Chamberlain Catherine, O'Mara-Eves Alison, Oliver Sandy, Caird Jenny R, Perlen Susan M, Eades Sandra J, Thomas James
Global Health and Society Unit, Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, L3/89 Commercial Road, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 3181.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Oct 23;10(10):CD001055. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001055.pub4.
Tobacco smoking in pregnancy remains one of the few preventable factors associated with complications in pregnancy, stillbirth, low birthweight and preterm birth and has serious long-term implications for women and babies. Smoking in pregnancy is decreasing in high-income countries, but is strongly associated with poverty and increasing in low- to middle-income countries.
To assess the effects of smoking cessation interventions during pregnancy on smoking behaviour and perinatal health outcomes.
In this fifth update, we searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (1 March 2013), checked reference lists of retrieved studies and contacted trial authors to locate additional unpublished data.
Randomised controlled trials, cluster-randomised trials, randomised cross-over trials, and quasi-randomised controlled trials (with allocation by maternal birth date or hospital record number) of psychosocial smoking cessation interventions during pregnancy.
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and trial quality, and extracted data. Direct comparisons were conducted in RevMan, and subgroup analyses and sensitivity analysis were conducted in SPSS.
Eighty-six trials were included in this updated review, with 77 trials (involving over 29,000 women) providing data on smoking abstinence in late pregnancy.In separate comparisons, counselling interventions demonstrated a significant effect compared with usual care (27 studies; average risk ratio (RR) 1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.75), and a borderline effect compared with less intensive interventions (16 studies; average RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.82). However, a significant effect was only seen in subsets where counselling was provided in conjunction with other strategies. It was unclear whether any type of counselling strategy is more effective than others (one study; RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.53). In studies comparing counselling and usual care (the largest comparison), it was unclear whether interventions prevented smoking relapse among women who had stopped smoking spontaneously in early pregnancy (eight studies; average RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.21). However, a clear effect was seen in smoking abstinence at zero to five months postpartum (10 studies; average RR 1.76, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.95), a borderline effect at six to 11 months (six studies; average RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.77), and a significant effect at 12 to 17 months (two studies, average RR 2.20, 95% CI 1.23 to 3.96), but not in the longer term. In other comparisons, the effect was not significantly different from the null effect for most secondary outcomes, but sample sizes were small.Incentive-based interventions had the largest effect size compared with a less intensive intervention (one study; RR 3.64, 95% CI 1.84 to 7.23) and an alternative intervention (one study; RR 4.05, 95% CI 1.48 to 11.11).Feedback interventions demonstrated a significant effect only when compared with usual care and provided in conjunction with other strategies, such as counselling (two studies; average RR 4.39, 95% CI 1.89 to 10.21), but the effect was unclear when compared with a less intensive intervention (two studies; average RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.45 to 3.12).The effect of health education was unclear when compared with usual care (three studies; average RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.64 to 3.59) or less intensive interventions (two studies; average RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.31).Social support interventions appeared effective when provided by peers (five studies; average RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.19), but the effect was unclear in a single trial of support provided by partners.The effects were mixed where the smoking interventions were provided as part of broader interventions to improve maternal health, rather than targeted smoking cessation interventions.Subgroup analyses on primary outcome for all studies showed the intensity of interventions and comparisons has increased over time, with higher intensity interventions more likely to have higher intensity comparisons. While there was no significant difference, trials where the comparison group received usual care had the largest pooled effect size (37 studies; average RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.44), with lower effect sizes when the comparison group received less intensive interventions (30 studies; average RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.31), or alternative interventions (two studies; average RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.53). More recent studies included in this update had a lower effect size (20 studies; average RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.59), I(2)= 3%, compared to those in the previous version of the review (50 studies; average RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.30 to 1.73). There were similar effect sizes in trials with biochemically validated smoking abstinence (49 studies; average RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.67) and those with self-reported abstinence (20 studies; average RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.87). There was no significant difference between trials implemented by researchers (efficacy studies), and those implemented by routine pregnancy staff (effectiveness studies), however the effect was unclear in three dissemination trials of counselling interventions where the focus on the intervention was at an organisational level (average RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.37 to 2.50). The pooled effects were similar in interventions provided for women with predominantly low socio-economic status (44 studies; average RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.66), compared to other women (26 studies; average RR 1.47, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.79); though the effect was unclear in interventions among women from ethnic minority groups (five studies; average RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.40) and aboriginal women (two studies; average RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.06 to 2.67). Importantly, pooled results demonstrated that women who received psychosocial interventions had an 18% reduction in preterm births (14 studies; average RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.96), and infants born with low birthweight (14 studies; average RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.94). There did not appear to be any adverse effects from the psychosocial interventions, and three studies measured an improvement in women's psychological wellbeing.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial interventions to support women to stop smoking in pregnancy can increase the proportion of women who stop smoking in late pregnancy, and reduce low birthweight and preterm births.
