Smokeless tobacco products have been linked to precancerous and cancers of oral cavity for long. Evidence was available on the association between smokeless tobacco (SLT) products and oral cancers at ...regional but not at global level. Present meta-analysis is aimed to evaluate the risk of oral cancer with the use of SLT products among "ever" versus "never" users.
Studies published for the period (1960-2016) are retrieved using Pubmed, Indmed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar search engines for the subject "ever" versus "never" users of SLT products and estimated the risk association with oral cancer. Summary odds ratios (relative risk) are estimated and meta-analysis was performed using random-effects model.
Thirty-seven studies from four of six WHO regions, Southeast Asia region (SEAR), the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR), Europe, and region of Americas (North and South) are included in the analysis. Significant risk with SLT products with oral cancer was found for SEAR (4.44, 95% CI = 3.51 to 5.61) and for EMR (1.28, 95% CI = 1.04 to 1.56). Significantly higher risk (p < .001) was found for females (5.83, 95% CI = 2.93 to 11.58). Product wise analysis for different SLT products revealed various levels of risk viz. gutkha (8.67, 95% CI = 3.59 to 20.93), pan tobacco / betel liquid (7.18, 95% CI = 5.48 to 9.41), oral snuff (4.18, 50% CI = 2.37 to 7.38), Mainpuri tobacco (3.32, 95% CI = 1.32 to 8.36), and snus (0.86, 95% CI = 0.58 to 1.29).
A significant positive association was observed between SLT use and the risk of oral cancer, in SEAR, EMRs, and among women users.
The present meta-analysis demonstrates SLT product use and the risk of oral cancer at global level. Moreover, the present analysis provided data on the risk associated with individual SLT product. The results fulfil the gap in the data on independent effect of individual SLT product use on the outcome of oral cancer at global level, conclusively. Chewing SLT products was associated with higher risk of oral cancer than other types of SLT. This can serve as a useful tool for policy makers in forming strict policies in controlling SLT menace. Hence, we propose that in addition to smoking, efforts should be directed towards SLT product cessation as well in reducing oral cancer incidence.
Tobacco smoking is the leading preventable cause of death worldwide, which makes it essential to stimulate smoking cessation. The financial cost of smoking cessation treatment can act as a barrier to ...those seeking support. We hypothesised that provision of financial assistance for people trying to quit smoking, or reimbursement of their care providers, could lead to an increased rate of successful quit attempts. This is an update of the original 2005 review.
The primary objective of this review was to assess the impact of reducing the costs for tobacco smokers or healthcare providers for using or providing smoking cessation treatment through healthcare financing interventions on abstinence from smoking. The secondary objectives were to examine the effects of different levels of financial support on the use or prescription of smoking cessation treatment, or both, and on the number of smokers making a quit attempt (quitting smoking for at least 24 hours). We also assessed the cost effectiveness of different financial interventions, and analysed the costs per additional quitter, or per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained.
We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register in September 2016.
We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled trials and interrupted time series studies involving financial benefit interventions to smokers or their healthcare providers, or both.
Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the quality of the included studies. We calculated risk ratios (RR) for individual studies on an intention-to-treat basis and performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model.
In the current update, we have added six new relevant studies, resulting in a total of 17 studies included in this review involving financial interventions directed at smokers or healthcare providers, or both.Full financial interventions directed at smokers had a favourable effect on abstinence at six months or longer when compared to no intervention (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.28, I² = 33%, 9333 participants). There was no evidence that full coverage interventions increased smoking abstinence compared to partial coverage interventions (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.48, I² = 64%, 5914 participants), but partial coverage interventions were more effective in increasing abstinence than no intervention (RR 1.27 95% CI 1.02 to 1.59, I² = 21%, 7108 participants). The economic evaluation showed costs per additional quitter ranging from USD 97 to USD 7646 for the comparison of full coverage with partial or no coverage.There was no clear evidence of an effect on smoking cessation when we pooled two trials of financial incentives directed at healthcare providers (RR 1.16, CI 0.98 to 1.37, I² = 0%, 2311 participants).Full financial interventions increased the number of participants making a quit attempt when compared to no interventions (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.17, I² = 15%, 9065 participants). There was insufficient evidence to show whether partial financial interventions increased quit attempts compared to no interventions (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.31, I² = 88%, 6944 participants).Full financial interventions increased the use of smoking cessation treatment compared to no interventions with regard to various pharmacological and behavioural treatments: nicotine replacement therapy (NRT): RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.54 to 2.09, I² = 35%, 9455 participants; bupropion: RR 3.22, 95% CI 1.41 to 7.34, I² = 71%, 6321 participants; behavioural therapy: RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.65, I² = 75%, 9215 participants.There was evidence that partial coverage compared to no coverage reported a small positive effect on the use of bupropion (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.29, I² = 0%, 6765 participants). Interventions directed at healthcare providers increased the use of behavioural therapy (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.86, I² = 85%, 25820 participants), but not the use of NRT and/or bupropion (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.18, I² = 6%, 2311 participants).We assessed the quality of the evidence for the main outcome, abstinence from smoking, as moderate. In most studies participants were not blinded to the different study arms and researchers were not blinded to the allocated interventions. Furthermore, there was not always sufficient information on attrition rates. We detected some imprecision but we judged this to be of minor consequence on the outcomes of this study.
