Barth J, Critchley J, Bengel J
University Berne, Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Niesenweg 6, Berne, Switzerland, 3012.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jan 23(1):CD006886. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006886.
Quitting smoking improves prognosis after a cardiac event, but many patients continue to smoke, and improved cessation aids are urgently required.
To assess the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions such as behavioural therapeutic intervention, telephone support and self-help interventions in helping people with coronary heart disease (CHD) to quit smoking.
The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (issue 2 2003), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and PSYNDEX were searched from the start of the database to August 2003. Results were supplemented by cross-checking references, and handsearches in selected journals and systematic reviews.
Randomised controlled studies (RCTs) in patients with CHD with a minimum follow-up of 6 months. After initial selection of the studies three trials with methodological flaws (e.g. high drop out) were excluded.
Abstinence rates were computed according to an intention to treat analysis if possible, or if not on follow-up results only.
We found 16 RCTs meeting inclusion criteria. Interventions consist of behavioural therapeutic approaches, telephone support and self-help material and were either focused on smoking cessation alone or addressed several risk factors. The trials mostly included older male patients with CHD, predominantly myocardial infarction. Overall there was a positive effect of interventions on abstinence after 6 to 12 months (odds ratio (OR) 1.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25 to 2.22), but substantial heterogeneity between trials. Studies with validated assessment of smoking status at follow-up had lower efficacy (OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.99 to 2.11) than non-validated trials (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.93). Studies were clustered by intervention strategy and intensity of the intervention. Clustering reduced heterogeneity, although many trials used more than one type of intervention. The ORs for different strategies were similar (behavioural therapies OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.14; telephone support OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.97; self-help OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.96). More intense interventions showed increased quit rates (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.65) whereas brief interventions did not appear effective (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.22). Two trials had longer term follow-up, and did not show any benefits after 5 years.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial smoking cessation interventions are effective in promoting abstinence at 1 year, provided they are of sufficient duration. Further studies, with longer follow-up, should compare different psychosocial intervention strategies, or the addition of a psychosocial intervention strategy to pharmacological therapy (e.g. nicotine replacement therapy) compared with pharmacological treatment alone.
戒烟可改善心脏事件后的预后,但许多患者仍继续吸烟,因此迫切需要改进戒烟辅助手段。
评估行为治疗干预、电话支持和自助干预等社会心理干预措施在帮助冠心病(CHD)患者戒烟方面的有效性。
检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(2003年第2期)、MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsycINFO和PSYNDEX,检索时间从各数据库建库起始至2003年8月。通过交叉核对参考文献以及对选定期刊和系统评价进行手工检索来补充结果。
针对冠心病患者的随机对照研究(RCT),最短随访期为6个月。在初步筛选研究后,排除了3项存在方法学缺陷(如高失访率)的试验。
尽可能根据意向性分析计算戒烟率,若无法进行意向性分析,则仅根据随访结果计算。
我们发现16项符合纳入标准的RCT。干预措施包括行为治疗方法、电话支持和自助材料,这些措施要么仅专注于戒烟,要么涉及多个危险因素。试验大多纳入了老年男性冠心病患者,主要是心肌梗死患者。总体而言,干预措施在6至12个月后对戒烟有积极效果(优势比(OR)为1.66,95%置信区间(CI)为1.25至2.22),但各试验之间存在显著异质性。随访时对吸烟状况进行有效评估的研究,其疗效(OR为1.44,95%CI为0.99至2.11)低于未进行有效评估的试验(OR为1.92,95%CI为1.26至2.93)。研究按干预策略和干预强度进行聚类。聚类减少了异质性,尽管许多试验使用了不止一种干预类型。不同策略的OR相似(行为疗法OR为1.69,95%CI为1.33至2.14;电话支持OR为1.58,95%CI为1.28至1.97;自助OR为1.48,95%CI为1.11至1.96)。更强化的干预措施显示戒烟率增加(OR为1.98,95%CI为1.49至2.65),而简短干预似乎无效(OR为0.92,95%CI为0.70至1.22)。两项试验进行了长期随访,5年后未显示出任何益处。
社会心理戒烟干预措施在为期1年时能有效促进戒烟,前提是干预持续时间足够。应开展随访期更长的进一步研究,比较不同的社会心理干预策略,或比较在药物治疗(如尼古丁替代疗法)基础上增加社会心理干预策略与单纯药物治疗的效果。