Association between smoking-related attentional bias and craving measured in the clinic and in the natural environment

Previous laboratory studies have investigated associations between attentional bias and craving, but ecological momentary assessment (EMA) may provide ecologically-valid data. This study examines whether clinic-measured attentional bias is associated with noticing smoking cues, attention to smoking, and craving assessed by EMA and whether EMA-assessed cues and attention to smoking are associated with craving in a secondary analysis of data from 100 cigarette smokers attempting cessation. Two weeks before quitting, participants completed attentional bias assessments on visual probe (VP) and Stroop tasks and completed random EMA-assessments for seven weeks thereafter. Participants completed 9,271 random assessments, averaging 3.3 prompts/day. Clinic-measured attentional bias was not associated with cues seen (VP: OR = 1.00, 95% CI = [0.99, 1.01]; Stroop: OR = 1.00, 95% CI [0.99, 1.00]), attention toward smoking (VP: OR = 1.00, 95% CI [0.99, 1.02]; Stroop: OR = 1.00, 95% CI [0.99, 1.00]), or craving (VP: OR = 1.00, 95% CI [0.99, 1.02]; Stroop: OR = 1.00, 95% CI [0.99, 1.01]). EMA responses to seeing a smoking cue (OR = 1.94, 95% CI [1.74, 2.16]) and attention toward smoking (OR = 3.69, 95% CI [3.42, 3.98]) were associated with craving. Internal reliability was higher for the Stroop (α = .75) than visual probe task (α = .20). In smokers attempting cessation, clinic measures of attentional bias do not predict noticing smoking cues, focus on smoking, or craving. However, associations exist between noticing smoking cues, attention toward smoking, and craving assessed in the moment, suggesting that attentional bias may not be a stable trait. (PsycINFO Database Recor

Gender differences in response to an opportunistic brief intervention for obesity in primary care: Data from the BWeL trial

Weight loss programmes appeal mainly to women, prompting calls for gender-specific programmes. In the United Kingdom, general practitioners (GPs) refer nine times as many women as men to community weight loss programmes. GPs endorsement and offering programmes systematically could reduce this imbalance. In this trial, consecutively attending patients in primary care with obesity were invited and 1882 were enrolled and randomized to one of two opportunistic 30-second interventions to support weight loss given by GPs in consultations unrelated to weight. In the support arm, clinicians endorsed and offered referral to a weight loss programme and, in the advice arm, advised that weight loss would improve health. Generalized linear mixed effects models examined whether gender moderated the intervention. Men took effective weight loss action less often in both arms (support: 41.6% vs 60.7%; advice: 12.1% vs 18.3%; odds ratio (OR) = 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.27, 0.52, P < .001) but there was no evidence that the relative effect differed by gender (interaction P = .32). In the support arm, men accepted referral and attended referral less often, 69.3% vs 82.4%; OR = 0.48, 95% CI, 0.35, 0.66, P < .001 and 30.4% vs 47.6%; OR = 0.48, 95% CI, 0.36, 0.63, P < .001, respectively. Nevertheless, the gender balance in attending weight loss programmes closed to 1.6:1. Men and women attended the same number of sessions (9.7 vs 9.1 sessions, P = .16) and there was no evidence weight loss differed by gender (6.05 kg men vs 4.37 kg women, P = .39). Clinician-delivered opportunistic 30-second interventions benefits men and women equally and reduce most of the gender imbalance in attending weight loss programmes

Clinician–patient communication about emergency aerial medical evacuation in case of infectious disease

Aerial medical evacuation (AME) refers to the removal of patients from one site to a medical facility elsewhere using medically equipped air ambulances.1 In cases of certain infectious diseases it may be necessary to isolate patients in a patient isolation unit (PIU) or ‘pod’ during AME to reduce the risk of transmission of infection to others. Used to transfer patients within and between countries during outbreaks of infectious disease,2 during the COVID-19 pandemic AME became an area of ongoing need.3 With projections indicating current increases in pandemics will likely continue,4 the need for AME will do the same. However, AME in case of infectious disease is an under researched area. There is limited information about the processes and procedures of AME in case of infectious disease,5 and no research or guidance on how to communicate these to patients. A 2019 systematic review aimed to evaluate the processes and procedures used, including pre-flight, in-flight and post-flight.6 The review highlighted the importance of effective communication, but identified a dearth of studies in this area, with just one study detailing communication with patients during the flight, and none examining pre-flight communication

