Stanton Alan, Grimshaw Gill
Heart of England Foundation Trust, 3, The Green, Shirley, UK, B90 4LA.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Aug 23(8):CD003289. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003289.pub5.
Most tobacco control programmes for adolescents are based around prevention of uptake, but teenage smoking is still common. It is unclear if interventions that are effective for adults can also help adolescents to quit. This is the second update of a Cochrane review first published in 2006.
To evaluate the effectiveness of strategies that help young people to stop smoking tobacco.
We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register in February 2013. This includes reports for trials identified in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsyclNFO.
We included randomized controlled trials, cluster-randomized controlled trials and other controlled trials recruiting young people, aged less than 20, who were regular tobacco smokers. We included any interventions; these could include pharmacotherapy, psycho-social interventions and complex programmes targeting families, schools or communities. We excluded programmes primarily aimed at prevention of uptake. The primary outcome was smoking status after at least six months follow-up among those who smoked at baseline.
Both authors independently assessed the eligibility of candidate trials and extracted data. Included studies were evaluated for risk of bias using standard Cochrane methodology. Where meta-analysis was appropriate, we estimated pooled risk ratios using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect method, based on the quit rates at longest follow-up.
Twenty-eight trials involving approximately 6000 young people met our inclusion criteria (12 cluster-randomized controlled trials, 14 randomized controlled trials and 2 controlled trials). The majority of studies were judged to be at high or unclear risk of bias in at least one domain. Many studies combined components from various theoretical backgrounds to form complex interventions.The majority used some form of motivational enhancement combined with psychological support such as cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and some were tailored to stage of change using the transtheoretical model (TTM). Three trials based mainly on TTM interventions achieved moderate long-term success, with a pooled risk ratio (RR) of 1.56 at one year (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21 to 2.01). The 12 trials that included some form of motivational enhancement gave an estimated RR of 1.60 (95% CI 1.28 to 2.01). None of the 13 individual trials of complex interventions that included cognitive behavioural therapy achieved statistically significant results, and results were not pooled due to clinical heterogeneity. There was a marginally significant effect of pooling six studies of the Not on Tobacco programme (RR of 1.31, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.71), although three of the trials used abstinence for as little as 24 hours at six months as the cessation outcome. A small trial testing nicotine replacement therapy did not detect a statistically significant effect. Two trials of bupropion, one testing two doses and one testing it as an adjunct to NRT, did not detect significant effects. Studies of pharmacotherapies reported some adverse events considered related to study treatment, though most were mild, whereas no adverse events were reported in studies of behavioural interventions.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Complex approaches show promise, with some persistence of abstinence (30 days point prevalence abstinence or continuous abstinence at six months), especially those incorporating elements sensitive to stage of change and using motivational enhancement and CBT. Given the episodic nature of adolescent smoking, more data is needed on sustained quitting. There were few trials with evidence about pharmacological interventions (nicotine replacement and bupropion), and none demonstrated effectiveness for adolescent smokers. There is not yet sufficient evidence to recommend widespread implementation of any one model. There continues to be a need for well-designed adequately powered randomized controlled trials of interventions for this population of smokers.
大多数针对青少年的烟草控制项目都围绕预防吸烟展开,但青少年吸烟现象仍然普遍。尚不清楚对成年人有效的干预措施是否也能帮助青少年戒烟。这是2006年首次发表的Cochrane系统评价的第二次更新。
评估帮助年轻人戒烟的策略的有效性。
我们于2013年2月检索了Cochrane烟草成瘾小组的专业注册库。这包括在Cochrane对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL)、MEDLINE、EMBASE和PsycINFO中识别出的试验报告。
我们纳入了招募年龄小于20岁的经常吸烟的年轻人的随机对照试验、整群随机对照试验和其他对照试验。我们纳入任何干预措施;这些措施可以包括药物治疗、心理社会干预以及针对家庭、学校或社区的综合项目。我们排除主要旨在预防吸烟的项目。主要结局是基线时吸烟的人在至少六个月随访后的吸烟状况。
两位作者独立评估候选试验的合格性并提取数据。使用标准的Cochrane方法对纳入的研究进行偏倚风险评估。在合适的情况下进行荟萃分析时,我们基于最长随访时的戒烟率,采用Mantel-Haenszel固定效应方法估计合并风险比。
28项涉及约6000名年轻人的试验符合我们的纳入标准(12项整群随机对照试验、14项随机对照试验和2项对照试验)。大多数研究在至少一个领域被判定为高偏倚风险或偏倚风险不明确。许多研究将来自不同理论背景的成分结合起来形成综合干预措施。大多数研究采用某种形式的动机增强并结合心理支持,如认知行为疗法(CBT),有些研究根据行为改变阶段理论模型(TTM)进行了调整。三项主要基于TTM干预的试验取得了中度的长期成功,一年时的合并风险比(RR)为1.56(95%置信区间(CI)1.21至2.01)。12项包括某种形式动机增强的试验给出的估计RR为1.60(95%CI 1.28至2.01)。13项包括认知行为疗法的综合干预的单项试验均未取得具有统计学意义的结果,且由于临床异质性未进行结果合并。对六项“无烟计划”研究进行合并有略微显著的效果(RR为1.31,95%CI 1.01至1.71),尽管其中三项试验将六个月时仅24小时的戒烟作为戒烟结局。一项测试尼古丁替代疗法的小型试验未检测到具有统计学意义的效果。两项安非他酮试验,一项测试两种剂量,一项测试其作为尼古丁替代疗法的辅助药物,均未检测到显著效果。药物治疗研究报告了一些被认为与研究治疗相关的不良事件,不过大多数为轻度不良事件,而行为干预研究未报告不良事件。
综合方法显示出前景,有一定的持续戒烟效果(30天点患病率戒烟或六个月持续戒烟),尤其是那些包含对行为改变阶段敏感的要素并采用动机增强和CBT的方法。鉴于青少年吸烟的间歇性特点,需要更多关于持续戒烟的数据。关于药物干预(尼古丁替代和安非他酮)的试验很少且缺乏证据,没有一项试验证明对青少年吸烟者有效。尚无足够证据推荐广泛实施任何一种模式。仍然需要针对这群吸烟者进行设计良好、样本量充足的随机对照试验。