aid for smoking cessation.
Journal
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
Author(s)
Bize R., Burnand B., Mueller Y., Cornuz J.
ISSN
1469-493X (Electronic)
ISSN-L
1361-6137
Publication state
Published
Issued date
19/10/2005
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Number
4
Pages
CD004705
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article ; Meta-Analysis ; Review ; Systematic Review
Publication Status: epublish
Abstract
A possible strategy for increasing smoking cessation rates could be to provide smokers who have contact with healthcare systems with feedback on the biomedical or potential future effects of smoking, e.g. measurement of exhaled carbon monoxide (CO), lung function, or genetic susceptibility to lung cancer. We reviewed systematically data on smoking cessation rates from controlled trials that used biomedical risk assessment and feedback.
To determine the efficacy of biomedical risk assessment provided in addition to various levels of counselling, as a contributing aid to smoking cessation.
We systematically searched he Cochrane Collaboration Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1966 to 2004), and EMBASE (1980 to 2004). We combined methodological terms with terms related to smoking cessation counselling and biomedical measurements.
Inclusion criteria were: a randomized controlled trial design; subjects participating in smoking cessation interventions; interventions based on a biomedical test to increase motivation to quit; control groups receiving all other components of intervention; an outcome of smoking cessation rate at least six months after the start of the intervention.
Two assessors independently conducted data extraction on each paper, with disagreements resolved by consensus.
From 4049 retrieved references, we selected 170 for full text assessment. We retained eight trials for data extraction and analysis. One of the eight used CO alone and CO + Genetic Susceptibility as two different intervention groups, giving rise to three possible comparisons. Three of the trials isolated the effect of exhaled CO on smoking cessation rates resulting in the following odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI): 0.73 (0.38 to 1.39), 0.93 (0.62 to 1.41), and 1.18 (0.84 to 1.64). Combining CO measurement with genetic susceptibility gave an OR of 0.58 (0.29 to 1.19). Exhaled CO measurement and spirometry were used together in three trials, resulting in the following ORs (95% CI): 0.6 (0.25 to 1.46), 2.45 (0.73 to 8.25), and 3.50 (0.88 to 13.92). Spirometry results alone were used in one other trial with an OR of 1.21 (0.60 to 2.42). Two trials used other motivational feedback measures, with an OR of 0.80 (0.39 to 1.65) for genetic susceptibility to lung cancer alone, and 3.15 (1.06 to 9.31) for ultrasonography of carotid and femoral arteries performed in light smokers (average 10 to 12 cigarettes a day).
Due to the scarcity of evidence of sufficient quality, we can make no definitive statements about the effectiveness of biomedical risk assessment as an aid for smoking cessation. Current evidence of lower quality does not however support the hypothesis that biomedical risk assessment increases smoking cessation in comparison with standard treatment. Only two studies were similar enough in term of recruitment, setting, and intervention to allow pooling of data and meta-analysis.
Keywords
Biofeedback, Psychology/methods, Breath Tests, Carbon Monoxide/analysis, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Humans, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Risk Assessment, Smoking/adverse effects, Smoking/metabolism, Smoking Cessation/methods, Smoking Cessation/psychology, Spirometry
Pubmed
Web of science
Open Access
Yes
Create date
20/05/2021 16:55
Last modification date
21/05/2021 6:35
Usage data