Figure - available via license: Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic
Content may be subject to copyright.
"Fletcher curve". Adapted from Fletcher & Peto (1977): The natural history of chronic airflow obstruction [30].

"Fletcher curve". Adapted from Fletcher & Peto (1977): The natural history of chronic airflow obstruction [30].

Source publication
Article
Full-text available
The use of spirometry for early detection of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is still an issue of debate, particularly because of a lack of convincing evidence that spirometry has an added positive effect on smoking cessation. We hypothesise that early detection of COPD and confrontation with spirometry for smoking cessation may be eff...

Similar publications

Article
Full-text available
We performed a double-blinded, genotype-based stratification study to explore the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of amitriptyline according to CYP2C19 and CYP2D6 genotype in Korean subjects. Twenty-four healthy adults were grouped by genotype of CYP2C19 and CYP2D6. After a single dose of 25 mg of amitriptyline, blood samples were collected a...

Citations

... La intervención no farmacológica más frecuentemente empleada fue la intervención breve o protocolo de actuación antitabáquica en aquellos pacientes que querían dejar de fumar en el 51,2% (47, 8), p < 0,05. Es de destacar que el 23,8% (20,(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)0) de los pacientes no tuvo ningún tipo de intervención para dejar de fumar, p < 0,05 (Tabla IV). ...
Article
Full-text available
Background and objectives: Smoking is the main cause of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The objective of this study is to estimate the prevalence of smoking and analyze how the COPD smokers are diagnosed and treated. Methods: Multicenter, epidemiological, transversal study (30 health centers in the province of Leon, Spain). It included patients over 35 years old diagnosed and treated for COPD. The analyzed variables are: age, sex, habitat, anthropometric data, smoking, pack-years cooximetry, dependence (analog-visual scale), motivation (Fagerström test), self-effi cacy, mood, previous attempts, cognitive behavioral therapy, pharmacotherapy (NRT, bupropion, varenicline) and relapses. Results are expressed with CI 95.5%. Results: 833 patients were included. 85.8% males; mean age: 64.69 (53.66-75.61) years and 20.65 (4.47-36.8) years of COPD evolution. The 86.67% (80.30-93.30) had previous history of tabaquism (n = 722) with 35.26 (17.87-52.64) years of evolution and an average consumption of 28.36 (9.60-46.86) packs per year p < 0.001, 58% being heavy smokers. 57.4% (53.90-60.60) are former smokers. 29.3% (26.40-32.70) Smoking declared assets vs. 35.11% (33.90-37.12) smokers diagnosed by cooximetry p < 0.05. 288 active smokers had low motivation (49.80%), high dependence (49.5%), negative attitude (52.60%), low mood (32.05%), with 2.72 (1.74-3.67) attempts to quit smoking, p < 0.0001. The conductive-behavioral therapy (CBT) combined with drug treatment was performed in 55.8% (52.2 to 54.9), p < 0.05; the most effective intervention was CBT combined with varenicline achieving an abstinence of 29.86%. A total of 51.05% (49.49 to 52.70) out of the patients with COPD stopped smoking, p < 0.001. Conclusions: The prevalence of smoking in COPD in our environment remains unacceptably high. Greater involvement is required to reduce its impact on the health of these patients.
... La intervención no farmacológica más frecuentemente empleada fue la intervención breve o protocolo de actuación antitabáquica en aquellos pacientes que querían dejar de fumar en el 51,2% (47, 8), p < 0,05. Es de destacar que el 23,8% (20,(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)0) de los pacientes no tuvo ningún tipo de intervención para dejar de fumar, p < 0,05 (Tabla IV). ...
