Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Considering the high rates of persistent tobacco use, effective cessation interventions are needed for cancer patients and caregivers. Despite the need, there is a significant lack of research on tobacco cessation, especially for non-respiratory cancers (breast, prostate, colorectal, cervical, and bladder cancer).
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to evaluate tobacco use and tobacco cessation interventions among patients and caregivers for non-respiratory cancers.
METHODS: Randomized controlled trials assessing tobacco cessation interventions were identified. Five electronic databases were searched in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines through July 2023. Studies exclusive to lung, oral, thoracic, and head and neck cancers were excluded. Effect sizes were estimated; risk of bias was assessed.
RESULTS: Of 3,304 studies, 17 were included. Interventions included behavioral (n = 6), pharmacotherapy (n = 2), and a combination (n = 9) treatment. Eight studies included a health behavior model; mean behavioral change techniques were 5.57. Pooled magnitude of the odds of cessation was positive and significant (odds ratio = 1.24, 95% confidence interval [Lower Limit 1.02, Upper Limit 1.51]) relative to usual care/placebo. Cumulative meta-analysis examined the accumulation of results over-time and demonstrated that studies have been significant since 2020. Two studies included caregivers\' who were involved in the provision of social support.
CONCLUSIONS: Current interventions have the potential to reduce tobacco use in non-respiratory cancers. Results may be beneficial for promoting tobacco cessation among non-respiratory cancers. There is a considerable lack of dyadic interventions for cancer survivors and caregivers; researchers are encouraged to explore dyadic approaches.
We aimed to understand effective ways for cancer patients and caregivers to quit using tobacco. We focused on non-respiratory cancers (cancers not related to breathing issues) like breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer. We reviewed 17 randomized controlled trials designed to help people quit tobacco, which included behavioral therapies (e.g., education and counseling), pharmacotherapy (i.e., medicine), and combinations of both. We found that people in these studies quit using tobacco, especially when more than one approach was used. The studies also showed that these approaches have been more successful since 2020. The research highlighted a need for more studies that include both patients and their caregivers together in the quitting process. This approach, called dyadic intervention, could be more effective in supporting patients and their caregivers. Overall, while the current approaches are promising, more research is needed to develop better ways to help cancer patients and caregivers quit smoking for longer.
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to evaluate tobacco use and tobacco cessation interventions among patients and caregivers for non-respiratory cancers.
METHODS: Randomized controlled trials assessing tobacco cessation interventions were identified. Five electronic databases were searched in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines through July 2023. Studies exclusive to lung, oral, thoracic, and head and neck cancers were excluded. Effect sizes were estimated; risk of bias was assessed.
RESULTS: Of 3,304 studies, 17 were included. Interventions included behavioral (n = 6), pharmacotherapy (n = 2), and a combination (n = 9) treatment. Eight studies included a health behavior model; mean behavioral change techniques were 5.57. Pooled magnitude of the odds of cessation was positive and significant (odds ratio = 1.24, 95% confidence interval [Lower Limit 1.02, Upper Limit 1.51]) relative to usual care/placebo. Cumulative meta-analysis examined the accumulation of results over-time and demonstrated that studies have been significant since 2020. Two studies included caregivers\' who were involved in the provision of social support.
CONCLUSIONS: Current interventions have the potential to reduce tobacco use in non-respiratory cancers. Results may be beneficial for promoting tobacco cessation among non-respiratory cancers. There is a considerable lack of dyadic interventions for cancer survivors and caregivers; researchers are encouraged to explore dyadic approaches.
We aimed to understand effective ways for cancer patients and caregivers to quit using tobacco. We focused on non-respiratory cancers (cancers not related to breathing issues) like breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer. We reviewed 17 randomized controlled trials designed to help people quit tobacco, which included behavioral therapies (e.g., education and counseling), pharmacotherapy (i.e., medicine), and combinations of both. We found that people in these studies quit using tobacco, especially when more than one approach was used. The studies also showed that these approaches have been more successful since 2020. The research highlighted a need for more studies that include both patients and their caregivers together in the quitting process. This approach, called dyadic intervention, could be more effective in supporting patients and their caregivers. Overall, while the current approaches are promising, more research is needed to develop better ways to help cancer patients and caregivers quit smoking for longer.
