Search

Purpose This paper aims to determine whether a single session of a motivational interview (MI) reduces smoking relapse amongst people released from smoke-free prisons. Design/methodology/approach This study sought to recruit 824 ex-smokers from 2 smoke-free prisons in the Northern Territory, Australia. Participants were randomised to receive either one session (45–60 min) face-to-face MI intervention 4–6 weeks prior to release or usual care (UC) without smoking advice. The primary outcome was continuous smoking abstinence verified by exhaled carbon monoxide test ( Findings From April 2017 to March 2018, a total of 557 participants were randomised to receive the MI (n = 266) or UC (n = 291), with 75% and 77% being followed up, respectively. There was no significant between-group difference in continuous abstinence (MI 8.6% vs UC 7.4%, risk ratio = 1.16, 95%CI 0.67∼2.03). Of all participants, 66.9% relapsed on the day of release and 90.2% relapsed within three months. On average, participants in the MI group smoked one less cigarette daily than those in the UC within the three months after release (p Research limitations/implications A single-session of MI is insufficient to reduce relapse after release from a smoke-free prison. However, prison release remains an appealing time window to build on the public health benefit of smoke-free prisons. Further research is needed to develop both pre- and post-release interventions that provide continuity of care for relapse prevention. Originality/value This study is the first Australian randomised controlled trial to evaluate a pre-release MI intervention on smoking relapse prevention amongst people released from smoke-free prisons.

Background Relapse remains an unresolved issue in smoking cessation. Extended stop smoking medication use can help, but uptake is low and several behavioural relapse prevention interventions have been found to be ineffective. However, opportunistic ‘emergency’ use of fast-acting nicotine replacement treatment or electronic cigarettes may be more attractive and effective, and an online behavioural Structured Planning and Prompting Protocol has shown promise. The present trial aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these two interventions. Design A randomised controlled trial. Setting English stop smoking services and Australian quitlines, Australian social media and St Vincent’s Hospital Melbourne, Fitzroy, VIC. Participants Ex-smokers abstinent for at least 4 weeks, with some participants in Australia also recruited from 1 week post quit date. The planned sample size was 1400, but the trial was curtailed when 235 participants were recruited. Interventions Participants were randomised in permuted blocks of random sizes to (1) oral nicotine replacement treatment/electronic cigarettes to use if at risk of relapse, plus static text messages (n = 60), (2) the Structured Planning and Prompting Protocol and interactive text messages (n = 57), (3) oral nicotine replacement treatment/electronic cigarettes plus the Structured Planning and Prompting Protocol with interactive text messages (n = 58) or (4) usual care plus static text messages (n = 59). Outcome measures Owing to delays in study set-up and recruitment issues, the study was curtailed and the primary outcome was revised. The original objective was to determine whether or not the two interventions, together or separately, reduced relapse rates at 12 months compared with usual care. The revised primary objective was to determine whether or not number of interventions received (i.e. none, one or two) affects relapse rate at 6 months (not biochemically validated because of study curtailment). Relapse was defined as smoking on at least 7 consecutive days, or any smoking in the last month at final follow-up for both the original and curtailed outcomes. Participants with missing outcome data were included as smokers. Secondary outcomes included sustained abstinence (i.e. no more than five cigarettes smoked over the 6 months), nicotine product preferences (e.g. electronic cigarettes or nicotine replacement treatment) and Structured Planning and Prompting Protocol coping strategies used. Two substudies assessed reactions to interventions quantitatively and qualitatively. The trial statistician remained blinded until analysis was complete. Results The 6-month relapse rates were 60.0%, 43.5% and 49.2% in the usual-care arm, one-intervention arm and the two-intervention arm, respectively (p = 0.11). Sustained abstinence rates were 41.7%, 54.8% and 50.9%, respectively (p = 0.17). Electronic cigarettes were chosen more frequently than nicotine replacement treatment in Australia (71.1% vs. 29.0%; p = 0.001), but not in England (54.0% vs. 46.0%; p = 0.57). Of participants allocated to nicotine products, 23.1% were using them daily at 6 months. The online intervention received positive ratings from 63% of participants at 6 months, but the majority of participants (72%) completed one assessment only. Coping strategies taught in the Structured Planning and Prompting Protocol were used with similar frequency in all study arms, suggesting that these are strategies people had already acquired. Only one participant used the interactive texting, and interactive and static messages received virtually identical ratings. Limitations The inability to recruit sufficient participants resulted in a lack of power to detect clinically relevant differences. Self-reported abstinence was not biochemically validated in the curtailed trial, and the ecological momentary assessment substudy was perceived by some as an intervention. Conclusions Recruiting recent ex-smokers into an interventional study proved problematic. Both interventions were well received and safe. Combining the interventions did not surpass the effects of each intervention alone. There was a trend in favour of single interventions reducing relapse, but it did not reach significance and there are reasons to interpret the trend with caution. Future work Further studies of both interventions are warranted, using simpler study designs. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN11111428. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 68. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Funding was also provided by the National Health and Medical Research Council, Canberra, ACT, Australia (NHMRC APP1095880). Public Health England provided the funds to purchase the nicotine products in England.