Article
Introducción: estimar la prevalencia del tabaquismo y analizar cómo se diagnostican y se trata a los fumadores diagnosticados de EPOC.Métodos: estudio epidemiológico, transversal, multicéntrico (30 centros salud de la provincia de León). Incluyó pacientes mayores de 35 años diagnosticados y tratados de EPOC. Variables analizadas: edad, sexo, hábitat, datos antropométricos, tabaquismo, número de paquetes/año, cooximetría, dependencia (escala analógico-visual), motivación (test de Fagerström), autoeficacia, estado anímico, intentos previos, terapia cognitivo-conductual, tratamiento farmacológico (TSN, bupropión, vareniclina) y recaídas. Los resultados se expresan con sus IC al 95,5%.Resultados: se incluyó a 833 pacientes, el 85,8% varones, edad media: 64,69 (53,66-75,61) años y 20,65 (4,47-36,8) años de evolución de la EPOC. El 86,67% (80,30-93,30) tenían antecedentes de tabaquismo (n = 722), de 35,26 (17,87-52,64) años de evolución, con consumo medio 28,36 (9,60-46,86) paquetes año, p < 0,001, siendo el 58% fumadores severos. El 57,4% (53,90-60,60) son exfumadores. El 29,3% (26,40-32,70) fumadores activos declarados vs. 35,11% (33,90-37,12) fumadores diagnosticados por cooximetría p < 0,05. Los 288 fumadores activos, presentaban baja motivación (49,80%), alta dependencia (49,5%), actitud negativa (52,60%), bajo estado de ánimo (32,05%), con 2,72 (1,74-3,67) intentos para dejar de fumar, p < 0,0001. La terapia conductivo-conductual (TCC) combinado con tratamiento farmacológico se realizó en el 55,8% (52,2-54,9), p < 0,05; La intervención más efectiva fue TCC combinada con vareniclina logrando una abstinencia del 29,86%. En total dejaron de fumar un 51,05% (49,49-52,70) de los pacientes con EPOC, p < 0,001.Conclusiones: la prevalencia de tabaquismo en la EPOC en nuestro medio continúa siendo inadmisiblemente elevada. Es necesaria una mayor implicación para disminuir su impacto en la salud de estos pacientes.
... Results of the search strategy are presented in figure 1. In total, eight randomised controlled trials (11 publications) were included [9,25,[37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45]. As these studies were very heterogeneous regarding study population, type of intervention, duration of follow-up and outcome measure, no pooling of data was carried out. ...
Article
Full-text available
Smoking cessation is the cornerstone of treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. This systematic review evaluates the effectiveness of behavioural and pharmacological smoking cessation strategies in COPD patients.Medline was searched from January 2002 to October 2011. Randomized controlled trials, evaluating the effect of smoking cessation interventions for COPD patients, published in English, were selected. Methodological quality of included trials was assessed with the Delphi List by two reviewers independently. Relative risks of smoking cessation of intervention compared to controls were calculated.Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Heterogeneity was observed for study population, the intervention strategy, the follow up period and the outcome. According to the Delphi List methodological quality scores, five studies were considered to be of acceptable quality. Pharmacological therapy combined with behavioural counselling was more effective than each strategy separately. In COPD patients, the intensity of counselling did not seem to influence the results, nor did the choice of drug therapy make a difference.This systematic review makes clear that in COPD patients, pharmacological therapy combined with behavioural counselling is more effective than each strategy separately. The intensity of counselling nor the type of anti-smoking drug made a difference.
... The full protocol of our study has been published elsewhere. 6 In brief, current smokers with 10 or more packyears smoking history from Dutch and Belgian Limburg (the area surrounding Maastricht) who were interested in quitting were recruited by media advertising and from primary care practices. Based on telephone screening, smokers were invited for spirometry if they reported at least one respiratory symptom (cough, shortness of breath and/or sputum production) but had no prior diagnosis of COPD and no spirometry in the preceding 12 months. ...
... We compared the quit rate in our cohort with three other quit rates using Pearson's chi-square test: (1) the quit rate from a cohort study of the Dutch general population, (2) the quit rate from a cohort study of the Dutch working population, and (3) the quit rate among smokers screened with abnormal lung function and recruited into the primary "care as usual" control group of our smoking cessation trial ( Fig. 1). 3,6 We found these the most suitable comparisons because other designs to assess the impact of normal spirometry on smoking cessation were considered not feasible or not ethical as we will discuss later. ...
