Do school-based smoking preventive interventions have unintended effects? Post hoc analysis of the Focus cluster
Simone G Kjeld1, Lau C Thygesen2, Dina Danielsen2
1University of Southern Denmark, National Institute of Public Health, Copenhagen, Denmark simk@sdu.dk.
Objectives:
Public health interventions are designed to improve specific health-related outcomes; however, they may also produce negative side effects, such as substitution use, psychological or social harms. Knowledge about the unintended effects of school-based smoking preventive interventions is sparse. Hence, this study examined these potential unintended effects of the smoking-reducing intervention, Focus, among students in the vocational education and training setting.
Design:
Cluster randomised controlled trial stratified by school type with 5 months follow-up.
Setting And Participants:
Across Denmark, eight schools were randomised to the intervention group (n=844 students, response proportion 76%) and six schools to the control group (n=815 students, response proportion 75%). This study focused solely on students who smoked at baseline (N=491).
Interventions:
The intervention was developed systematically based on theory and a thoroughly mixed-methods needs assessment. Intervention components included a comprehensive school tobacco policy (smoke-free school hours) supported by a 3-day course for school staff and launched by an edutainment session for students; class-based lessons and a quit-and-win competition; and individual telephone smoking cessation support.
Outcomes:
Alternative tobacco and nicotine products (regular use of smokeless tobacco, hookah and e-cigarettes), regular cannabis use, boredom and loneliness at school, stress and perceived stigmatisation among smokers.
Results:
We found no statistically significant unintended effects of the intervention. Nonetheless, insignificant findings indicated that students in the intervention group were less likely to be bored during school hours (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.10) and experience stress (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.10), but more likely to report feeling stigmatised compared with the control group (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.71 to 3.40).
Conclusions:
Overall, findings suggested no unintended effects of the Focus trial with respect to substitution use, psychological, nor group or social harms. Future research is encouraged to report potential harmful outcomes of smoking preventive interventions, and interventions should be aware of the possible stigmatisation of smokers.
Trial Registration Number:
ISRCTN16455577.
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
Longitudinal Research
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Confounding in Epidemiological Studies
Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data
Stress Prevention and Stress Management Techniques IV
Group Design