Background Aboriginal alcohol and other drug residential rehabilitation (residential rehabilitation) services have been providing treatment in Australia of over 50 years. However, there are no studies in Australia or internationally that document characteristics of clients attending Indigenous residential rehabilitation services worldwide. This is the first multi-site paper to describe key client characteristics of six Indigenous (hereafter Aboriginal Australians as the term recommended by the Aboriginal Health and Medical Research Council of New South Wales) residential rehabilitation services in Australia. Methods All recorded client admissions between 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2016 were considered from six operating services in the Australian state of New South Wales. Data collected were classified into categories based on demographics, treatment utilisation, substance use, mental health and quality of life characteristics. Means, median and percentages were calculated (where appropriate). Results There were 2645 admissions across the six services in the study period, with an average of 440 admissions per year across all services. Participants were aged between 26 to 35 years, with fewest participants aged 46 +. Program length ranged from 12 to 52 weeks (mean of 12 weeks). The completion rates and length of stay for each service ranged from less than two to more than 12 weeks. The principal drug of choice was alcohol and amphetamines in half of the services. Not all services used them, but a range of tools were used to measure treatment, substance use and mental health or quality of life outcomes. Conclusion This study is the first internationally to describe the key features of multiple Aboriginal residential rehabilitation services. The variation in tools used to collect client data made it difficult to compare client characteristics across services. Future research could explore predictors of treatment completion, identify opportunities for standardisation in client assessments and validate cultural approaches of care. These efforts would need to be guided by Aboriginal leadership in each service.

Introduction Aboriginal clients accessing Aboriginal community-controlled residential alcohol and other drug rehabilitation services in New South Wales, Australia believe they have better outcomes due to culturally appropriate care. However, there is a paucity of published treatment outcome data. This study aims to identify predictors of treatment outcomes based on client characteristics at intake. Methods A cross-sectional, retrospective, observational study of 2326 admissions to six services between January 2011 and December 2016. The outcomes were: (i) leaving treatment early; (ii) self-discharge or house discharge (by staff); and (iii) re-admission within two years. The predictors examined were Aboriginal status, age, justice system referral and primary substance of concern. Competing risk and Poisson regression analyses were used to identify trends in the data. Results The mean age of clients was 33 years, and the majority (56%) stayed at least 6 weeks. Aboriginal clients whose primary substance of concern was stimulants were almost eight times more likely to re-admitted within 2 years than other clients (risk ratio 7.91; P

Importance Cytisine is more effective than placebo and nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation. However, cytisine has not been tested against the most effective smoking cessation medication, varenicline, which is associated with adverse events known to lead to discontinuation of therapy. Objective To examine whether standard cytisine treatment (25 days) was at least as effective as standard varenicline treatment (84 days) for smoking cessation. Design, Setting, and Participants This noninferiority, open-label randomized clinical trial with allocation concealment and blinded outcome assessment was undertaken in Australia from November 2017 through May 2019; follow-up was completed in January 2020. A total of 1452 Australian adult daily smokers willing to make a quit attempt were included. Data collection was conducted primarily by computer-assisted telephone interview, but there was an in-person visit to validate the primary outcome. Interventions Treatments were provided in accordance with the manufacturers’ recommended dosage: cytisine (n = 725), 1.5-mg capsules taken 6 times daily initially then gradually reduced over the 25-day course; varenicline (n = 727), 0.5-mg tablets titrated to 1 mg twice daily for 84 days (12 weeks). All participants were offered referral to standard telephone behavioral support. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was 6-month continuous abstinence verified using a carbon monoxide breath test at 7-month follow-up. The noninferiority margin was set at 5% and the 1-sided significance threshold was set at .025. Results Among 1452 participants who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 42.9 [12.7] years; 742 [51.1%] women), 1108 (76.3%) completed the trial. Verified 6-month continuous abstinence rates were 11.7% for the cytisine group and 13.3% for the varenicline group (risk difference, −1.62% [1-sided 97.5% CI, −5.02% to ∞];P = .03 for noninferiority). Self-reported adverse events occurred less frequently in the cytisine group (997 events among 482 participants) compared with the varenicline group (1206 events among 510 participants) and the incident rate ratio was 0.88 (95% CI, 0.81 to 0.95;P = .002). Conclusions and Relevance Among daily smokers willing to quit, cytisine treatment for 25 days, compared with varenicline treatment for 84 days, failed to demonstrate noninferiority regarding smoking cessation. Trial Registration anzctr.org.au Identifier:ACTRN12616001654448