Article
Case-finding of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) using spirometry may deter people with normal lung function from stopping smoking. The objective of this study was to observe the percentage of smokers screened with normal lung function that quit smoking. As part of a study on early detection of COPD, 518 smokers were screened with normal lung function (post-bronchodilator FEV(1)/FVC ≥ 70%). They were invited for a follow-up measurement after an average of 2.4 years. Non-smoking was validated by carbon monoxide (<10 ppm), and respiratory health related quality of life was measured with the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ). A total of 255 participants were followed up (49%). The point prevalence rate of non-smoking at follow-up was 18% (N = 47), and 9% assuming that all non-respondents were smokers. This rate was not lower than the expected rate of quitting in the Dutch population (8-9%) and primary "care as usual" in smokers screened with abnormal lung function (10%; p > 0.05 for all comparisons). The average decline in post-bronchodilator FEV(1) was 26 mL/year, which was unrelated to smoking status at follow-up. Non-smokers showed a clinically meaningful and statistically significant (p < 0.001) improvement in CCQ respiratory symptoms (-0.96) and total score (-0.51). Our results do not suggest that early detection of airflow limitation to motivate smoking cessation reduces the rate of quitting in smokers shown to have normal lung function. Such smokers should be advised to quit smoking on the grounds that they are likely to improve their respiratory health in the short term and reduce their risk for smoking related diseases in the long term.
... The data for this study came from a recently completed randomized controlled trial 11 which aimed to test the efficacy of smoking cessation interventions in smokers with mild to moderate airflow limitation. Prolonged abstinence rate for the whole sample was 23% at week 26 and 10% at week 52. ...
... Prolonged abstinence from smoking was defined as self-reported nonsmoking at week 5, 26, and 52 after the target quit date, validated by a urine cotinine test (<50 ng/ml). 11 The study was approved by the ethical review committee of Maastricht University Medical Centre and registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (ISRCTN 64481813). ...
Article
Questionnaires are often used in assessing health-related quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It is important that these questionnaires have good reliability, validity, and responsiveness. The aim of this study was to investigate and compare these properties in the disease specific Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) and the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire self-reported (CRQ-SR). Two hundred ninety six participants with spirometry confirmed mild to moderate COPD were included in a smoking cessation trial. It was assumed that health-related quality of life would improve in participants who stopped smoking. The questionnaires were administered at baseline and at weeks 5, 26, and 52 after the target quit date. At baseline, 292 (97%) participants returned the CCQ and 296 (100%) the CRQ-SR questionnaire. For both instruments, the internal consistency was good (Cronbach's alpha >70%) as was the convergent validity with each other but not with spirometry. The CCQ was responsive to improvements in respiratory symptoms at both week 26 (-1.02, SD = 0.81) and 52 (-1.04, SD = 0.91) and in the total score at week 26 (-0.54, SD = 0.50) and 52 (-0.43, SD = 0.44). The mastery domain and the total score of the CRQ-SR were responsive at week 26 (1.14, SD = 0.82; 0.67, SD = 0.97 respectively) but not at week 52 (0.04, SD = 0.93; 0.38, SD = 0.57 respectively). Both the CCQ and CRQ-SR are equally reliable and valid. The long-term responsiveness of the CCQ is better. Both questionnaires can be used in future studies involving patients with mild to moderate COPD. However, when the follow-up exceeds 26 weeks, the CCQ is the recommended alternative. Netherlands Trial Register: ISRCTN 64481813.
... The effect of both treatments were compared to low-intensity ''care as usual'' for smoking cessation by the general practitioner (GP; control group 2). A detailed description of the protocol has been published previously [18]. The trial was approved by the medical ethics committee of Maastricht University Medical Centre (Maastricht, the Netherlands) and registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (ISRCTN 64481813). ...