Full financial interventions directed at smokers when compared to no financial interventions increase the proportion of smokers who attempt to quit, use smoking cessation treatments, and succeed in quitting. There was no clear and consistent evidence of an effect on smoking cessation from financial incentives directed at healthcare providers. We are only moderately confident in the effect estimate because there was some risk of bias due to a lack of blinding in participants and researchers, and insufficient information on attrition rates.
Understanding the basic and clinical pharmacology of nicotine provides a basis for improved prevention and treatment of tobacco addiction. Nicotine acts on nicotinic cholinergic receptors in the ...brain to release dopamine and other neurotransmitters that sustain addiction. Neuroadaptation and tolerance involve changes in both nicotinic receptors and neural plasticity. Nicotine addiction can occur in the context of physical dependence characterized by self‐medication to modulate negative affect and/or to relieve withdrawal symptoms, as well as, in light or occasional smokers, primarily for positive reinforcement in specific situations. Nicotine is metabolized primarily by CYP2A6. Its clearance exhibits considerable individual variability that is determined by genetic, racial, and hormonal (sex) factors. Genetically slow metabolism of nicotine appears to be associated with a lower level of dependence. Nicotine dependence is highly heritable and appears to be influenced by genes coding for some nicotine receptor subtypes, some neurotransmitter genes, and genes involved in neural connectivity. Novel pharmacotherapies for nicotine dependence include partial agonists for nicotinic receptors and nicotine vaccines. Pharmacogenetic studies suggest various candidate genes and a nicotine metabolism phenotype that influence outcome. Human pharmacology studies of nicotine and smoking behavior also provide a basis for assessing the benefits and risks of long‐term nicotine use for harm reduction and for a potential cigarette regulatory strategy that includes reducing nicotine content of cigarettes to nonaddictive levels.
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (2008); 83, 4, 531–541. doi:10.1038/clpt.2008.3
Smoking bans have been implemented in a variety of settings, as well as being part of policy in many jurisdictions to protect the public and employees from the harmful effects of secondhand smoke ...(SHS). They also offer the potential to influence social norms and the smoking behaviour of those populations they affect. Since the first version of this review in 2010, more countries have introduced national smoking legislation banning indoor smoking.
To assess the effects of legislative smoking bans on (1) morbidity and mortality from exposure to secondhand smoke, and (2) smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption.
We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and reference lists of included studies. We also checked websites of various organisations. Date of most recent search; February 2015.
We considered studies that reported legislative smoking bans affecting populations. The minimum standard was having an indoor smoking ban explicitly in the study and a minimum of six months follow-up for measures of smoking behaviour. Our search included a broad range of research designs including: randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies (i.e. non-randomized controlled studies), controlled before-and-after studies, interrupted time series as defined by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group, and uncontrolled pre- and post-ban data.
One author extracted characteristics and content of the interventions, participants, outcomes and methods of the included studies and a second author checked the details. We extracted health and smoking behaviour outcomes. We did not attempt a meta-analysis due to the heterogeneity in design and content of the studies included. We evaluated the studies using qualitative narrative synthesis.
There are 77 studies included in this updated review. We retained 12 studies from the original review and identified 65 new studies. Evidence from 21 countries is provided in this update, an increase of eight countries from the original review. The nature of the intervention precludes randomized controlled trials. Thirty-six studies used an interrupted time series study design, 23 studies use a controlled before-and-after design and 18 studies are before-and-after studies with no control group; six of these studies use a cohort design. Seventy-two studies reported health outcomes, including cardiovascular (44), respiratory (21), and perinatal outcomes (7). Eleven studies reported national mortality rates for smoking-related diseases. A number of the studies report multiple health outcomes. There is consistent evidence of a positive impact of national smoking bans on improving cardiovascular health outcomes, and reducing mortality for associated smoking-related illnesses. Effects on respiratory and perinatal health were less consistent. We found 24 studies evaluating the impact of national smoke-free legislation on smoking behaviour. Evidence of an impact of legislative bans on smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption is inconsistent, with some studies not detecting additional long-term change in existing trends in prevalence.