Aims To review cytisine's history of use, pre-clinical evidence, clinical pharmacokinetics, efficacy, adverse reactions (ARs) and safety for smoking cessation. Methods A synoptic review of the use of cytisine as a smoking cessation medication, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics and safety. Relevant literature on data included in these sections were identified through a search of 11 databases with additional literature obtained from reports and monographs. Three databases (PubMed, EMBASE and www.elibrary.ru) were systematically searched for studies published from 2012 to August 2018 in any language to provide an updated meta-analysis of cytisine's efficacy and ARs for smoking cessation compared with placebo. We pooled the relative risks (RR) of abstinence in the efficacy analysis and RR of ARs, either reported by the authors or calculated from the reports. Results Cytisine has been in use since 1964 and is currently marketed in 18 countries. Systemic bioavailability from oral ingestion is high and clearance is primarily renal, with minimal or no metabolism. Brain uptake in animal models is moderate. The plasma half-life averages 4.8 hours. Eight studies were included for meta-analysis of efficacy. With heterogeneous results, the overall RR versus placebo of successful continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up was 1.74 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.38-2.19]. Nausea, vomiting, dyspepsia, upper abdominal pain and dry mouth that were mild or moderate were the most common ARs, with RR versus placebo 1.10 (95% CI = 0.95-1.28). The cost of cytisine in eastern and central Europe is several-fold less than that of other smoking cessation medications. Conclusions Cytisine is a low-cost medication found to increase the likelihood of smoking cessation. The most frequently reported ARs of cytisine involve gastrointestinal symptoms that are mostly reported as either mild or moderate in severity.

To examine factors associated with Quitline and pharmacotherapy utilisation in low socioeconomic status (low-SES) smokers enrolled in a smoking cessation trial.Baseline data was used from a large-scale smoking cessation randomised controlled trial (RCT). Logistic regression models were used to examine predictors of treatment utilisation prior to entering the RCT and perceived effectiveness of past and future use.A total of 1047 smokers consented and prior to enrolment 92% had previously tried to quit smoking, 86% had ever used quit support, 83% had used pharmacotherapy at least once and 38% had ever utilised Quitline. For those who had used pharmacotherapies, 71% used NRT, of which 21% had used dual NRT products. In the last 12-months, 27% utilised Quitline and 50% utilised NRT. Ever use of Quitline was negatively associated with self-efficacy to quit (OR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.68, 0.94 p .01) and positively associated with being diagnosed with a mental health condition (OR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.01, 2.25 p .05). Recent use of NRT was positively associated with mental health condition (OR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.02, 1.90 p .05) and negatively associated with alcohol consumption (OR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.52, 0.92 p .01).Past use of Quitline and pharmacotherapy treatment was associated with self-efficacy to quit, sociodemographic variables, mental health conditions and alcohol consumption. Community-based strategies that target smoking, mental health and drug and alcohol problems may overcome some of the barriers that prevent low-SES populations from engaging with smoking cessation support.

ObjectivesPeople suffering from mental health disorder (MHDs) are often under-represented in clinical research though the reasons for their exclusion are rarely recorded. As they have higher rates of smoking and nicotine dependence, it is crucial that they are adequately represented in clinical trials of established pharmacotherapy interventions for smoking cessation. This review aims to examine the practice of excluding smokers with MHDs and reasons for such exclusion in clinical trials evaluating pharmacotherapy treatments for smoking cessation.Data sourceThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews was searched until September 2020 for reviews on smoking cessation using pharmacotherapies.Study selectionRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) within the selected Cochrane reviews were included.Data extractionConducted by one author and independently verified by three authors.Data synthesisWe included 279 RCTs from 13 Cochrane reviews. Of all studies, 51 (18.3%) explicitly excluded participants with any MHDs, 152 (54.5%) conditionally excluded based on certain MHD criteria and 76 (27.2%) provided insufficient information to ascertain either inclusion or exclusion. Studies of antidepressant medications used for smoking cessation were found to be 3.33 times more likely (95% CI 1.38 to 8.01, p=0.007) to conditionally exclude smokers with MHDs than explicitly exclude compared with studies of nicotine replacement therapy.ConclusionSmokers with MHDs are not sufficiently represented in RCTs examining the safety and effectiveness of smoking cessation medications. Greater access to clinical trial participation needs to be facilitated for this group to better address access to appropriate pharmacotherapeutic interventions in this vulnerable population.

Background and Objectives: Smoking and smoking-related harms are highly prevalent among people with severe mental illness. Targeted smoking cessation programs are much needed in this population. This pilot study aimed to assess the effectiveness of implementing smoking cessation system change interventions within an acute inpatient mental health unit. Materials and Methods: Design: Pre-post intervention study. System change interventions for smoking cessation were delivered over a three-month period (05 March 2018–04 June 2018) on an acute inpatient mental health unit. Participants (n = 214) were all individuals receiving care as inpatients during the three-month intervention. Outcomes assessed pre- and post-intervention were: (i) recording of patient smoking status in medical notes, (ii) number of inpatients offered smoking cessation medication, and iii) number of violent incidents reported. Results: Recording of smoking status significantly increased from 1.9% to 11.4% (X2 = 14.80; p ≤ 0.001). The proportion of inpatients offered smoking cessation treatment significantly increased from 11.0% to 26.8% (X2 = 16.01; p ≤ 0.001). The number of violent incidents decreased by half, which was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Evidence-based smoking cessation interventions can be successfully implemented on an inpatient mental health unit. Modest gains were made in routine screening for smoking and in smoking cessation treatment prescription. Future studies should prioritize effective participatory collaboration with staff to optimize effectiveness of interventions and should include additional strategies such as brief intervention training and smoking cessation treatments such as varenicline and buproprion in addition to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT).