Article
The objective of the present study was to test whether confronting smokers with previously undetected chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) increases the rate of smoking cessation. In total, 296 smokers with no prior diagnosis of COPD were detected with mild-to-moderate airflow limitation by means of spirometry and randomly allocated to: confrontational counselling by a nurse with nortriptyline for smoking cessation (experimental group); regular counselling by a nurse with nortriptyline (control group 1); or "care as usual" for smoking cessation by the general practitioner (control group 2). Only the experimental group was confronted with their abnormal spirometry (mean forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) post-bronchodilator 80.5% predicted, mean FEV(1)/forced vital capacity post-bronchodilator 62.5%). There was no difference in cotinine-validated prolonged abstinence rate between the experimental group (11.2%) and control group 1 (11.6%) from week 5-52 (odds ratio (OR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43-2.18). The abstinence rate was approximately twice as high in the experimental group compared with control group 2 (5.9%), but this difference was not statistically significant (OR 2.02, 95% CI 0.63-6.46). The present study did not provide evidence that the confrontational approach increases the rate of long-term abstinence from smoking compared with an equally intensive treatment in which smokers were not confronted with spirometry. The high failure rates (> or =88%) highlight the need for treating tobacco addiction as a chronic relapsing disorder.
... The healthy control subjects were volunteers recruited through advertisement in a local newspaper. Part of the healthy controls were also recruited through the COSMO study [23]. Inclusion criteria for both groups were: Caucasian origin, 40 years of age or older, smoking history of 10 pack-years or more, completed spirometry and blood sample donation. ...
Article
Full-text available
Elevated circulating levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin (IL)-6 and fibrinogen (FG) have been repeatedly associated with many adverse outcomes in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). To date, it remains unclear whether and to what extent systemic inflammation is primary or secondary in the pathogenesis of COPD. The aim of this study was to examine the association between haplotypes of CRP, IL6 and FGB genes, systemic inflammation, COPD risk and COPD-related phenotypes (respiratory impairment, exercise capacity and body composition). Eighteen SNPs in three genes, representing optimal haplotype-tagging sets, were genotyped in 355 COPD patients and 195 healthy smokers. Plasma levels of CRP, IL-6 and FG were measured in the total study group. Differences in haplotype distributions were tested using the global and haplotype-specific statistics. Raised plasma levels of CRP, IL-6 and fibrinogen were demonstrated in COPD patients. However, COPD population was very heterogeneous: about 40% of patients had no evidence of systemic inflammation (CRP < 3 mg/uL or no inflammatory markers in their top quartile). Global test for haplotype effect indicated association of CRP gene and CRP plasma levels (P = 0.0004) and IL6 gene and COPD (P = 0.003). Subsequent analysis has shown that IL6 haplotype H2, associated with an increased COPD risk (p = 0.004, OR = 4.82; 1.64 to 4.18), was also associated with very low CRP levels (p = 0.0005). None of the genes were associated with COPD-related phenotypes. Our findings suggest that common genetic variation in CRP and IL6 genes may contribute to heterogeneity of COPD population associated with systemic inflammation.
Article
Background: Whilst the pharmacological profiles and mechanisms of antidepressants are varied, there are common reasons why they might help people to stop smoking tobacco. Firstly, nicotine withdrawal may produce depressive symptoms and antidepressants may relieve these. Additionally, some antidepressants may have a specific effect on neural pathways or receptors that underlie nicotine addiction. Objectives: To assess the evidence for the efficacy, safety and tolerability of medications with antidepressant properties in assisting long-term tobacco smoking cessation in people who smoke cigarettes. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Specialized Register, which includes reports of trials indexed in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO, clinicaltrials.gov, the ICTRP, and other reviews and meeting abstracts, in May 2019. Selection criteria: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that recruited smokers, and compared antidepressant medications with placebo or no treatment, an alternative pharmacotherapy, or the same medication used in a different way. We excluded trials with less than six months follow-up from efficacy analyses. We included trials with any follow-up length in safety analyses. Data collection and analysis: We extracted data and assessed risk of bias using standard Cochrane methods. We also used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. The primary outcome measure was smoking cessation after at least six months follow-up, expressed as a risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence