The effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in rural and remote populations: Systematic review and
Lucille Vance1, Brittany Glanville1, Kaushik Ramkumar1
1School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan, New South Wales, 230, Australia.
Background:
Rural and remote residents are more likely to smoke tobacco than those in major cities. However, they may experience unique systemic, provider, and individual barriers to accessing smoking cessation treatments, including distance and limited resources. Understanding the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in this population is important due to higher smoking-related disease burden and death compared to those in major cities.
Methods:
Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, PsychINFO, and Cochrane Library were searched until 19-02/2021. Inclusion criteria were randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs, randomised trials, or cluster randomised trials investigating behavioural interventions and pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation in rural and remote populations compared with a control or another smoking cessation treatment; and published in English. Given there is no internationally-standardised rurality index, definitions of 'rural' and 'remote' used by authors of studies were applied to reflect their country. Exclusion criteria were studies of non-combustible smoking cessation; and studies with urban participants in the sample. Two reviewers independently screened records for eligibility, extracted data from studies utilising a modified Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group form, and rated methodological quality using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies.
Results:
Sixteen studies were included. Meta-analysis revealed a statistically significant treatment effect of individual face-to-face counselling on smoking cessation (RR 2.35, 95% CI 1.16-4.76, I2=0%) in rural and remote populations. There was no statistically significant treatment effect for nicotine replacement therapy (RR 2.97, 95% CI 0.84-10.53, I2=47%), telephone-counselling (RR 1.69, 95% CI 0.56-5.06, I2=62%), and community-based multiple-interventions (RR:1.57, 95% CI 0.89-2.78, I2=85%). Certainty of evidence was rated very low for each meta-analysis.
Conclusion:
Despite limited resources in rural and remote settings, individual face-to-face counselling for smoking cessation appears promising. Given the limited number of studies, further research about the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in rural and remote populations is warranted.
More Related Videos
04:34Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness and Safety of Shugan Jieyu Capsules for the Treatment of Insomnia
Published on: February 17, 2023
06:55Inverse Probability of Treatment Weighting Propensity Score using the Military Health System Data Repository and National Death Index
Published on: January 8, 2020
Related Concept Videos
01:25Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data
01:26Stress Prevention and Stress Management Techniques IV
01:20Lifestyle 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...
01:30Specialized Care Centers and Settings-II
Rural health centers are specialized care facilities in remote locations with very few medical personnel. The primary care providers who run the centers are mostly Registered Nurse Practitioners. Here, emergency treatment is provided to critically ill or injured patients before they are transferred to the closest hospital. Fortunately, due to advancement in technology, many rural healthcare facilities and professionals have easy access to diagnostic and treatment...
01:29Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease-V: Management
Smoking Cessation
01:26COPD: Management Using Bronchodilators and Corticosteroids