Background and aims Little is known about the factors associated with retention in smoking cessation trials, especially for low-socioeconomic status (low-SES) smokers. This study examined the factors associated with retention of low-SES smokers in the Australian Financial Interventions for Smoking Cessation Among Low-Income Smokers (FISCALS) trial. Design A two-group parallel block randomised open-label trial with allocation concealment. Setting Australia. The study was conducted primarily by telephone-based interviews with nicotine replacement therapy delivered via mail. Participants 1047 low-SES smokers interested in quitting smoking were randomised. Measurements Participants completed computer assisted telephone interviews (CATIs) at baseline, 2-month and 8-month follow-up. Smoking-related, substance use, mental or physical health, general psychological constructs, sociodemographic and recruitment sources association with retention at 8-month follow-up were examined using binary logistic regression. Findings 946 participants (90%) completed the 2-month follow-up interview and 880 participants (84%) completed the 8-month follow-up interview. Retention at 8-months was associated with higher motivation to quit (OR: 1.15; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.27 p

ObjectivesExamine the patterns of cigarette smoking and e-cigarette use (vaping), the perceived harm of e-cigarettes compared with tobacco cigarettes, and associations between smoking and vaping with student characteristics.DesignCross-sectional studies.SettingThe University of Queensland (UQ), Australia and eight New Zealand (NZ) universities.ParticipantsStudents at UQ: 4957 (70.8% aged MethodsΧ2 tests compared smoking by age and gender, and vaping by age, gender and smoking status. Two-sided pResultsSmoking (UQ vs NZ, 95% CI): ever 45.2% (43.8% to 46.6%) vs 50.0% (47.7% to 52.3%), current 8.9% (8.1% to 9.7%) vs 10.4% (9.1% to 11.9%) and daily 5.2% (4.6% to 5.8%) vs 5.6% (4.6% to 6.7%), and not smoking in indoor 98.3% vs 87.7% or outdoor smoke-free spaces 83.8% vs 65.3%.Vaping (UQ vs NZ, 95% CI): ever 20.9% (19.8% to 22.1%) vs 37.6% (35.4% to 39.9%), current 1.8% (1.5% to 2.2%) vs 6.5% (5.4% to 7.7%) and daily 0.7% (0.5% to 1.0%) vs 2.5% (1.9% to 3.4%), and not vaping in indoor 91.4% vs 79.6% or outdoor smoke-free spaces 84.4% vs 71.3%. Of respondents, 71.7% (70.3% to 73.2%) vs 75.3% (72.9% to 77.6%) perceived e-cigarettes as less harmful than tobacco cigarettes.Men were more likely than women to smoke and vape, and to believe that e-cigarettes are less harmful. Regression models containing all predictors for smoking and vaping were significant and the effect of gender was significant for dual use, exclusive smoking and exclusive vaping (all pConclusionsResults suggest significant differences in patterns of smoking and vaping of university students in Australia and NZ, and a strong influence of gender on smoking and vaping.

The prison setting presents not only challenges, but also opportunities, for the prevention and treatment of HIV, viral hepatitis, and tuberculosis. We did a comprehensive literature search of data published between 2005 and 2015 to understand the global epidemiology of HIV, hepatitis C virus (HCV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and tuberculosis in prisoners. We further modelled the contribution of imprisonment and the potential impact of prevention interventions on HIV transmission in this population. Of the estimated 10·2 million people incarcerated worldwide on any given day in 2014, we estimated that 3·8% have HIV (389 000 living with HIV), 15·1% have HCV (1 546 500), 4·8% have chronic HBV (491 500), and 2·8% have active tuberculosis (286 000). The few studies on incidence suggest that intraprison transmission is generally low, except for large-scale outbreaks. Our model indicates that decreasing the incarceration rate in people who inject drugs and providing opioid agonist therapy could reduce the burden of HIV in this population. The prevalence of HIV, HCV, HBV, and tuberculosis is higher in prison populations than in the general population, mainly because of the criminalisation of drug use and the detention of people who use drugs. The most effective way of controlling these infections in prisoners and the broader community is to reduce the incarceration of people who inject drugs.