available in each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect model. Similarly, we presented incidence of safety and tolerance outcomes, including adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), psychiatric AEs, seizures, overdoses, suicide attempts, death by suicide, all-cause mortality, and trial dropout due to drug, as RRs (95% CIs). Main results: We included 115 studies (33 new to this update) in this review; most recruited adult participants from the community or from smoking cessation clinics. We judged 28 of the studies to be at high risk of bias; however, restricting analyses only to studies at low or unclear risk did not change clinical interpretation of the results. There was high-certainty evidence that bupropion increased long-term smoking cessation rates (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.52 to 1.77; I2 = 15%; 45 studies, 17,866 participants). There was insufficient evidence to establish whether participants taking bupropion were more likely to report SAEs compared to those taking placebo. Results were imprecise and CIs encompassed no difference (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.48; I2 = 0%; 21 studies, 10,625 participants; moderate-certainty evidence, downgraded one level due to imprecision). We found high-certainty evidence that use of bupropion resulted in more trial dropouts due to adverse events of the drug than placebo (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.56; I2 = 19%; 25 studies, 12,340 participants). Participants randomized to bupropion were also more likely to report psychiatric AEs compared with those randomized to placebo (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.37; I2 = 15%; 6 studies, 4439 participants). We also looked at the safety and efficacy of bupropion when combined with other non-antidepressant smoking cessation therapies. There was insufficient evidence to establish whether combination bupropion and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) resulted in superior quit rates to NRT alone (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.51; I2 = 52%; 12 studies, 3487 participants), or whether combination bupropion and varenicline resulted in superior quit rates to varenicline alone (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.55; I2 = 15%; 3 studies, 1057 participants). We judged the certainty of evidence to be low and moderate, respectively; in both cases due to imprecision, and also due to inconsistency in the former. Safety data were sparse for these comparisons, making it difficult to draw clear conclusions. A meta-analysis of six studies provided evidence that bupropion resulted in inferior smoking cessation rates to varenicline (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.79; I2 = 0%; 6 studies, 6286 participants), whilst there was no evidence of a difference in efficacy between bupropion and NRT (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.09; I2 = 18%; 10 studies, 8230 participants). We also found some evidence that nortriptyline aided smoking cessation when compared with placebo (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.78; I2 = 16%; 6 studies, 975 participants), whilst there was insufficient evidence to determine whether bupropion or nortriptyline were more effective when compared with one another (RR 1.30 (favouring bupropion), 95% CI 0.93 to 1.82; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 417 participants). There was no evidence that any of the other antidepressants tested (including St John's Wort, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs)) had a beneficial effect on smoking cessation. Findings were sparse and inconsistent as to whether antidepressants, primarily bupropion and nortriptyline, had a particular benefit for people with current or previous depression. Authors' conclusions: There is high-certainty evidence that bupropion can aid long-term smoking cessation. However, bupropion also increases the number of adverse events, including psychiatric AEs, and there is high-certainty evidence that people taking bupropion are more likely to discontinue treatment compared with placebo. However, there is no clear evidence to suggest whether people taking bupropion experience more or fewer SAEs than those taking placebo (moderate certainty). Nortriptyline also appears to have a beneficial effect on smoking quit rates relative to placebo. Evidence suggests that bupropion may be as successful as NRT and nortriptyline in helping people to quit smoking, but that it is less effective than varenicline. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether the other antidepressants tested, such as SSRIs, aid smoking cessation, and when looking at safety and tolerance outcomes, in most cases, paucity of data made it difficult to draw conclusions. Due to the high-certainty evidence, further studies investigating the efficacy of bupropion versus placebo are unlikely to change our interpretation of the effect, providing no clear justification for pursuing bupropion for smoking cessation over front-line smoking cessation aids already available. However, it is important that where studies of antidepressants for smoking cessation are carried out they measure and report safety and tolerability clearly.
