Effectiveness of anti-smoking interventions towards community: a meta-analysis study
1Department of Public Health, Medical Faculty, Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University, Ankara, Turkey.
Objectives:
Smoking is one of the biggest public health problems in the world. The World Health Organization (WHO) has declared the MPOWER package which provides a guide for tobacco control. The package includes six evidence based anti-smoking interventions. This meta-analysis study aims to assess the effectiveness of MPOWER - (M)onitor, (P)rotect, (O)ffer, (W)arn, (E)nforce, and (R)aise. In the study, "smoking prevalence rate, smoking cessation rate and number of cigarettes smoked daily" outputs were used in adult and adolescent age groups.
Methods:
Literature search has been made with "smok*, tobacco, cigarette*" keywords from the databases of Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane-Library. Abstracts were assessed in detail according to the inclusion criteria by the research team. Quality of articles was evaluated with modified Jadad criteria. The follow-up periods of articles were determined in two groups named as short and long term periods. We used random effects model (p ≤ 0.05) and fixed effects model (p > 0.05) according to the heterogeneity test results.
Results:
P and O interventions, which are evaluated with smoking cessation rate, increased the smoking cessation rate in adults by 39% in the longest follow-up period - RR: 1.39 (1.23-1.57). However, it was determined that the interventions were not effective on smoking cessation rate in adolescents - RR: 1.13 (0.90-1.42). Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) was the most effective intervention for smoking cessation rate in adults. W interventions, which are evaluated with smoking prevalence rate, decreased the smoking prevalence rate in adults by 13% in the longest follow-up period - OR: 0.87 (0.82-0.92). P, W and E interventions, which are evaluated with smoking prevalence rate, decreased the smoking prevalence rate in adolescents by 26% in the longest follow-up period - OR: 0.74 (0.68-0.80).
Conclusions:
MPOWER interventions affect smoking prevalence rate, smoking cessation rate and number of cigarettes smoked daily in different age groups. Well-controlled, well-planned and cost-effective anti-smoking interventions have great importance for public health protection.
More Related Videos
09:50Impact Assessment of Repeated Exposure of Organotypic 3D Bronchial and Nasal Tissue Culture Models to Whole Cigarette Smoke
Published on: February 12, 2015
10:44Comparing the Effects of Electronic Cigarette Vapor and Cigarette Smoke in a Novel In Vivo Exposure System
Published on: May 24, 2017
Related Concept Videos
Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data
Community Based Intervention
Foundations of Community Mental Health Programs
Central to the success of community-based interventions is the...
Lifestyle Factors and Health
Benefits of Physical Activity
Physical activity, whether through structured exercise or casual activities like walking, biking, or dancing, is a cornerstone of a...
Stress Prevention and Stress Management Techniques IV
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and...