Since the first version of this review was published, the current evidence provides more robust support for the previous conclusions that the introduction of a legislative smoking ban does lead to improved health outcomes through reduction in SHS for countries and their populations. The clearest evidence is observed in reduced admissions for acute coronary syndrome. There is evidence of reduced mortality from smoking-related illnesses at a national level. There is inconsistent evidence of an impact on respiratory and perinatal health outcomes, and on smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption.
The nation has made tremendous progress in reducing tobacco use during the past 40 years. Despite extensive knowledge about successful interventions, however, approximately one-quarter of American ...adults still smoke. Tobacco-related illnesses and death place a huge burden on our society.
Ending the Tobacco Problem generates a blueprint for the nation in the struggle to reduce tobacco use. The report reviews effective prevention and treatment interventions and considers a set of new tobacco control policies for adoption by federal and state governments. Carefully constructed with two distinct parts, the book first provides background information on the history and nature of tobacco use, developing the context for the policy blueprint proposed in the second half of the report. The report documents the extraordinary growth of tobacco use during the first half of the 20th century as well as its subsequent reversal in the mid-1960s (in the wake of findings from the Surgeon General). It also reviews the addictive properties of nicotine, delving into the factors that make it so difficult for people to quit and examines recent trends in tobacco use. In addition, an overview of the development of governmental and nongovernmental tobacco control efforts is provided.
After reviewing the ethical grounding of tobacco control, the second half of the book sets forth to present a blueprint for ending the tobacco problem. The book offers broad-reaching recommendations targeting federal, state, local, nonprofit and for-profit entities. This book also identifies the benefits to society when fully implementing effective tobacco control interventions and policies.
Abstract
Introduction
People with serious mental illness (SMI) have a high smoking prevalence and low quit rates. Few cessation treatments are tested in smokers with SMI. Mental health (MH) providers ...are reluctant to address smoking. Proactive tobacco cessation treatment strategies reach out directly to smokers to offer counseling and medication and improve treatment utilization and quit rates. The current study is a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of proactive outreach for tobacco cessation treatment in VA MH patients.
Aims and Methods
Participants (N = 1938, 83% male, mean age 55.7) across four recruitment sites, who were current smokers and had a MH visit in the past 12 months, were identified using the electronic medical record. Participants were randomized to Intervention (telephone outreach call plus invitation to engage in MH tailored telephone counseling and assistance obtaining nicotine replacement therapy) or Control (usual care). The current study assessed outcomes in participants with SMI (N = 982).
Results
Compared to the Control group, participants assigned to the Intervention group were more likely to engage in telephone counseling (22% vs. 3%) and use nicotine replacement therapy (51% vs. 41%). Participants in the Intervention group were more likely to be abstinent (7-day point prevalence; 18%) at 12 months than participants in the Control group (11%) but equally likely to make quit attempts.
Conclusions
Proactive tobacco cessation treatment is an effective strategy for tobacco users with SMI. Proactive outreach had a particularly strong effect on counseling utilization. Future randomized clinical trials examining proactive tobacco treatment approaches in SMI treatment settings are needed.
Implications
Few effective treatment models exist for smokers with SMI. Proactive tobacco cessation outreach with connections to MH tailored telephone counseling and medication promotes tobacco abstinence among smokers with SMI and is an effective treatment strategy for this underserved population.
Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of disease, disability, and death in the US. In 2014, it was estimated that 480 000 deaths annually are attributed to cigarette smoking, including second ...hand smoke exposure. Smoking during pregnancy can increase the risk of numerous adverse pregnancy outcomes (eg, miscarriage and congenital anomalies) and complications in the offspring (including sudden infant death syndrome and impaired lung function in childhood). In 2019, an estimated 50.6 million US adults (20.8% of the adult population) used tobacco; 14.0% of the US adult population currently smoked cigarettes and 4.5% of the adult population used electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes). Among pregnant US women who gave birth in 2016, 7.2% reported smoking cigarettes while pregnant.
To update its 2015 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review to evaluate the benefits and harms of primary care interventions on tobacco use cessation in adults, including pregnant persons.
This recommendation statement applies to adults 18 years or older, including pregnant persons.
The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that the net benefit of behavioral interventions and US Food and Drug Associated (FDA)-approved pharmacotherapy for tobacco smoking cessation, alone or combined, in nonpregnant adults who smoke is substantial. The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that the net benefit of behavioral interventions for tobacco smoking cessation on perinatal outcomes and smoking cessation in pregnant persons is substantial. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence on pharmacotherapy interventions for tobacco smoking cessation in pregnant persons is insufficient because few studies are available, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence on the use of e-cigarettes for tobacco smoking cessation in adults, including pregnant persons, is insufficient, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. The USPSTF has identified the lack of well-designed, randomized clinical trials on e-cigarettes that report smoking abstinence or adverse events as a critical gap in the evidence.