孕期吸烟仍然是少数几个与孕期并发症、死产、低出生体重和早产相关的可预防因素之一,对女性和婴儿有严重的长期影响。高收入国家孕期吸烟率正在下降,但与贫困密切相关,且在低收入和中等收入国家呈上升趋势。
评估孕期戒烟干预措施对吸烟行为和围产期健康结局的影响。
在本次第五次更新中,我们检索了Cochrane妊娠与分娩组试验注册库(2013年3月1日),检查了检索到的研究的参考文献列表,并联系试验作者以获取更多未发表的数据。
孕期心理社会戒烟干预措施的随机对照试验、整群随机试验、随机交叉试验和半随机对照试验(按产妇出生日期或医院记录号分配)。
两位综述作者独立评估试验是否纳入及试验质量,并提取数据。在RevMan中进行直接比较,在SPSS中进行亚组分析和敏感性分析。
本次更新的综述纳入了86项试验,其中77项试验(涉及超过29000名女性)提供了孕晚期戒烟的数据。在单独的比较中,咨询干预与常规护理相比显示出显著效果(27项研究;平均风险比(RR)1.44,95%置信区间(CI)1.19至1.75),与强度较低的干预相比显示出临界效果(16项研究;平均RR 1.35,95%CI 1.00至1.82)。然而,仅在咨询与其他策略联合提供的亚组中观察到显著效果。尚不清楚任何类型的咨询策略是否比其他策略更有效(1项研究;RR 1.15,95%CI 0.86至1.53)。在比较咨询与常规护理的研究中(最大的比较),尚不清楚干预措施是否能预防孕早期自发戒烟的女性复吸(8项研究;平均RR 1.06,95%CI 0.93至1.21)。然而,在产后0至5个月的戒烟方面观察到明显效果(10项研究;平均RR 1.76,95%CI 1.05至2.95),在6至11个月时有临界效果(6项研究;平均RR 1.33,95%CI 1.00至1.77),在12至17个月时有显著效果(2项研究,平均RR 2.20,95%CI 1.23至3.96),但长期效果不明显。在其他比较中,大多数次要结局的效果与无效效果无显著差异,但样本量较小。基于激励的干预与强度较低的干预相比效果量最大(1项研究;RR 3.64,95%CI 1.84至7.23),与替代干预相比效果量最大(1项研究;RR 4.05,95%CI 1.48至11.11)。反馈干预仅在与常规护理相比并与其他策略(如咨询)联合提供时显示出显著效果(2项研究;平均RR 4.39,95%CI 1.89至10.21),但与强度较低的干预相比效果不明确(2项研究;平均RR 1.19,95%CI 0.45至3.12)。与常规护理相比健康教育的效果不明确(3项研究;平均RR 1.51,95%CI 0.64至3.59),与强度较低的干预相比效果不明确(2项研究;平均RR 1.50,95%CI 0.97至2.31)。同伴提供社会支持干预时似乎有效(5项研究;平均RR 1.49,95%CI 1.01至2.19),但伴侣提供支持的单项试验效果不明确。作为改善孕产妇健康的更广泛干预措施的一部分提供吸烟干预时,效果不一,而非针对性的戒烟干预。所有研究的主要结局亚组分析表明,干预措施和比较的强度随时间增加,强度较高的干预更可能与强度较高的比较相关。虽然无显著差异,但对照组接受常规护理的试验合并效果量最大(37项研究;平均RR 1.34,95%CI 1.25至1.44),对照组接受强度较低的干预时效果量较低(30项研究;平均RR 1.20,95%CI 1.08至1.31),或接受替代干预时效果量较低(2项研究;平均RR 1.26,95%CI 0.98至1.53)。本次更新纳入的较新研究效果量较低(20项研究;平均RR 1.26,95%CI 1.00至1.