Danhong Chen1, Li-Tzy Wu2. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, School of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, BOX 3903, Durham, NC, 27710, USA. Electronic address: danhong_chen@hotmail.com. 2. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, School of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, BOX 3903, Durham, NC, 27710, USA; Center for Child and Family Policy, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA. Electronic address: litzy.wu@duke.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The older population size has increased substantially, and a considerable proportion of older adults are cigarette smokers. Quitting smoking is associated with reduced health risk. This review is among the first to quantitatively assess the relative efficacy of types of cessation interventions for smokers aged ≥50 years. METHODS: We conducted searches of the Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO to identify smoking cessation studies on adults aged ≥50 years. Twenty-nine randomized clinical trials met the inclusion criteria. Three main types of interventions were identified. We analyzed relative cessation rates or Risk Ratios (RRs) between the type of intervention groups and the control group by fixed- and random-effects meta-analyses at the study level. We conducted a weighted least squares meta-regression of cessation rates on trial and sample characteristics to determine sources of outcome heterogeneity. RESULTS: Fixed-effects analysis showed significant treatment effects for pharmacological (RR=3.18, 95% CI: 1.89-5.36), non-pharmacological (RR=1.80, 95% CI: 1.67-1.94), and multimodal interventions (RR=1.61, 95% CI: 1.41-1.84) compared with control group. Estimations based on meta-regression suggested that pharmacological intervention (mean point prevalence abstinence rate (PPA)=26.10%, CI: 15.20-37.00) resembled non-pharmacological (27.97%, CI: 24.00-31.94), and multimodal interventions (36.64%, CI: 31.66-41.62); and non-pharmacological and multimodal interventions had higher PPAs than the control group (18.80%, CI: 14.48-23.12), after adjusting for a number of trial and sample characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: A small number of smoking cessation studies examined smokers aged ≥50 years. Additional research is recommended to determine smoking cessation efficacy for diverse older population groups (e.g., ethnic minorities).
BACKGROUND: The older population size has increased substantially, and a considerable proportion of older adults are cigarette smokers. Quitting smoking is associated with reduced health risk. This review is among the first to quantitatively assess the relative efficacy of types of cessation interventions for smokers aged ≥50 years. METHODS: We conducted searches of the Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO to identify smoking cessation studies on adults aged ≥50 years. Twenty-nine randomized clinical trials met the inclusion criteria. Three main types of interventions were identified. We analyzed relative cessation rates or Risk Ratios (RRs) between the type of intervention groups and the control group by fixed- and random-effects meta-analyses at the study level. We conducted a weighted least squares meta-regression of cessation rates on trial and sample characteristics to determine sources of outcome heterogeneity. RESULTS: Fixed-effects analysis showed significant treatment effects for pharmacological (RR=3.18, 95% CI: 1.89-5.36), non-pharmacological (RR=1.80, 95% CI: 1.67-1.94), and multimodal interventions (RR=1.61, 95% CI: 1.41-1.84) compared with control group. Estimations based on meta-regression suggested that pharmacological intervention (mean point prevalence abstinence rate (PPA)=26.10%, CI: 15.20-37.00) resembled non-pharmacological (27.97%, CI: 24.00-31.94), and multimodal interventions (36.64%, CI: 31.66-41.62); and non-pharmacological and multimodal interventions had higher PPAs than the control group (18.80%, CI: 14.48-23.12), after adjusting for a number of trial and sample characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: A small number of smoking cessation studies examined smokers aged ≥50 years. Additional research is recommended to determine smoking cessation efficacy for diverse older population groups (e.g., ethnic minorities).
Authors: Shatha A Alduraywish; Meaad F Alnofaie; Balqes F Alrajhi; Fatima A Balsharaf; Sarah S Alblaihed; Alaa A Alsowigh; Wafa S Alotaibi; Fahad M Aldakheel Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-05-05 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: S Jane Henley; Kat Asman; Behnoosh Momin; M Shayne Gallaway; MaryBeth B Culp; Kathleen R Ragan; Thomas B Richards; Stephen Babb Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2019-08-17
Authors: Emilie Manolios; Jordan Sibeoni; Maria Teixeira; Anne Révah-Levy; Laurence Verneuil; Ljiljana Jovic Journal: NPJ Prim Care Respir Med Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 2.871
Authors: Lisa M Fucito; Krysten W Bold; Stephen R Baldassarri; John P LaVigne; Bennie Ford; Polly Sather; Stephanie S O'Malley; Benjamin A Toll Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2021-06-09