Livingstone-Banks Jonathan, Norris Emma, Hartmann-Boyce Jamie, West Robert, Jarvis Martin, Hajek Peter
Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Feb 13;2(2):CD003999. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003999.pub5.
A number of treatments can help smokers make a successful quit attempt, but many initially successful quitters relapse over time. Several interventions have been proposed to help prevent relapse.
To assess whether specific interventions for relapse prevention reduce the proportion of recent quitters who return to smoking.
We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the ICTRP in February 2018 for studies mentioning relapse prevention or maintenance in their title, abstracts, or keywords.
Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of relapse prevention interventions with a minimum follow-up of six months. We included smokers who quit on their own, were undergoing enforced abstinence, or were participating in treatment programmes. We included studies that compared relapse prevention interventions with a no intervention control, or that compared a cessation programme with additional relapse prevention components with a cessation programme alone.
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
We included 77 studies (67,285 participants), 15 of which are new to this update. We judged 21 studies to be at high risk of bias, 51 to be at unclear risk of bias, and five studies to be at low risk of bias. Forty-eight studies included abstainers, and 29 studies helped people to quit and then tested treatments to prevent relapse. Twenty-six studies focused on special populations who were abstinent because of pregnancy (18 studies), hospital admission (five studies), or military service (three studies). Most studies used behavioural interventions that tried to teach people skills to cope with the urge to smoke, or followed up with additional support. Some studies tested extended pharmacotherapy.We focused on results from those studies that randomised abstainers, as these are the best test of relapse prevention interventions. Of the 12 analyses we conducted in abstainers, three pharmacotherapy analyses showed benefits of the intervention: extended varenicline in assisted abstainers (2 studies, n = 1297, risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 1.41, I² = 82%; moderate certainty evidence), rimonabant in assisted abstainers (1 study, RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.55), and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in unaided abstainers (2 studies, n = 2261, RR 1.24, 95% Cl 1.04 to 1.47, I² = 56%). The remainder of analyses of pharmacotherapies in abstainers had wide confidence intervals consistent with both no effect and a statistically significant effect in favour of the intervention. These included NRT in hospital inpatients (2 studies, n = 1078, RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.60, I² = 0%), NRT in assisted abstainers (2 studies, n = 553, RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.40, I² = 0%; low certainty evidence), extended bupropion in assisted abstainers (6 studies, n = 1697, RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.35, I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence), and bupropion plus NRT (2 studies, n = 243, RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.87, I² = 66%; low certainty evidence). Analyses of behavioural interventions in abstainers did not detect an effect. These included studies in abstinent pregnant and postpartum women at end of pregnancy (8 studies, n = 1523, RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.11, I² = 0%) and at postpartum follow-up (15 studies, n = 4606, RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.09, I² = 3%), studies in hospital inpatients (4 studies, n = 1300, RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.11, I² = 0%), and studies in assisted abstainers (10 studies, n = 5408, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.13, I² = 56%; moderate certainty evidence) and unaided abstainers (5 studies, n = 3561, RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.16, I² = 1%) from the general population.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Behavioural interventions that teach people to recognise situations that are high risk for relapse along with strategies to cope with them provided no worthwhile benefit in preventing relapse in assisted abstainers, although unexplained statistical heterogeneity means we are only moderately certain of this. In people who have successfully quit smoking using pharmacotherapy, there were mixed results regarding extending pharmacotherapy for longer than is standard. Extended treatment with varenicline helped to prevent relapse; evidence for the effect estimate was of moderate certainty, limited by unexplained statistical heterogeneity. Moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, did not detect a benefit from extended treatment with bupropion, though confidence intervals mean we could not rule out a clinically important benefit at this stage. Low-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, did not show a benefit of extended treatment with nicotine replacement therapy in preventing relapse in assisted abstainers. More research is needed in this area, especially as the evidence for extended nicotine replacement therapy in unassisted abstainers did suggest a benefit.
