Niamh Connolly, Dervla Kelly, Patrick O'Donnell, Sarah Hyde
{"title":"Effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in pregnant women attending primary care: a scoping review.","authors":"Niamh Connolly, Dervla Kelly, Patrick O'Donnell, Sarah Hyde","doi":"10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Smoking during pregnancy has many adverse effects for infant and mother. Despite this, many pregnant women continue smoking. Primary care is a suitable area to provide smoking cessation interventions.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To investigate available literature regarding effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions for pregnant women in primary care, the factors contributing to this effectiveness, and to provide suggestions for future research.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>Systematic scoping literature review.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The methodology followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews. Five electronic databases were searched. Inclusion criteria included original research studies and studies published in English. Data were extracted using a modified Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) data-charting tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The initial search yielded 878 articles. Following article screening, 12 studies were included. Five studies found a statistically significant increase in smoking cessation rates or reduction in tobacco consumed in the intervention group. The remaining studies showed no significant difference between the groups. However, 10 studies showed the control group received usual antenatal care involving smoking cessation promotion. An increase in smoking cessation rates was seen in intervention and control groups, demonstrating the effectiveness of these interventions. Interventions included education, counselling, self-help, and financial incentives. They were delivered by GPs, midwives, counsellors, and pregnancy advisers.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Primary care is suitable to offer smoking cessation interventions to pregnant women, as it is often the first point of care and more easily accessible than secondary care. Future research is needed to determine the most effective types of interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":36541,"journal":{"name":"BJGP Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11523498/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJGP Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2023.0185","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Smoking during pregnancy has many adverse effects for infant and mother. Despite this, many pregnant women continue smoking. Primary care is a suitable area to provide smoking cessation interventions.
Aim: To investigate available literature regarding effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions for pregnant women in primary care, the factors contributing to this effectiveness, and to provide suggestions for future research.
Design & setting: Systematic scoping literature review.
Method: The methodology followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews. Five electronic databases were searched. Inclusion criteria included original research studies and studies published in English. Data were extracted using a modified Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) data-charting tool.
Results: The initial search yielded 878 articles. Following article screening, 12 studies were included. Five studies found a statistically significant increase in smoking cessation rates or reduction in tobacco consumed in the intervention group. The remaining studies showed no significant difference between the groups. However, 10 studies showed the control group received usual antenatal care involving smoking cessation promotion. An increase in smoking cessation rates was seen in intervention and control groups, demonstrating the effectiveness of these interventions. Interventions included education, counselling, self-help, and financial incentives. They were delivered by GPs, midwives, counsellors, and pregnancy advisers.
Conclusion: Primary care is suitable to offer smoking cessation interventions to pregnant women, as it is often the first point of care and more easily accessible than secondary care. Future research is needed to determine the most effective types of interventions.