Volume 35, Issue 3 , Pages 147-163, May 2006
Nursing intervention and smoking cessation: Meta-analysis update
Objective
The study objective was to determine through meta-analysis the effects of nursing-delivered smoking-cessation interventions.
Results
Thirty-four studies met inclusion criteria in this updated meta-analysis. Twenty-six studies compared a nursing intervention with a control or usual care group of adults and found interventions of high and low intensity to modestly increase the odds of quitting (1.36, 95% confidence interval 1.22-1.51). The study results demonstrated heterogeneity; using a random effects model did not make a difference. There was evidence that interventions were most effective for hospital inpatients with cardiovascular disease than for patients with other conditions (odds ratio 2.14, confidence interval 1.39-3.31). Interventions in nonhospitalized adults were beneficial as well; no effect was found for additive intervention components. Counseling during health-screening programs or as part of multifactorial secondary preventions programs was found to be the least effective. The challenge will be to incorporate smoking-cessation interventions into evidence-based nursing practice.
To access this article, please choose from the options below
Potential conflict of interest V. H. Rice was the principal investigator in one of the studies included in this review (Rice VH, Fox DH, Lepczyk MB, et al. A comparison of nursing interventions for smoking cessation in adults with cardiovascular health problems. Heart Lung 1994;23:473-86).
PII: S0147-9563(06)00028-8
doi:10.1016/j.hrtlng.2006.01.001
© 2006 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Volume 35, Issue 3 , Pages 147-163, May 2006
