Kastaun Sabrina, Leve Verena, Hildebrandt Jaqueline, Funke Christian, Klosterhalfen Stephanie, Lubisch Diana, Reddemann Olaf, McRobbie Hayden, Raupach Tobias, West Robert, Wilm Stefan, Viechtbauer Wolfgang, Kotz Daniel
Institute of General Practice (Ifam), Centre for Health and Society (chs), Addiction Research and Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Medical Faculty of the Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
University of New South Wales, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, Randwick, Australia.
ERJ Open Res. 2021 Jul 26;7(3). doi: 10.1183/23120541.00621-2020. eCollection 2021 Jul.
This study assessed the effectiveness of a 3.5-h training session for general practitioners (GPs) in providing brief stop-smoking advice and compared two methods of giving advice - ABC 5As - on the rates of delivery of such advice and of recommendations of evidence-based smoking cessation treatment during routine consultations. A pragmatic, two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial was carried out including a pre-/post-design for the analyses of the primary outcome in 52 GP practices in Germany. Practices were randomised (1:1) to receive a 3.5-h training session (ABC or 5As). In total, 1937 tobacco-smoking patients, who consulted trained GPs in these practices in the 6 weeks prior to or following the training, were included. The primary outcome was patient-reported rates of GP-delivered stop-smoking advice prior to and following the training, irrespective of the training method. Secondary outcomes were patient-reported receipt of recommendation/prescription of behavioural therapy, pharmacotherapy or combination therapy for smoking cessation, and the effectiveness of ABC 5As regarding all outcomes. GP-delivered stop-smoking advice increased from 13.1% (n=136 out of 1039) to 33.1% (n=297 out of 898) following the training (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.25, 95% CI 2.34-4.51). Recommendation/prescription rates of evidence-based treatments were low (<2%) pre-training, but had all increased after training ( behavioural support: aOR 7.15, 95% CI 4.02-12.74). Delivery of stop-smoking advice increased non-significantly (p=0.08) stronger in the ABC 5As group (aOR 1.71, 95% CI 0.94-3.12). A single training session in stop-smoking advice was associated with a three-fold increase in rates of advice giving and a seven-fold increase in offer of support. The ABC method may lead to higher rates of GP-delivered advice during routine consultations.
本研究评估了为全科医生(GP)提供为时3.5小时的简短戒烟建议培训课程的效果,并比较了两种提供建议的方法——ABC 5A法——在常规诊疗过程中此类建议的提供率以及基于证据的戒烟治疗推荐率。在德国的52家全科医疗诊所开展了一项实用的双臂整群随机对照试验,采用前后设计分析主要结局。诊所被随机分为两组(1:1),分别接受为时3.5小时的培训课程(ABC法或5A法)。共有1937名吸烟患者纳入研究,这些患者在培训前或培训后的6周内在这些诊所咨询了接受过培训的全科医生。主要结局是患者报告的培训前后全科医生提供的戒烟建议率,与培训方法无关。次要结局包括患者报告的接受行为疗法、药物疗法或联合疗法戒烟的推荐/处方情况,以及ABC 5A法在所有结局方面的效果。培训后,全科医生提供的戒烟建议从13.1%(1039例中的136例)增至33.1%(898例中的297例)(调整优势比(aOR)为3.25,95%置信区间为2.34 - 4.51)。基于证据的治疗的推荐/处方率在培训前较低(<2%),但培训后均有所增加(行为支持:aOR为7.15,95%置信区间为4.02 - 12.74)。ABC 5A法组中戒烟建议的提供增加幅度无显著差异(p = 0.08)(aOR为1.71,95%置信区间为0.94 - 3.12)。一次戒烟建议培训课程与建议提供率增加三倍以及支持提供率增加七倍相关。ABC方法可能会使常规诊疗过程中全科医生提供建议的比率更高。