Article
Background: Pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation increase the likelihood of achieving abstinence in a quit attempt. It is plausible that providing support, or, if support is offered, offering more intensive support or support including particular components may increase abstinence further. Objectives: To evaluate the effect of adding or increasing the intensity of behavioural support for people using smoking cessation medications, and to assess whether there are different effects depending on the type of pharmacotherapy, or the amount of support in each condition. We also looked at studies which directly compare behavioural interventions matched for contact time, where pharmacotherapy is provided to both groups (e.g. tests of different components or approaches to behavioural support as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy). Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the ICTRP in June 2018 for records with any mention of pharmacotherapy, including any type of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, nortriptyline or varenicline, that evaluated the addition of personal support or compared two or more intensities of behavioural support. Selection criteria: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials in which all participants received pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation and conditions differed by the amount or type of behavioural support. The intervention condition had to involve person-to-person contact (defined as face-to-face or telephone). The control condition could receive less intensive personal contact, a different type of personal contact, written information, or no behavioural support at all. We excluded trials recruiting only pregnant women and trials which did not set out to assess smoking cessation at six months or longer. Data collection and analysis: For this update, screening and data extraction followed standard Cochrane methods. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically-validated rates, if available. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a random-effects model. Main results: Eighty-three studies, 36 of which were new to this update, met the inclusion criteria, representing 29,536 participants. Overall, we judged 16 studies to be at low risk of bias and 21 studies to be at high risk of bias. All other studies were judged to be at unclear risk of bias. Results were not sensitive to the exclusion of studies at high risk of bias. We pooled all studies comparing more versus less support in the main analysis. Findings demonstrated a benefit of behavioural support in addition to pharmacotherapy. When all studies of additional behavioural therapy were pooled, there was evidence of a statistically significant benefit from additional support (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.22, I² = 8%, 65 studies, n = 23,331) for abstinence at longest follow-up, and this effect was not different when we compared subgroups by type of pharmacotherapy or intensity of contact. This effect was similar in the subgroup of eight studies in which the control group received no behavioural support (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.43, I² = 20%, n = 4,018). Seventeen studies compared interventions matched for contact time but that differed in terms of the behavioural components or approaches employed. Of the 15 comparisons, all had small numbers of participants and events. Only one detected a statistically significant effect, favouring a health education approach (which the authors described as standard counselling containing information and advice) over motivational interviewing approach (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.94, n = 378). Authors' conclusions: There is high-certainty evidence that providing behavioural support in person or via telephone for people using pharmacotherapy to stop smoking increases quit rates. Increasing the amount of behavioural support is likely to increase the chance of success by about 10% to 20%, based on a pooled estimate from 65 trials. Subgroup analysis suggests that the incremental benefit from more support is similar over a range of levels of baseline support. More research is needed to assess the effectiveness of specific components that comprise behavioural support.
Article
Background: Healthcare professionals, including nurses, frequently advise people to improve their health by stopping smoking. Such advice may be brief, or part of more intensive interventions. Objectives: To determine the effectiveness of nursing-delivered smoking cessation interventions in adults. To establish whether nursing-delivered smoking cessation interventions are more effective than no intervention; are more effective if the intervention is more intensive; differ in effectiveness with health state and setting of the participants; are more effective if they include follow-ups; are more effective if they include aids that demonstrate the pathophysiological effect of smoking. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register and CINAHL in January 2017. Selection criteria: Randomized trials of smoking cessation interventions delivered by nurses or health visitors with follow-up of at least six months. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors extracted data independently. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow-up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically-validated rates if available. Where statistically and clinically appropriate, we pooled studies using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model and reported the outcome as a risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Main results: Fifty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria, nine of which are new for this update. Pooling 44 studies (over 20,000 participants) comparing a nursing intervention to a control or to usual care, we found the intervention increased the likelihood of quitting (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.38); however, statistical heterogeneity was moderate (I2 = 50%) and not explained by subgroup analysis. Because of this, we judged the quality of evidence to be moderate. Despite most studies being at unclear risk of bias in at least one domain, we did not downgrade the quality of evidence further, as restricting the main analysis to only those studies at low risk of bias did not significantly alter the effect estimate. Subgroup analyses found no evidence that high-intensity interventions, interventions with additional follow-up or interventions including aids that demonstrate the pathophysiological effect of smoking are more effective than lower intensity interventions, or interventions without additional follow-up or aids. There was no evidence that the effect of support differed by patient group or across healthcare settings. Authors' conclusions: There is moderate quality evidence that behavioural support to motivate and sustain smoking cessation delivered by nurses can lead to a modest increase in the number of people who achieve prolonged abstinence. There is insufficient evidence to assess whether more intensive interventions, those incorporating additional follow-up, or those incorporating pathophysiological feedback are more effective than one-off support. There was no evidence that the effect of support differed by patient group or across healthcare settings.