IntroductionSmoking remains the leading risk factor for disease burden and mortality worldwide. Heavy Smoking is often associated with poor Nutrition, Alcohol abuse and Physical inactivity (known as ‘SNAP’). Australia’s first prison smoking ban was introduced in the Northern Territory in July 2013. However, relapse to smoking after release from prison is normative. Holistic and cost-effective interventions are needed to maintain post-release abstinence to realise the potential public health impact of smoke-free prison policies. Rigorous, large-scale trials of innovative and scalable interventions are crucial to inform tobacco control policies in correctional settings.Methods and analysisThis multicentre, investigator-blinded, randomised parallel superiority trial will evaluate the effectiveness of a brief intervention on SNAP versus usual care in preventing smoking relapse among people released from smoke-free prisons in the Northern Territory, Australia. A maximum of 824 participants will be enrolled and randomly assigned to either SNAP intervention or usual care at a 1:1 ratio at baseline. The primary endpoint is self-reported continuous smoking abstinence three months after release from prison, verified by breath carbon monoxide test. Secondary endpoints include seven-day point prevalence abstinence, time to first cigarette, number of cigarettes smoked post release, Health Eating Index for Australian Adults, Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test-Consumption and International Physical Activity Questionnaire scores. The primary endpoint will be analysed on an intention-to-treat basis using a simple log binomial regression model with multiple imputation for missing outcome data. A cost-effectiveness analysis of the brief intervention will be conducted subsequently.Ethics and disseminationThis study was approved by the University of New South Wales Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC), Menzies HREC and Central Australia HREC. Primary results of the trial and each of the secondary endpoints will be submitted for publication in a peer-review journal.Trial registration numberACTRN12617000217303; Pre-results.

Background The social gradient in smoking rates persist with an overrepresentation of smoking and its associated harms concentrated within lower socioeconomic status (SES) populations. Low-SES smokers are motivated to quit but face multiple barriers when engaging a quit attempt. An understanding of the current treatment service model from the perspectives of treatment-seeking low-SES smokers is needed to inform the design of alternative smoking cessation support services tailored to the needs of low-SES populations. This qualitative study aimed to: i) explore low-SES smokers’ recent quitting experiences; ii) assess factors that impact treatment engagement; and iii) determine the acceptability and feasibility of alternative approaches to smoking cessation. Method Low-SES participants (n = 24) previously enrolled in a smoking cessation RCT participated in either a semi-structured focus group or in-depth telephone interview. Data was obtained and analysed using thematic analysis from October 2015 to June 2016. Analysis was deductive from the interview guide and supplemented inductively. Results Participants expressed feelings of guilt and shame around their smoking behaviour and experienced stigmatisation for their smoking. Guilt, shame, and stigmatisation negatively impacted treatment seeking behaviours with most avoiding current quit services. Costs of pharmacotherapy and treatment adherence were commonly cited barriers to treatment success. Electronic-cigarettes were perceived to be unsafe due to uncertainty on their legal status and regulatory restrictions. Technology-based text-messaging quit support was endorsed as a more favourable alternative compared to existing behavioural treatment services. Conclusion Stigmatisation was commonly endorsed and acted as an impediment to current treatment utilisation. Electronic-cigarettes may present a viable harm reduction alternative, but their likely uptake in socioeconomically disadvantaged groups in Australia is limited by smokers’ uncertainty about their regulation and legality. Mobile phone based cessation support may provide an alternative to telephone counselling and overcome the stigmatisation low-SES smokers face while trying to quit.

Introduction: Being in use for 50 years as a smoking cessation aid, cytisine initially lacked high-quality evidence, but recently the number of studies has increased with new clinical trials pending. The aim of this study was to compare data from earlier studies against newer studies completed within the last 10 years. Methods: We searched Pubmed, Embase and www.elibrary.ru for all studies on cytisine efficacy. After exclusion, nine randomized controlled trials dated from 1968 onwards were identified and included in the random effects meta-analysis of the continuous or longest reported abstinence, both self-reported and biochemically verified. We extracted relative risks (RR) from each study or, alternatively, calculated crude RRs from studies only reporting numbers of abstinent subjects. Results: Four studies (40%) were published in the last 10 years with the RR of continuous or longest abstinence ranging from 1.28 to 14.01. Recent studies with higher quality elucidated greater cytisine efficacy (abstinence RR 2.12 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27-3.54) than earlier studies (RR 1.54 (95% CI 1.23-1.93)). Heterogeneity between studies was high in both groups. Conclusions: Cytisine may be more effective in helping smokers stop than thought before. Cytisine may double the chance of successful cessation, but more studies with larger sample size are needed to confirm current data.

Background Financial stress is a barrier to successful smoking cessation and a key predictor of relapse. Little is known about the financial situation of low-income Australian daily smokers. This study aims to describe and investigate associations between the financial functioning, tobacco use and quitting behaviours of low income daily smokers. Methods Low-income Australian adult smokers in the ‘Financial Intervention for Smoking Cessation Among Low-income Smokers (FISCALS) randomised clinical trial completed a structured telephone questionnaire. Results The median number of cigarettes typically smoked by the 1047 participants was 23 per day. The median spent on tobacco per week was AU$80. Three quarters (73.0%) reported some financial stress and 43.2% reported smoking-induced deprivation. Financial stress was significantly associated with deprivation (IRR: 1.23, 95% CI 1.21, 1.26, p

