Search

INTRODUCTION Tobacco smoking poses a significant threat to the health of individuals living with diabetes. Intensive stand-alone smoking cessation interventions, such as multiple or long (>20 minutes) behavioral support sessions focused solely on smoking cessation, with or without the use of pharmacotherapy, increase abstinence when compared to brief advice or usual care in the general population. However, there is limited evidence so far for recommending the use of such interventions amongst individuals with diabetes. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of intensive stand-alone smoking cessation interventions for individuals living with diabetes and to identify their critical features. METHODS A systematic review design with the addition of a pragmatic intervention component analysis using narrative methods was adopted. The key terms 'diabetes mellitus' and 'smoking cessation' and their synonyms were searched in 15 databases in May 2022. Randomized controlled trials which assessed the effectiveness of intensive stand-alone smoking cessation interventions by comparing them to controls, specifically amongst individuals with diabetes, were included. RESULTS A total of 15 articles met the inclusion criteria. Generally, the identified studies reported on the delivery of a multi-component behavioral support smoking cessation intervention for individuals with type I and type II diabetes, providing biochemically verified smoking abstinence rates at follow-up at six months. The overall risk-of-bias of most studies was judged to be of some concern. Despite observing inconsistent findings across the identified studies, interventions consisting of three to four sessions, lasting more than 20 min each, were found to be more likely to be associated with smoking cessation success. The additional use of visual aids depicting diabetes-related complications may also be useful. CONCLUSIONS This review provides evidence-based smoking cessation recommendations for use by individuals with diabetes. Nonetheless, given that the findings of some studies were found to be possibly at risk-of-bias, further research to establish the validity of the provided recommendations is suggested. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundPoor self-management of symptoms and psychological distress leads to worse outcomes and excess health service use in cardiovascular disease (CVD). Online-delivered therapy is effective, but generic interventions lack relevance for people with specific long-term conditions, such as cardiovascular disease. ObjectiveTo develop a comprehensive online CVD-specific intervention to improve both self-management and well-being, and to test acceptability and feasibility. MethodsInformed by the Medical Research Council (MRC) guidance for the development of complex interventions, we adapted an existing evidence-based generic intervention for depression and anxiety for people with CVD. Content was informed by a literature review of existing resources and trial evidence, and the findings of a focus group study. Think-aloud usability testing was conducted to identify improvements to design and content. Acceptability and feasibility were tested in a cross-sectional study. ResultsFocus group participants (n=10) agreed that no existing resource met all their needs. Improvements such as "collapse and expand" features were added based on findings that participants’ information needs varied, and specific information, such as detecting heart attacks and when to seek help, was added. Think-aloud testing (n=2) led to changes in font size and design changes around navigation. All participants of the cross-sectional study (10/10, 100%) were able to access and use the intervention. Reported satisfaction was good, although the intervention was perceived to lack relevance for people without comorbid psychological distress. ConclusionsWe have developed an evidence-based, theory-informed, user-led online intervention for improving self-management and well-being in CVD. The use of multiple evaluation tests informed improvements to content and usability. Preliminary acceptability and feasibility has been demonstrated. The Space from Heart Disease intervention is now ready to be tested for effectiveness. This work has also identified that people with CVD symptoms and comorbid distress would be the most appropriate sample for a future randomized controlled trial to evaluate its effectiveness.

Abstract Background Supplementary prescribing for mental health nurses was first introduced in the UK in 2003. Since then, a number of studies have reported stakeholders' perceptions of the success of the initiative. However, there has been little experimental research conducted into its effectiveness. This paper reports findings from the first known study to compare the cost and clinical impact of mental health nurse supplementary prescribing to independent medical prescribing. Methods A post-test control group experimental design was used to compare the treatment costs, clinical outcomes and satisfaction of patients in receipt of mental health nurse supplementary prescribing with a matched group of patients in receipt of independent prescribing from consultant psychiatrists. The sample comprised 45 patients in receipt of mental health nurse supplementary prescribing for a minimum of six months and a matched group (by age, gender, diagnosis, and chronicity) of patients prescribed for by psychiatrists. Results There were no significant differences between patients in the nurse supplementary prescribers' group and the independent prescribers' group in terms of medication adherence, health status, side effects, and satisfaction with overall care. Total costs per patient for service use were £803 higher for the nurse prescribers' group but this difference was not significant (95% confidence interval -£1341 to £3020). Conclusions No significant differences were found between the health and social outcomes of patients in the mental health nurse supplementary prescribers' group, and those prescribed for by the independent medical prescribers. The cost appraisal also showed that there was no significant difference in the costs of the two types of prescribing, although the pattern of resources used differed between patients in the two prescriber groups. The results suggest that mental health nurse supplementary prescribers can deliver similar health benefits to patients as consultant psychiatrists without any significant difference in patients' service utilisation costs.

Purpose: To examine whether attachment styles of healthcare workers influence the quality of their relationships with patients, or impact patients' health outcomes.Data Source: Literature database searches on the CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, MEDLINE and PsyCinfo, and hand searching of reference lists of the retained articles.Study Selection: Original empirical studies reporting an analysis of the relationship of interest were selected for review.Data Extraction: Estimates of association between healthcare workers' attachment style and patients' health outcomes were extracted.Results Of Data Synthesis: Results from 13 studies were mixed in terms of which attachment styles related to patients' perceptions of care or health outcomes, and the evidence overall was of poor quality and methodologically heterogeneous. However, there is limited evidence that secure attachment styles of healthcare workers have little or a negative effect on patients' health outcomes or perceptions in the short term but in the long term have a more positive effect. Conversely, insecure styles tend to have a positive effect in the short term but little or a negative effect on long-term relationships. Studies which used self-report attachment measurements tended to report stronger associations with patients' outcome measurements than studies using the interviewer rated Adult Attachment Interview.Conclusion: It is unclear whether or not there is a relationship between attachment style of health workers and patients' health outcomes. Further research using consistent data collection tools, especially in relation to the attachment measurement construct selected, and analysis methods across studies is required to draw recommendations for clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]