The importance of practitioner smoking status: A survey of NHS Stop Smoking Service practitioners

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the smoking status of stop smoking practitioners, the impact of this on their practice, and clients' quit rates. METHODS: Smoking cessation practitioners in the UK NHS Stop Smoking Service were asked about their smoking status, client quit rates and practitioner-client interaction, using an online survey. Associations between responses were investigated using logistic regression. RESULTS: 51% of the sample (N=484) were ex-smokers. Most practitioners had been questioned about their smoking status by clients, with more never than ex-smokers claiming that this reduced their confidence when advising. Never smokers more frequently reported that clients questioned their ability as a practitioner, but no significant difference in quit rates was reported between never and ex-smokers. CONCLUSION: Although evidence suggests smokers believe many practitioners are never smokers, this survey found that this is not true. Research investigating how many smokers might not be seeking support to quit because of this could be beneficial. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Raising awareness of the similarity of quit rates achieved by never and former smoker practitioners, and the experience practitioners draw upon when offering advice, might encourage greater use of the NHS SSS. It could also be beneficial to improve training in never smokers to address confidence issues

Screening and brief intervention for obesity in primary care:cost-effectiveness analysis in the BWeL trial

This paper is closed access until 31 July 2019.Background: The Brief Intervention for Weight Loss Trial enrolled 1882 consecutively attending primary care patients who were obese and participants were randomised to physicians opportunistically endorsing, offering, and facilitating a referral to a weight loss programme (support) or recommending weight loss (advice). After one year, the support group lost 1.4 kg more (95%CI 0.9 to 2.0): 2.4 kg versus 1.0 kg. We use a cohort simulation to predict effects on disease incidence, quality of life, and healthcare costs over 20 years. Methods: Randomly sampling from the trial population, we created a virtual cohort of 20 million adults and assigned baseline morbidity. We applied the weight loss observed in the trial and assumed weight regain over four years. Using epidemiological data, we assigned the incidence of 12 weight-related diseases depending on baseline disease status, age, gender, body mass index. From a healthcare perspective, we calculated the quality adjusted life years (QALYs) accruing and calculated the incremental difference between trial arms in costs expended in delivering the intervention and healthcare costs accruing. We discounted future costs and benefits at 1.5% over 20 years. Results: Compared with advice, the support intervention reduced the cumulative incidence of weight-related disease by 722/100,000 people, 0.33% of all weight-related disease. The incremental cost of support over advice was £2.01million/100,000. However, the support intervention reduced health service costs by £5.86 million/100,000 leading to a net saving of £3.85 million/100,000. The support intervention produced 992 QALYs/100,000 people relative to advice. Conclusions: A brief intervention in which physicians opportunistically endorse, offer, and facilitate a referral to a behavioural weight management service to patients with a BMI of at least 30 kg/m2 reduces healthcare costs and improves health more than advising weight loss

Longer-term use of electronic cigarettes when provided as a stop smoking aid: Systematic review with meta-analyses

Moderate certainty evidence supports use of nicotine electronic cigarettes to quit smoking combustible cigarettes. However, there is less certainty regarding how long people continue to use e-cigarettes after smoking cessation attempts. We set out to synthesise data on the proportion of people still using e-cigarettes or other study products at 6 months or longer in studies of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation. We updated Cochrane searches (November 2021). For the first time, we meta-analysed prevalence of continued e-cigarette use among individuals allocated to e-cigarette conditions, and among those individuals who had successfully quit smoking. We updated meta-analyses comparing proportions continuing product use among individuals allocated to use nicotine e-cigarettes and other treatments. We included 19 studies (n = 7787). The pooled prevalence of continued e-cigarette use at 6 months or longer was 54% (95% CI: 46% to 61%, I2 86%, N = 1482) in participants assigned to e-cigarette conditions. Of participants who had quit combustible cigarettes overall 70% were still using e-cigarettes at six months or longer (95% CI: 53% to 82%, I2 73%, N = 215). Heterogeneity in direction of effect precluded meta-analysis comparing long-term use of nicotine e-cigarettes with NRT. More people were using nicotine e-cigarettes at longest follow-up compared to non-nicotine e-cigarettes, but CIs included no difference (risk ratio 1.15, 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.41, n = 601). The levels of continued e-cigarette use observed may reflect the success of e-cigarettes as a quitting tool. Further research is needed to establish drivers of variation in and implications of continued use of e-cigarettes