The USPSTF recommends that clinicians ask all adults about tobacco use, advise them to stop using tobacco, and provide behavioral interventions and FDA-approved pharmacotherapy for cessation to nonpregnant adults who use tobacco. (A recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that clinicians ask all pregnant persons about tobacco use, advise them to stop using tobacco, and provide behavioral interventions for cessation to pregnant persons who use tobacco. (A recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of pharmacotherapy interventions for tobacco cessation in pregnant persons. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of e-cigarettes for tobacco cessation in adults, including pregnant persons. The USPSTF recommends that clinicians direct patients who use tobacco to other tobacco cessation interventions with proven effectiveness and established safety. (I statement).
Comprehensive tobacco prevention and control efforts that include implementing smoke-free air laws, increasing tobacco prices, conducting hard-hitting mass media campaigns, and making evidence-based ...cessation treatments available are effective in reducing tobacco use in the general population. However, if these interventions are not implemented in an equitable manner, certain population groups may be left out causing or exacerbating disparities in tobacco use. Disparities in tobacco use have, in part, stemmed from inequities in the way tobacco control policies and programs have been adopted and implemented to reach and impact the most vulnerable segments of the population that have the highest rates of smokings (e.g., those with lower education and incomes).
Education and income are the 2 main social determinants of health that negatively impact health. However, there are other social determinants of health that must be considered for tobacco control policies to be effective in reducing tobacco-related disparities. This article will provide an overview of how tobacco control policies and programs can address key social determinants of health in order to achieve equity and eliminate disparities in tobacco prevention and control.
Tobacco control policy interventions can be effective in addressing the social determinants of health in tobacco prevention and control to achieve equity and eliminate tobacco-related disparities when they are implemented consistently and equitably across all population groups.
Taking a social determinants of health approach in tobacco prevention and control will be necessary to achieve equity and eliminate tobacco-related disparities.
ABSTRACT
Aims To assess the profile, utilization patterns, satisfaction and perceived effects among users of electronic cigarettes (‘e‐cigarettes’).
Design and Setting Internet survey in English ...and French in 2010.
Measurements Online questionnaire.
Participants Visitors of websites and online discussion forums dedicated to e‐cigarettes and to smoking cessation.
Findings There were 3587 participants (70% former tobacco smokers, 61% men, mean age 41 years). The median duration of electronic cigarette use was 3 months, users drew 120 puffs/day and used five refills/day. Almost all (97%) used e‐cigarettes containing nicotine. Daily users spent $33 per month on these products. Most (96%) said the e‐cigarette helped them to quit smoking or reduce their smoking (92%). Reasons for using the e‐cigarette included the perception that it was less toxic than tobacco (84%), to deal with craving for tobacco (79%) and withdrawal symptoms (67%), to quit smoking or avoid relapsing (77%), because it was cheaper than smoking (57%) and to deal with situations where smoking was prohibited (39%). Most ex‐smokers (79%) feared they might relapse to smoking if they stopped using the e‐cigarette. Users of nicotine‐containing e‐cigarettes reported better relief of withdrawal and a greater effect on smoking cessation than those using non‐nicotine e‐cigarettes.
Conclusions E‐cigarettes were used much as people would use nicotine replacement medications: by former smokers to avoid relapse or as an aid to cut down or quit smoking. Further research should evaluate the safety and efficacy of e‐cigarettes for administration of nicotine and other substances, and for quitting and relapse prevention.
Evidence-based treatments for tobacco use and dependence can increase cessation success but remain underutilized. Health professional societies and voluntary health organizations (advising ...organizations) are uniquely positioned to influence the delivery of cessation treatments by providing clinical guidance for healthcare providers. This study aimed to review the guidance produced by these organizations for content and consistency with current evidence.
Documents discussing healthcare providers' role in treatment of tobacco use and dependence produced by US-based advising organizations between 2000 and 2019 were identified in both peer-reviewed and grey (i.e., informally or non-commercially published) literature. Extraction of variables, defined in terms of healthcare provider role and endorsement of specific treatment(s), was completed by two independent reviewers.
Review of 38 identified documents sponsored by 57 unique advising organizations revealed deficits in the direction of comprehensive care and incorporation of the most recent evidence for treatment of tobacco use and dependence. Documents endorsed: screening (74%), pharmacotherapy (68%), counseling (89%), or follow-up (37%). Few documents endorsed more recent evidence-based treatments including combination nicotine replacement therapy (18%), and text- (11%) and web-based (11%) interventions.
Advising organizations have opportunities to address identified gaps and enhance clinical guidance to contribute toward expanding the provision of comprehensive tobacco cessation support.
•Gaps exist in tobacco-related clinical guidance from advising organizations.•Available guidance most frequently endorses tobacco use screening and counseling.•Available guidance infrequently endorses more recent evidence-based treatments.•Tobacco-related guidance could be enhanced through comprehensive recommendations.
PDF
