Article

Interventions in the preoperative clinic for long term smoking cessation: a quantitative systematic review.

Department of Anesthesia, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia (Impact Factor: 2.5). 06/2008; 55(1):11-21. DOI: 10.1007/BF03017592
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To assess the efficacy of interventions offered to patients in the preoperative clinic to promote long-term (> or = three months) smoking cessation following surgery.
We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL for all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on smoking-cessation interventions initiated in the preoperative clinic. Trial inclusion, quality assessment, and data extraction were performed independently by two authors. Standard meta-analytic techniques were applied.
Four RCTs (n = 610 patients) were included in the review. Interventions included pharmacotherapy, counseling, educational literature and postoperative telephone follow-up. The follow-up period ranged between three to 12 months with only one RCT following up patients for > one year. Two studies used biochemical methods to validate subjects' self-reporting of smoking cessation at the follow-up assessment. Overall, the interventions were associated with a significantly higher cessation rate vs control at the three to six month follow-up period (pooled odds ratio: 1.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-2.45, P value = 0.01, I(2) = 0%). The only trial with longer follow-up period (12 months), however, failed to show any significant difference between the intervention and control groups (odds ratio: 1.05, 95% CI 0.53-2.09, P value = 0.88).
This systematic review suggests that smoking-cessation interventions initiated at the preoperative clinic can increase the odds of abstinence by up to 60% within a three- to six-month follow-up period. To evaluate the possibility of longer abstinence, future trials with at least one-year follow-up are recommended.

0 Followers
 · 
81 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Tobacco smoking has a negative influence on the outcome of surgery due to an increase in peri-and post-operative morbidity and mortality. Smokers show impaired wound healing and more post-operative infection and thromboembolic episodes. Several studies have reported that patients who stop smoking following surgery have a better prognosis than those who continue to smoke. For example, a 20-yr follow-up cohort study of 985 patients following coronary artery bypass surgery showed that patients who continued to smoke had a greater risk of death (relative risk (RR) 1.75; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.33–2.13) and repeat revascularisation procedures (RR 1.41; 95% CI 1.02– 1.94) than subjects who stopped smoking [1]. The scientific documentation regarding the efficacy and timing of pre-operative smoking cessation in relation to post-operative abstinence and complication rate is much more sparse. The aims of the present chapter are to revise the scientific evidence regarding the efficacy of pre-operative smoking cessation programmes as regards post-operative abstinence rates and complications following surgery. In addition, smoking habits in lung cancer patients in relation to diagnosis, radiotherapy and chemotherapy are discussed. Efficacy of pre-operative smoking cessation as regards quit rates In a review of studies of interventions offered pre-operatively to smokers in order to promote long-term smoking cessation following surgery, only four randomised controlled trials could be found (table 1). Only two studies had small numbers of smokers enrolled, i.e. 47 and 116, whereas the other two had adequate numbers included, i.e. 210 and 237 [2–5]. One study showed no difference in quit rates in the two groups, whereas the other three found a nonsignificant increase in quit rates. In the meta-analysis, interventions were more effective than controls 3–6 months post-operatively, with an odds ratio of 1.58 and abstinence rates of 25 versus 17% [6]. The smoking intervention was delivered from 1–14 weeks before surgery. Counselling was combined with bupropion or nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in all trials. Abstinence at the time of surgery was reported in five studies, and, in four of these studies, there was a significant increase in quit rates for the intervention groups (table 2) [2, 4, 5, 7, 8]. However, in three studies, the number of patients in each arm ranged 9–56. Combining the results of all of the studies, 77% were abstinent in the intervention groups versus 45% for the control groups. In summary, each of these studies were small compared with the y200 randomised placebo-controlled smoking cessation trials with NRT, bupropion and varenicline. The numbers of smokers in each arm of the pre-operative studies were up to 100, whereas an Eur Respir Mon, 2008, 42, 113–120. Printed in UK -all rights reserved. Copyright ERS Journals Ltd 2008; European Respiratory Monograph; ISSN 1025-448x.
  • Source
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of these guidelines on the preoperative evaluation of the adult non-cardiac surgery patient is to present recommendations based on available relevant clinical evidence. The ultimate aims of preoperative evaluation are two-fold. First, we aim to identify those patients for whom the perioperative period may constitute an increased risk of morbidity and mortality, aside from the risks associated with the underlying disease. Second, this should help us to design perioperative strategies that aim to reduce additional perioperative risks. Very few well performed randomised studies on the topic are available and many recommendations rely heavily on expert opinion and are adapted specifically to the healthcare systems in individual countries. This report aims to provide an overview of current knowledge on the subject with an assessment of the quality of the evidence in order to allow anaesthetists all over Europe to integrate - wherever possible - this knowledge into daily patient care. The Guidelines Committee of the European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA) formed a task force with members of subcommittees of scientific subcommittees and individual members of the ESA. Electronic databases were searched from the year 2000 until July 2010 without language restrictions. These searches produced 15 425 abstracts. Relevant systematic reviews with meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional surveys were selected. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network grading system was used to assess the level of evidence and to grade recommendations. The final draft guideline was posted on the ESA website for 4 weeks and the link was sent to all ESA members, individual or national (thus including most European national anaesthesia societies). Comments were collated and the guidelines amended as appropriate. When the final draft was complete, the Guidelines Committee and ESA Board ratified the guidelines.
    European Journal of Anaesthesiology 08/2011; 28(10):684-722. DOI:10.1097/EJA.0b013e3283499e3b · 3.01 Impact Factor