Promoting smoking cessation in Pakistani and Bangladeshi men in the UK: pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of trained community outreach workers

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Smoking prevalence is high among Pakistani and Bangladeshi men in the UK, but there are few tailored smoking cessation programmes for Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities. The aim of this study was to pilot a cluster randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of Pakistani and Bangladeshi smoking cessation outreach workers with standard care to improve access to and the success of English smoking cessation services.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A pilot cluster randomised controlled trial was conducted in Birmingham, UK. Geographical lower layer super output areas were used to identify natural communities where more than 10% of the population were of Pakistani and Bangladeshi origin. 16 agglomerations of super output areas were randomised to normal care controls vs. outreach intervention. The number of people setting quit dates using NHS services, validated abstinence from smoking at four weeks, and stated abstinence at three and six months were assessed. The impact of the intervention on choice and adherence to treatments, attendance at clinic appointments and patient satisfaction were also assessed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We were able to randomise geographical areas and deliver the outreach worker-based services. More Pakistani and Bangladeshi men made quit attempts with NHS services in intervention areas compared with control areas, rate ratio (RR) 1.32 (95%CI: 1.03-1.69). There was a small increase in the number of 4-week abstinent smokers in intervention areas (RR 1.30, 95%CI: 0.82-2.06). The proportion of service users attending weekly appointments was lower in intervention areas than control areas. No difference was found between intervention and control areas in choice and adherence to treatments or patient satisfaction with the service. The total cost of the intervention was £124,000; an estimated cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained of £8,500.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The intervention proved feasible and acceptable. Outreach workers expanded reach of smoking cessation services in diverse locations of relevance to Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities. The outreach worker model has the potential to increase community cessation rates and could prove cost-effective, but needs evaluating definitively in a larger, appropriately powered, randomised controlled trial. These future trials of outreach interventions need to be of sufficient duration to allow embedding of new models of service delivery.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trials <a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN82127540">ISRCTN82127540</a></p

Screening and brief intervention for obesity in primary care: a parallel, two-arm, randomised trial

Background Obesity is a common cause of non-communicable disease. Guidelines recommend that physicians screen and offer brief advice to motivate weight loss through referral to behavioural weight loss programmes. However, physicians rarely intervene and no trials have been done on the subject. We did this trial to establish whether physician brief intervention is acceptable and effective for reducing bodyweight in patients with obesity. Methods In this parallel, two-arm, randomised trial, patients who consulted 137 primary care physicians in England were screened for obesity. Individuals could be enrolled if they were aged at least 18 years, had a body-mass index of at least 30 kg/m² (or at least 25 kg/m² if of Asian ethnicity), and had a raised body fat percentage. At the end of the consultation, the physician randomly assigned participants (1:1) to one of two 30 s interventions. Randomisation was done via preprepared randomisation cards labelled with a code representing the allocation, which were placed in opaque sealed envelopes and given to physicians to open at the time of treatment assignment. In the active intervention, the physician offered referral to a weight management group (12 sessions of 1 h each, once per week) and, if the referral was accepted, the physician ensured the patient made an appointment and offered follow-up. In the control intervention, the physician advised the patient that their health would benefit from weight loss. The primary outcome was weight change at 12 months in the intention-to-treat population, which was assessed blinded to treatment allocation. We also assessed asked patients’ about their feelings on discussing their weight when they have visited their general practitioner for other reasons. Given the nature of the intervention, we did not anticipate any adverse events in the usual sense, so safety outcomes were not assessed. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry, number ISRCTN26563137. Findings Between June 4, 2013, and Dec 23, 2014, we screened 8403 patients, of whom 2728 (32%) were obese. Of these obese patients, 2256 (83%) agreed to participate and 1882 were eligible, enrolled, and included in the intention-to-treat analysis, with 940 individuals in the support group and 942 individuals in the advice group. 722 (77%) individuals assigned to the support intervention agreed to attend the weight management group and 379 (40%) of these individuals attended, compared with 82 (9%) participants who were allocated the advice intervention. In the entire study population, mean weight change at 12 months was 2·43 kg with the support intervention and 1·04 kg with the advice intervention, giving an adjusted difference of 1·43 kg (95% CI 0·89–1·97). The reactions of the patients to the general practitioners’ brief interventions did not differ significantly between the study groups in terms of appropriateness (adjusted odds ratio 0·89, 95% CI 0·75–1·07, p=0·21) or helpfulness (1·05, 0·89–1·26, p=0·54); overall, four ( Interpretation A behaviourally-informed, very brief, physician-delivered opportunistic intervention is acceptable to patients and an effective way to reduce population mean weight.</p

