Baker Timothy B
Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI.
Nicotine Tob Res. 2017 Aug 1;19(8):891-900. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntx039.
Researchers may optimize smoking treatment by addressing three research topics that have been relatively neglected. First, researchers have neglected to intensively explore how counseling contents affect smoking cessation success. Worldwide, millions of smokers are exposed to different smoking cessation contents and messages, yet existing research evidence does not permit strong inference about the value of particular counseling contents or strategies. Research in this area could enhance smoking outcomes and yield new insights into smoking motivation. Second, researchers have focused great attention on inducing smokers to make quit attempts when they contact healthcare systems; the success of such efforts may have plateaued. Also, the vast majority of quit attempts are self-quit attempts, largely unsuccessful, that occur outside such contacts. Researchers should explore strategies for using healthcare systems as conduits for digital- and other population-based interventions independent of healthcare visits. Such resources should be used to graft timely access to evidence-based intervention onto self-quitting, yielding evidence-based, patient-managed quit attempts. Third, most smoking treatments are assembled via selection of components based on informal synthesis of empirical and impressionistic evidence and are evaluated as a package. However, recent factorial experiments show that components of smoking treatments often interact meaningfully; for example, some components may interfere with the effectiveness of other components. Many extant treatments likely comprise suboptimal sets of components; future treatment development should routinely use factorial experiments to permit the assembly of components that yield additive or synergistic effects.Research in the above three areas should significantly advance our understanding of tobacco use and its treatment.
A lack of relevant research, and the likely prospect of significant clinical and public health benefit, underscore the importance of performing research on three topics related to smoking intervention: (1) researchers need to identify which contents of smoking counseling are effective; (2) researchers need to devise innovative strategies that use healthcare systems as conduits of smoking treatment delivery outside of clinical contacts; and (3) researchers need to use factorial designs to guide their development of smoking treatments. Research on these topics should yield complementary evidence that guides the development of more effective smoking treatments.
研究人员可以通过关注三个相对被忽视的研究主题来优化吸烟治疗。首先,研究人员一直疏于深入探究咨询内容如何影响戒烟的成功率。在全球范围内,数以百万计的吸烟者接触到不同的戒烟内容和信息,但现有的研究证据无法有力推断特定咨询内容或策略的价值。该领域的研究可以改善吸烟治疗效果,并对吸烟动机产生新的见解。其次,研究人员高度关注促使吸烟者在接触医疗保健系统时尝试戒烟;这类努力的成功率可能已趋于平稳。此外,绝大多数的戒烟尝试是自行戒烟尝试,大多未成功,且发生在这种接触之外。研究人员应探索利用医疗保健系统作为数字及其他基于人群的干预措施的渠道的策略,而不依赖于医疗就诊。这些资源应用于将及时获取循证干预措施与自行戒烟相结合,产生基于证据的、由患者管理的戒烟尝试。第三,大多数吸烟治疗是通过基于经验证据和印象证据的非正式综合来选择组成部分并作为一个整体进行评估的。然而,最近的析因实验表明,吸烟治疗的组成部分之间常常存在显著的相互作用;例如,某些组成部分可能会干扰其他组成部分的效果。许多现有治疗可能包含次优的组成部分组合;未来的治疗开发应常规使用析因实验,以允许构建能产生累加或协同效应的组成部分组合。上述三个领域的研究应能显著推进我们对烟草使用及其治疗的理解。
缺乏相关研究以及显著的临床和公共卫生效益前景,凸显了开展与吸烟干预相关的三个主题研究的重要性:(1)研究人员需要确定哪些吸烟咨询内容是有效的;(2)研究人员需要设计创新策略,利用医疗保健系统作为临床接触之外的吸烟治疗传递渠道;(3)研究人员需要使用析因设计来指导吸烟治疗的开发。对这些主题的研究应能产生补充证据,以指导更有效的吸烟治疗的开发。