Scoping review of guidance on cessation interventions for electronic cigarettes and dual electronic and combustible cigarettes use.

CMAJ open Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.9778/cmajo.20210325
Anasua Kundu, Erika Kouzoukas, Laurie Zawertailo, Chantal Fougere, Rosa Dragonetti, Peter Selby, Robert Schwartz
{"title":"Scoping review of guidance on cessation interventions for electronic cigarettes and dual electronic and combustible cigarettes use.","authors":"Anasua Kundu,&nbsp;Erika Kouzoukas,&nbsp;Laurie Zawertailo,&nbsp;Chantal Fougere,&nbsp;Rosa Dragonetti,&nbsp;Peter Selby,&nbsp;Robert Schwartz","doi":"10.9778/cmajo.20210325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although evidence-based smoking cessation guidelines are available, the applicability of these guidelines for the cessation of electronic cigarette and dual e-cigarette and combustible cigarette use is not yet established. In this review, we aimed to identify current evidence or recommendations for cessation interventions for e-cigarette users and dual users tailored to adolescents, youth and adults, and to provide direction for future research.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and grey literature for publications that provided evidence or recommendations on vaping cessation for e-cigarette users and complete cessation of cigarette and e-cigarette use for dual users. We excluded publications focused on smoking cessation, harm reduction by e-cigarettes, cannabis vaping, and management of lung injury associated with e-cigarette or vaping use. Data were extracted on general characteristics and recommendations made in the publications, and different critical appraisal tools were used for quality assessment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 13 publications on vaping cessation interventions were included. Most articles were youth-focused, and behavioural counselling and nicotine replacement therapy were the most recommended interventions. Whereas 10 publications were appraised as \"high quality\" evidence, 5 articles adapted evidence from evaluation of smoking cessation. No study was found on complete cessation of cigarettes and e-cigarettes for dual users.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>There is little evidence in support of effective vaping cessation interventions and no evidence for dual use cessation interventions. For an evidence-based cessation guideline, clinical trials should be rigorously designed to evaluate the effectiveness of behavioural interventions and medications for e-cigarette and dual use cessation among different subpopulations.</p>","PeriodicalId":10432,"journal":{"name":"CMAJ open","volume":"11 2","pages":"E336-E344"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/27/6a/cmajo.20210325.PMC10118292.pdf","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CMAJ open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9778/cmajo.20210325","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Background: Although evidence-based smoking cessation guidelines are available, the applicability of these guidelines for the cessation of electronic cigarette and dual e-cigarette and combustible cigarette use is not yet established. In this review, we aimed to identify current evidence or recommendations for cessation interventions for e-cigarette users and dual users tailored to adolescents, youth and adults, and to provide direction for future research.

Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and grey literature for publications that provided evidence or recommendations on vaping cessation for e-cigarette users and complete cessation of cigarette and e-cigarette use for dual users. We excluded publications focused on smoking cessation, harm reduction by e-cigarettes, cannabis vaping, and management of lung injury associated with e-cigarette or vaping use. Data were extracted on general characteristics and recommendations made in the publications, and different critical appraisal tools were used for quality assessment.

Results: A total of 13 publications on vaping cessation interventions were included. Most articles were youth-focused, and behavioural counselling and nicotine replacement therapy were the most recommended interventions. Whereas 10 publications were appraised as "high quality" evidence, 5 articles adapted evidence from evaluation of smoking cessation. No study was found on complete cessation of cigarettes and e-cigarettes for dual users.

Interpretation: There is little evidence in support of effective vaping cessation interventions and no evidence for dual use cessation interventions. For an evidence-based cessation guideline, clinical trials should be rigorously designed to evaluate the effectiveness of behavioural interventions and medications for e-cigarette and dual use cessation among different subpopulations.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对电子烟和双重使用电子烟和可燃烟的戒烟干预措施指南的范围审查。
背景:虽然有基于证据的戒烟指南,但这些指南对停止使用电子烟和双重使用电子烟和可燃香烟的适用性尚未确定。在本综述中,我们旨在确定针对青少年、青年和成人的电子烟使用者和双重使用者的戒烟干预措施的现有证据或建议,并为未来的研究提供方向。方法:我们系统地检索MEDLINE、Embase、PsycINFO和灰色文献,寻找为电子烟使用者戒烟和双重使用者完全停止吸烟和电子烟使用提供证据或建议的出版物。我们排除了专注于戒烟、电子烟减少危害、大麻雾化以及与电子烟或电子烟使用相关的肺损伤管理的出版物。提取了关于出版物中提出的一般特征和建议的数据,并使用了不同的关键评估工具进行质量评估。结果:共纳入13篇关于戒烟干预措施的出版物。大多数文章以青年为重点,行为咨询和尼古丁替代疗法是最推荐的干预措施。虽然有10篇论文被评价为“高质量”证据,但有5篇文章改编了戒烟评估的证据。没有研究发现双重使用者完全停止吸烟和电子烟。解释:几乎没有证据支持有效的戒烟干预措施,也没有证据支持双重用途戒烟干预措施。对于以证据为基础的戒烟指南,应严格设计临床试验,以评估不同亚人群中电子烟和双重用途戒烟的行为干预和药物的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Validity of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Canadian administrative health data: a multiprovince, population-based cohort study. Trends in attachment to a primary care provider in Ontario, 2008-2018: an interrupted time-series analysis. Identifying clusters of coexisting conditions and outcomes among adults admitted to hospital with community-acquired pneumonia: a multicentre cohort study. Is the number of ideal cardiovascular health metrics in midlife associated with lower risk of cancer? Evidence from 3 European prospective cohorts. Trends in antihypertensive drug utilization in British Columbia, 2004-2019: a descriptive study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1