Background Systematic reviews and meta-analyses (reviews) conflict regarding the efficacy and feasibility of substance disorder treatments for young people (YP). This overview of reviews, synthesizes, and methodologically assesses reviews examining substance disorder interventions for YP in outpatient settings. Methods Reviews published between 1990 and March 2018 were searched using EBM Reviews, PsycINFO, Embase, Ovid Medline, and Campbell Collaboration. Reviews investigating efficacy and/or feasibility of YP substance disorder treatments in outpatient settings were included. Forty-three reviews met all inclusion criteria To appraise methodological biases, 40 reviews were assessed using A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR2) and 3 were narratively assessed. One reviewer (NS) extracted study data and evaluated all 43 reviews. For inter-rater reliability, 13 (30%) reviews were extracted and appraised in duplicate by a second reviewer (JA, RC or ES). Agreement on AMSTAR2 ratings reached 100%. Agreement was moderate; κ = .52 (p Results All high quality methodological reviews (n = 6) focused on intervention efficacy and none on treatment feasibility. One (n = 1) high quality review reported evidence for an intervention. Multidimensional Family Therapy (MDFT) has possible efficacy in reducing YP substance use when compared to treatment as usual, Cognitive Behavior Therapy, Adolescent Community Reinforcement Approach and Multifamily Educational Therapy. Conclusions Methodological and reporting quality of reviews require improvement. High quality reviews focused on intervention efficacy but treatments commonly lacked evidence. One high quality review found MDFT demonstrated promising outcomes. Reviews examining feasibility of interventions were of low methodological quality.

To assess the methodological quality and effectiveness of technology-based smoking cessation interventions in disadvantaged groups.Four databases (EMBASE, Cochrane, Medline, and PsycInfo) were searched for studies conducted from 1980 to May 2016. Randomized controlled trials that compared a behavioral smoking cessation intervention delivered primarily through a technology-based platform (eg, mobile phone) with a no-intervention comparison group among disadvantaged smokers were included. Three reviewers assessed all relevant studies for inclusion, and one reviewer extracted study, participant and intervention-level data, with a subset crosschecked by a second reviewer.Thirteen studies targeting disadvantaged smokers (n =4820) were included. Only one study scored highly in terms of methodological rigor on EPOC criteria for judging risk of bias. Of the 13 studies using a technology-based platform, most utilized websites (n = 5) or computer programs (n = 5), and seven additionally offered nicotine replacement therapy. Technology-based interventions increased the odds of smoking cessation for disadvantaged groups at 1 month (odds ratio [OR] 1.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10, 2.63), 3 months (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.07, 1.59), 6 months (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.03, 1.62), and 18 months post-intervention (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.11, 3.01).Few methodologically rigorous studies were identified. Mobile phone text-messaging, computer- and website-delivered quit support showed promise at increasing quit rates among Indigenous, psychiatric and inpatient substance use disorder patients. Further research is needed to address the role technology-based interventions have on overcoming health inequalities to meet the needs of disadvantaged groups.This review provides the first quantitative evidence of the effectiveness of a range of technology-based smoking cessation interventions among disadvantaged smokers, with separate estimates on the basis of intervention type, and cessation outcome measure. Providing cost-effective, easily accessible and real-time smoking cessation treatment is needed, and innovative technology-based platforms will help reach this endpoint. These interventions need to be tested in larger scale randomized controlled trial designs and target broader disadvantaged groups. Data collection beyond 6 months is also needed in order to establish the efficacy of these intervention approaches on long-term cessation rates among disadvantaged population groups.

OBJECTIVES To determine current colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates and the level of adherence to screening guidelines @a community level. SETTING A cross-sectional cohort of at-risk people aged 56-88 years randomly selected from the Hunter Community Study (HCS), Australia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Proportion ever reporting undertaking any CRC testing; current screening rates for each CRC screening modality; level of screening in accordance with national screening guidelines. RESULTS Of the 1117 participants (70%) who returned a questionnaire, 777 were deemed asymptomatic and eligible for analysis. Overall, 63% of respondents had ever received any CRC testing. Forty-three per cent had ever had a faecal occult blood test (20% screened in the previous 2 years); 30% had ever had a colonoscopy (16% screened in the previous 5 years); and 7% had ever had a sigmoidoscopy (1% screened in the previous 5 years). Rates of adherence to screening guidelines were 21% for respondents who were @or slightly above average risk, and 45% for respondents who were @moderately increased or potentially high risk. CONCLUSIONS Rates of CRC screening remain low. The screening rate for colonoscopy was particularly high among people who were @or slightly above average risk, despite such screening not being endorsed in the guidelines. Effective strategies to improve rates of CRC screening and appropriate use of colonoscopy are required across the entire at-risk population.