摘要：
背景：考虑到持续烟草使用率高，癌症患者和护理人员需要有效的戒烟干预措施.尽管有需要,关于戒烟的研究明显缺乏，特别是对于非呼吸道癌症（乳腺癌，前列腺,结直肠,子宫颈,和膀胱癌）。
目的：目的是评估非呼吸道癌症患者和照顾者的烟草使用和戒烟干预措施。
方法：确定了评估戒烟干预措施的随机对照试验。到2023年7月，根据系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目搜索了五个电子数据库。专门研究肺，口服,胸廓,头颈癌被排除在外.估计效应大小；评估偏倚风险。
结果：在3,304项研究中，17人被包括在内。干预措施包括行为(n=6)，药物治疗（n=2），和组合(n=9)治疗。八项研究包括健康行为模型；平均行为改变技术为5.57。相对于常规治疗/安慰剂，停止几率的汇总幅度为阳性且显着（优势比=1.24，95％置信区间[下限1.02，上限1.51]）。累积荟萃分析检查了结果随时间的积累，并表明自2020年以来的研究意义重大。两项研究包括参与提供社会支持的护理人员。
结论：目前的干预措施有可能减少非呼吸道癌症患者的烟草使用。结果可能有利于促进非呼吸道癌症的戒烟。对于癌症幸存者和照顾者，相当缺乏二重干预措施；鼓励研究人员探索二重方法。
我们旨在了解癌症患者和护理人员戒烟的有效方法。我们专注于非呼吸道癌症（与呼吸问题无关的癌症），如乳腺癌，前列腺,还有结直肠癌.我们回顾了17项旨在帮助人们戒烟的随机对照试验，其中包括行为疗法(例如，教育和咨询)，药物治疗(即，medicine),以及两者的组合。我们发现这些研究中的人们戒烟，尤其是当使用一种以上的方法时。研究还表明，自2020年以来，这些方法更加成功。该研究强调需要更多的研究，包括患者和他们的照顾者一起在戒烟过程中。这种方法,叫做二元干预，可以更有效地支持患者及其护理人员。总的来说,虽然目前的方法很有希望，需要更多的研究来开发更好的方法来帮助癌症患者和护理人员更长时间戒烟。
目的：目的是评估非呼吸道癌症患者和照顾者的烟草使用和戒烟干预措施。
方法：确定了评估戒烟干预措施的随机对照试验。到2023年7月，根据系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目搜索了五个电子数据库。专门研究肺，口服,胸廓,头颈癌被排除在外.估计效应大小；评估偏倚风险。
结果：在3,304项研究中，17人被包括在内。干预措施包括行为(n=6)，药物治疗（n=2），和组合(n=9)治疗。八项研究包括健康行为模型；平均行为改变技术为5.57。相对于常规治疗/安慰剂，停止几率的汇总幅度为阳性且显着（优势比=1.24，95％置信区间[下限1.02，上限1.51]）。累积荟萃分析检查了结果随时间的积累，并表明自2020年以来的研究意义重大。两项研究包括参与提供社会支持的护理人员。
结论：目前的干预措施有可能减少非呼吸道癌症患者的烟草使用。结果可能有利于促进非呼吸道癌症的戒烟。对于癌症幸存者和照顾者，相当缺乏二重干预措施；鼓励研究人员探索二重方法。
我们旨在了解癌症患者和护理人员戒烟的有效方法。我们专注于非呼吸道癌症（与呼吸问题无关的癌症），如乳腺癌，前列腺,还有结直肠癌.我们回顾了17项旨在帮助人们戒烟的随机对照试验，其中包括行为疗法(例如，教育和咨询)，药物治疗(即，medicine),以及两者的组合。我们发现这些研究中的人们戒烟，尤其是当使用一种以上的方法时。研究还表明，自2020年以来，这些方法更加成功。该研究强调需要更多的研究，包括患者和他们的照顾者一起在戒烟过程中。这种方法,叫做二元干预，可以更有效地支持患者及其护理人员。总的来说,虽然目前的方法很有希望，需要更多的研究来开发更好的方法来帮助癌症患者和护理人员更长时间戒烟。
