Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work was to systematically scope the evidence on opportunistic tobacco smoking cessation interventions for people accessing financial support settings.
METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group specialized register to 21 March 2023. We duplicate screened 20% of titles/abstracts and all full texts. We included primary studies investigating smoking cessation interventions delivered opportunistically to people who smoked tobacco, within settings offering support for problems caused by financial hardship, for example homeless support services, social housing and food banks. Data were charted by one reviewer, checked by another and narratively synthesized.
RESULTS: We included 25 studies conducted in a range of financial support settings using qualitative (e.g. interviews and focus groups) and quantitative (e.g. randomized controlled trials, surveys and single arm intervention studies) methodologies. Evidence on the acceptability and feasibility of opportunistic smoking cessation advice was investigated among both clients and providers. Approximately 90% of service providers supported such interventions; however, lack of resources, staff training and a belief that tobacco smoking reduced illicit substance use were perceived barriers. Clients welcomed being asked about smoking and offered assistance to quit and expressed interest in interventions including the provision of nicotine replacement therapy, e-cigarettes and incentives to quit smoking. Six studies investigated the comparative effectiveness of opportunistic smoking cessation interventions on quitting success, with five comparing more to less intensive interventions, with mixed results.
CONCLUSIONS: Most studies investigating opportunistic smoking cessation interventions in financial support settings have not measured their effectiveness. Where they have, settings, populations, interventions and findings have varied. There is more evidence investigating acceptability, with promising results.
METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group specialized register to 21 March 2023. We duplicate screened 20% of titles/abstracts and all full texts. We included primary studies investigating smoking cessation interventions delivered opportunistically to people who smoked tobacco, within settings offering support for problems caused by financial hardship, for example homeless support services, social housing and food banks. Data were charted by one reviewer, checked by another and narratively synthesized.
RESULTS: We included 25 studies conducted in a range of financial support settings using qualitative (e.g. interviews and focus groups) and quantitative (e.g. randomized controlled trials, surveys and single arm intervention studies) methodologies. Evidence on the acceptability and feasibility of opportunistic smoking cessation advice was investigated among both clients and providers. Approximately 90% of service providers supported such interventions; however, lack of resources, staff training and a belief that tobacco smoking reduced illicit substance use were perceived barriers. Clients welcomed being asked about smoking and offered assistance to quit and expressed interest in interventions including the provision of nicotine replacement therapy, e-cigarettes and incentives to quit smoking. Six studies investigated the comparative effectiveness of opportunistic smoking cessation interventions on quitting success, with five comparing more to less intensive interventions, with mixed results.
CONCLUSIONS: Most studies investigating opportunistic smoking cessation interventions in financial support settings have not measured their effectiveness. Where they have, settings, populations, interventions and findings have varied. There is more evidence investigating acceptability, with promising results.
摘要：
目的：这项工作的目的是系统地对机会性戒烟干预措施的证据进行范围研究，以帮助人们获得经济支持。
方法：我们搜索了MEDLINE，Embase,PsycINFO和Cochrane烟草成瘾小组专门注册至2023年3月21日。我们重复筛选了20%的标题/摘要和所有全文。我们纳入了调查戒烟干预措施的主要研究，在为财务困难造成的问题提供支持的环境中，例如无家可归者支持服务，社会住房和食品银行。数据由一位审阅者绘制，由另一个人检查并叙述合成。
结果：我们纳入了在一系列财务支持环境中进行的25项研究，使用定性（例如访谈和焦点小组）和定量（例如随机对照试验，调查和单臂干预研究)方法。在客户和提供者中都调查了机会性戒烟建议的可接受性和可行性的证据。大约90%的服务提供商支持此类干预措施；然而，缺乏资源,员工培训和认为吸烟减少非法药物使用的信念被认为是障碍。客户欢迎被问及吸烟问题，并为戒烟提供帮助，并表示对干预措施感兴趣，包括提供尼古丁替代疗法，电子烟和戒烟激励措施。六项研究调查了机会性戒烟干预措施对戒烟成功的比较有效性，有五个比较更多或更少的密集干预，结果喜忧参半。
结论：大多数调查经济支持环境中的机会性戒烟干预措施的研究尚未衡量其有效性。他们在哪里，设置，人口,干预措施和调查结果各不相同。有更多证据调查可接受性，有希望的结果。
方法：我们搜索了MEDLINE，Embase,PsycINFO和Cochrane烟草成瘾小组专门注册至2023年3月21日。我们重复筛选了20%的标题/摘要和所有全文。我们纳入了调查戒烟干预措施的主要研究，在为财务困难造成的问题提供支持的环境中，例如无家可归者支持服务，社会住房和食品银行。数据由一位审阅者绘制，由另一个人检查并叙述合成。
结果：我们纳入了在一系列财务支持环境中进行的25项研究，使用定性（例如访谈和焦点小组）和定量（例如随机对照试验，调查和单臂干预研究)方法。在客户和提供者中都调查了机会性戒烟建议的可接受性和可行性的证据。大约90%的服务提供商支持此类干预措施；然而，缺乏资源,员工培训和认为吸烟减少非法药物使用的信念被认为是障碍。客户欢迎被问及吸烟问题，并为戒烟提供帮助，并表示对干预措施感兴趣，包括提供尼古丁替代疗法，电子烟和戒烟激励措施。六项研究调查了机会性戒烟干预措施对戒烟成功的比较有效性，有五个比较更多或更少的密集干预，结果喜忧参半。
结论：大多数调查经济支持环境中的机会性戒烟干预措施的研究尚未衡量其有效性。他们在哪里，设置，人口,干预措施和调查结果各不相同。有更多证据调查可接受性，有希望的结果。