Aim There are few data on the factors associated with healthcare-seeking behaviour for symptoms of colorectal cancer. This study describes the determinants of failure and delay in seeking medical advice for rectal bleeding and change in bowel habit. Method In total, 1592 persons (56–88 years) were randomly selected from the Hunter Community Study and mailed a questionnaire. Results In all, 18% (60/332) of respondents experiencing rectal bleeding and 20% (39/195) reporting change in bowel habit had never consulted a doctor. The rate of delay (> 1 month) for each symptom was 18% and 37%. The reasons for delay included the assumption that the symptoms were not serious or that they were benign. Triggers for seeking medical advice varied. Healthcare-seeking behaviour for rectal bleeding had not significantly improved compared with a previous community-based study. Conclusion The seriousness of symptoms, importance of early detection and prompt medical consultation must be articulated in health messages to at-risk persons.

Waiting times can raise significant concern for cancer patients. This study examined cancer patients' concern levels at each phase of waiting. Demographic, disease and psychosocial characteristics associated with concern at each phase were also assessed. 146 consenting outpatients (n= 146) were recruited from two hospitals in Sydney, Australia. Each completed a touch-screen computer survey, asking them to recall concern experienced regarding waiting times at each treatment phase. Approximately half (52%) reported experiencing concern during at least one treatment phase, while 8.9% reported experiencing concern at every phase. Higher proportions of patients reported concern about waiting times from: deciding to have radiotherapy to commencement of radiotherapy (31%); the first specialist appointment to receiving a cancer diagnosis (28%); and deciding to have chemotherapy to commencement of chemotherapy (28%). Patient groups more likely to report concern were those of lower socio-economic status, born outside Australia, or of younger age. Although a small proportion of patients reported very high levels of concern regarding waiting times, the experience of some concern was prevalent. Opportunities for reducing this concern are discussed. Vulnerable groups, such as younger and socio-economically disadvantaged patients, should be the focus of efforts to reduce waiting times and patient concern levels.

Background The aim of this study was to determine the proportions and predictors of first-degree relatives (FDRs) of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients (i) ever receiving any CRC testing and (ii) receiving CRC screening in accordance with CRC screening guidelines. Methods Colorectal cancer patients and their FDRs were recruited through the population-based Victorian Cancer Registry, Victoria, Australia. Seven hundred and seven FDRs completed telephone interviews. Of these, 405 FDRs were deemed asymptomatic and eligible for analysis. Results Sixty-nine percent of FDRs had ever received any CRC testing. First-degree relatives of older age, those with private health insurance, siblings and FDRs who had ever been asked about family history of CRC by a doctor were significantly more likely than their counterparts to have ever received CRC testing. Twenty-five percent of FDRs “at or slightly above average risk” were adherent to CRC screening guidelines. For this group, adherence to guideline-recommended screening was significantly more likely to occur for male FDRs and those with a higher level of education. For persons at “moderately increased risk” and “potentially high risk”, 47% and 49% respectively adhered to CRC screening guidelines. For this group, guideline-recommended screening was significantly more likely to occur for FDRs who were living in metropolitan areas, siblings, those married or partnered and those ever asked about family history of CRC. Conclusions A significant level of non-compliance with screening guidelines was evident among FDRs. Improved CRC screening in accordance with guidelines and effective systematic interventions to increase screening rates among population groups experiencing inequality are needed. Trial Registration Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN12609000628246

Background Family history is a common risk factor for colorectal cancer (CRC), yet it is often underused to guide risk assessment and the provision of risk-appropriate CRC screening recommendation. The aim of this study was to identify from a patient perspective health care providers' current practice relating to: (i) assessment of family history of CRC; (ii) notification of "increased risk" to patients at "moderately/potentially high" familial risk; and (iii) recommendation that patients undertake CRC screening. Methods 1592 persons aged 56-88 years randomly selected from the Hunter Community Study (HCS), New South Wales, Australia were mailed a questionnaire. 1117 participants (70%) returned a questionnaire. Results Thirty eight percent of respondents reported ever being asked about their family history of CRC. Ever discussing family history of CRC with a health care provider was significantly more likely to occur for persons with a higher level of education, who had ever received screening advice and with a lower physical component summary score. Fifty one percent of persons at "moderately/potentially high risk" were notified of their "increased risk" of developing CRC. Thirty one percent of persons across each level of risk had ever received CRC screening advice from a health care provider. Screening advice provision was significantly more likely to occur for persons who had ever discussed their family history of CRC with a health care provider and who were at "moderately/potentially high risk". Conclusions Effective interventions that integrate both the assessment and notification of familial risk of CRC to the wider population are needed. Systematic and cost-effective mechanisms that facilitate family history collection, risk assessment and provision of screening advice within the primary health care setting are required.