Promoting smoking cessation in Bangladeshi and Pakistani male adults: design of a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of trained community smoking cessation workers

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of smoking is higher among Pakistani and Bangladeshi males than among the general population. Smokers who receive behavioural support and medication quadruple their chances of stopping smoking, but evidence suggests that these populations do not use National Health Service run stop smoking clinics as frequently as would be expected given their high prevalence of smoking. This study aims to tackle some of the main barriers to use of stop smoking services and adherence to treatment programmes by redesigning service delivery to be more acceptable to these adult male populations. The study compares the effectiveness of trained Pakistani and Bangladeshi smoking cessation workers operating in an outreach capacity ('clinic + outreach') with standard care ('clinic only') to improve access to and success of National Health Service smoking cessation services. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial based in Birmingham, UK. Super output areas of Birmingham will be identified in which more than 10% of the population are of Pakistani and/or Bangladeshi origin. From these areas, 'natural geographical communities' will be identified. Sixteen aggregated agglomerations of super output areas will be identified, separating areas from each other using buffer regions in order to reduce potential contamination. These natural communities will be randomised to 'clinic + outreach' (intervention) or 'clinic only' (control) arms. The use of stop smoking services and the numbers of people quitting smoking (defined as prolonged self-reported abstinence at four weeks, three months and six months) will be assessed in each area. In addition, we will assess the impact of the intervention on adherence to smoking cessation treatments and patient satisfaction

Attentional bias retraining in cigarette smokers attempting smoking cessation (ARTS): study protocol for a double bline randomised controlled trial

YesSmokers attend preferentially to cigarettes and other smoking-related cues in the environment, in what is known as an attentional bias. There is evidence that attentional bias may contribute to craving and failure to stop smoking. Attentional retraining procedures have been used in laboratory studies to train smokers to reduce attentional bias, although these procedures have not been applied in smoking cessation programmes. This trial will examine the efficacy of multiple sessions of attentional retraining on attentional bias, craving, and abstinence in smokers attempting cessation. This is a double-blind randomised controlled trial. Adult smokers attending a 7-session weekly stop smoking clinic will be randomised to either a modified visual probe task with attentional retraining or placebo training. Training will start 1 week prior to quit day and be given weekly for 5 sessions. Both groups will receive 21 mg transdermal nicotine patches for 8–12 weeks and withdrawal-orientated behavioural support for 7 sessions. Primary outcome measures are the change in attentional bias reaction time and urge to smoke on the Mood and Physical Symptoms Scale at 4 weeks post-quit. Secondary outcome measures include differences in withdrawal, time to first lapse and prolonged abstinence at 4 weeks post-quit, which will be biochemically validated at each clinic visit. Follow-up will take place at 8 weeks, 3 months and 6 months post-quit. This is the first randomised controlled trial of attentional retraining in smokers attempting cessation. This trial could provide proof of principle for a treatment aimed at a fundamental cause of addiction.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Doctoral Research Fellowship (DRF) awarded to RB (DRF-2009-02-15