多种治疗方法可帮助吸烟者成功尝试戒烟,但许多最初成功戒烟者会随着时间推移而复吸。已提出多种干预措施以帮助预防复吸。
评估预防复吸的特定干预措施是否能降低近期戒烟者重新吸烟的比例。
我们于2018年2月检索了Cochrane烟草成瘾组试验注册库、美国国立医学图书馆临床试验数据库(clinicaltrials.gov)以及国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP),以查找在标题、摘要或关键词中提及预防复吸或维持戒烟状态的研究。
预防复吸干预措施的随机或半随机对照试验,最短随访期为6个月。我们纳入了自行戒烟、接受强制戒烟或参与治疗项目的吸烟者。我们纳入了将预防复吸干预措施与无干预对照进行比较的研究,或比较包含额外预防复吸成分的戒烟项目与仅含戒烟项目的研究。
我们采用了Cochrane预期的标准方法程序。
我们纳入了77项研究(67285名参与者),其中15项是本次更新新增的。我们判定21项研究存在高偏倚风险,51项研究存在不确定偏倚风险,5项研究存在低偏倚风险。48项研究纳入了已戒烟者,29项研究帮助人们戒烟,然后测试预防复吸的治疗方法。26项研究聚焦于因怀孕(18项研究)、住院(5项研究)或服兵役(3项研究)而戒烟的特殊人群。大多数研究采用行为干预措施,试图教会人们应对吸烟冲动的技巧,或提供额外的随访支持。一些研究测试了延长药物治疗。我们重点关注那些将已戒烟者随机分组的研究结果,因为这些是预防复吸干预措施的最佳检验。在我们对已戒烟者进行的12项分析中,三项药物治疗分析显示了干预措施的益处:在辅助戒烟者中使用延长疗程的伐尼克兰(2项研究,n = 1297,风险比(RR)1.23,95%置信区间(CI)1.08至1.41,I² = 82%;中等确定性证据),在辅助戒烟者中使用利莫那班(1项研究,RR 1.29,95% CI 1.08至1.55),以及在自行戒烟者中使用尼古丁替代疗法(NRT)(2项研究,n = 2261,RR 1.24,95% Cl 1.04至1.47,I² = 56%)。其余对已戒烟者进行的药物治疗分析的置信区间较宽,既与无效果一致,也与有利于干预措施的统计学显著效果一致。这些分析包括在住院患者中使用NRT(2项研究,n = 1078,RR 1.23,95% CI 0.94至1.60,I² = 0%),在辅助戒烟者中使用NRT(2项研究,n = 553,RR 1.04,95% CI 0.77至1.40,I² = 0%;低确定性证据),在辅助戒烟者中使用延长疗程的安非他酮(6项研究,n = 1697,RR 1.15,95% CI 0.98至1.35,I² = 0%;中等确定性证据),以及安非他酮加NRT(2项研究,n = 243,RR 1.18,95% CI 0.75至1.87,I² = 66%;低确定性证据)。对已戒烟者进行的行为干预分析未发现效果。这些分析包括在怀孕末期和产后的已戒烟孕妇和产后妇女中进行的研究(共8项研究,n = 1523,RR 1.05,95% CI 0.99至1.11,I² = 0%)以及产后随访研究(15项研究,n = 4606,RR 1.02,95% CI 0.94至1.09,I² = 3%),在住院患者中进行的研究(4项研究,n = 1300,RR 0.95,95% CI 0.81至1.11,I² = 0%),以及在辅助戒烟者(10项研究,n = 5408,RR 0.99,95% CI 0.87至1.13,I² = 56%;中等确定性证据)和普通人群中的自行戒烟者(5项研究,n = 3561,RR 1.06,95% CI 0.96至1.16,I² = 1%)中进行的研究。
教会人们识别复吸高风险情况以及应对策略的行为干预措施,在预防辅助戒烟者复吸方面未提供有价值的益处,尽管无法解释的统计异质性意味着我们对此仅有中等程度的确定性。在使用药物疗法成功戒烟的人群中,延长药物治疗时间超过标准疗程的结果不一。延长疗程使用伐尼克兰有助于预防复吸;效果估计的证据具有中等确定性,但受到无法解释的统计异质性限制。由于不精确性而具有中等确定性的证据未发现延长疗程使用安非他酮有获益,尽管置信区间意味着我们在此阶段不能排除临床上重要的获益。由于不精确性而具有低确定性的证据未显示延长疗程使用尼古丁替代疗法在预防辅助戒烟者复吸方面有获益。该领域需要更多研究,特别是因为在自行戒烟者中延长尼古丁替代疗法的证据确实表明有获益。