Background Little data exists on the factors associated with health care seeking behaviour for primary symptoms of colorectal cancer (CRC). This study aimed to identify individual, provider and psychosocial factors associated with (i) ever seeking medical advice and (ii) seeking early medical advice for primary symptoms of colorectal cancer (CRC). Methods 1592 persons aged 56–88 years randomly selected from the Hunter Community Study (HCS) were sent a questionnaire. Results Males and those who had received screening advice from a doctor were at significantly higher odds of ever seeking medical advice for rectal bleeding. Persons who had private health coverage, consulted a doctor because the ‘symptom was serious’, or who did not wait to consult a doctor for another reason were at significantly higher odds of seeking early medical advice (< 2 weeks). For change in bowel habit, persons with lower income, within the healthy weight range, or who had discussed their family history of CRC irrespective of whether informed of ‘increased risk’ were at significantly higher odds of ever seeking medical advice. Persons frequenting their GP less often and seeing their doctor because the symptom persisted were at significantly higher odds of seeking early medical advice (< 2 weeks). Conclusions The seriousness of symptoms, importance of early detection, and prompt consultation must be articulated in health messages to at-risk persons. This study identified modifiable factors, both individual and provider-related to consultation behaviour. Effective health promotion efforts must heed these factors and target sub-groups less likely to seek early medical advice.

Technical and Further Education (TAFE) colleges are the primary provider of vocational education in Australia. Most TAFE students are young adults, a period when health risk behaviours become established. Furthermore, high rates of smoking, risky alcohol consumption, inadequate fruit and vegetable intake and insufficient physical activity have been reported in TAFE students. There have been no intervention studies targeting multiple health risk behaviours simultaneously in this population. The proposed trial will examine the effectiveness of providing TAFE students with electronic feedback regarding health risk behaviours and referral to a suite of existing online and telephone services addressing smoking, risky alcohol consumption, fruit and vegetable intake, and physical activity levels. A two arm, parallel, cluster randomised trial will be conducted within TAFE campuses in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. TAFE classes will be randomly allocated to an intervention or control condition (50 classes per condition). To be eligible, students must be: enrolled in a course that runs for more than 6 months; aged 16 years or older; and not meet Australian health guideline recommendations for at least one of the following: smoking, alcohol consumption, fruit and/or vegetable intake, or physical activity. Students attending intervention classes, will undertake via a computer tablet a risk assessment for health risk behaviours, and for behaviours not meeting Australian guidelines be provided with electronic feedback about these behaviours and referral to evidence-based online programs and telephone services. Students in control classes will not receive any intervention. Primary outcome measures that will be assessed via online surveys at baseline and 6 months post-recruitment are: 1) daily tobacco smoking; 2) standard drinks of alcohol consumed per week; 3) serves of fruit consumed daily; 4) serves of vegetables consumed daily; and 5) metabolic equivalent minutes of physical activity per week. Proactive enrolment to existing online and telephone services has the potential to address modifiable determinants of disease. This trial will be the first to examine a potentially scalable intervention targeting multiple health risk behaviours among students in the vocational training setting. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12615000105549 ; Registered 5/2/15

Background Participation rates in colorectal cancer screening (CRC) are low. Relatively little is known about screening uptake across varying levels of risk and across population groups. The purpose of the current study was to identify factors associated with (i) ever receiving colorectal cancer (CRC) testing; (ii) risk-appropriate CRC screening in accordance with guidelines; and (iii) recent colonoscopy screening. Methods 1592 at-risk persons (aged 56–88 years) were randomly selected from the Hunter Community Study (HCS), Australia. Participants self-reported family history of CRC was used to quantify risk in accordance with national screening guidelines. Results 1117 participants returned a questionnaire; 760 respondents were eligible for screening and analysis. Ever receiving CRC testing was significantly more likely for persons: aged 65–74 years; who had discussed with a doctor their family history of CRC or had ever received screening advice. For respondents “at or slightly above average risk”, guideline-appropriate screening was significantly more likely for persons: aged 65–74 years; with higher household income; and who had ever received screening advice. For respondents at “moderately or potentially high risk”, guideline-appropriate screening was significantly more likely for persons: with private health insurance and who had discussed their family history of CRC with a doctor. Colonoscopy screening was significantly more likely for persons: who had ever smoked; discussed their family history of CRC with a doctor; or had ever received screening advice. Conclusions The level of risk-appropriate screening varied across populations groups. Interventions that target population groups less likely to engage in CRC screening are pivotal for decreasing screening inequalities.

Background Recruiting cancer patients is a barrier often encountered in research trials. However, very few randomized trials explore strategies to improve participation rates. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a pre-recruitment primer letter to recruit persons diagnosed with colorectal cancer for a research trial. Methods Potentially eligible participants were identified by the Victorian Cancer Registry. A total of 1,062 participants were randomized to receive either a mailed explanatory primer letter designed to encourage research participation, or no primer letter. Two weeks after the intervention, the Victorian Cancer Registry sought permission from patients to release their contact details to researchers. Those who agreed were contacted and invited to the study. Results Pre-recruitment encouragement was not effective at increasing recruitment, with no significant differences demonstrated between experimental groups. Overall, 40% (n = 425) consented to participate, 25% (n = 243) refused and 35% (n = 394) did not respond. Conclusions While this study demonstrated disappointing outcomes, pre-recruitment letters should not be ruled out as an approach altogether. Rather, future research should explore whether other factors to increase motivation, such as intensity and timing, are feasible and acceptable for contacting cancer patients. Trial registration Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12609000628246