Next Article in Journal
Job Insecurity: A Comparative Analysis between Migrant and Native Workers in Australia
Next Article in Special Issue
How the New European Union’s (Pictorial) Tobacco Health Warnings Influence Quit Attempts and Smoking Cessation: Findings from the 2016–2017 International Tobacco Control (ITC) Netherlands Surveys
Previous Article in Journal
Indoor Microbiome and Antibiotic Resistance on Floor Surfaces: An Exploratory Study in Three Different Building Types
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 16
Issue 21
10.3390/ijerph16214158
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

The Effectiveness of Tobacco Dependence Education in Health Professional Students’ Practice: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

by
Kathryn Hyndman
1,*,
Roger E. Thomas
2,*,
H. Rainer Schira
3,
Jenifer Bradley
4,
Kathryn Chachula
1,
Steven K. Patterson
5 and
Sharon M. Compton
6
1
Faculty of Health Studies, Brandon University, Brandon, MB R7A 6A9, Canada
2
School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N 4N1, Canada
3
John E. Robbins Library, Brandon University, Brandon, MB R7A 6A9, Canada
4
Department of National Defence, Petawawa, ON K8H 2X3, Canada
5
School of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 1C9, Canada
6
Dental Hygiene Program, Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 1C9, Canada
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16(21), 4158; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16214158
Submission received: 3 October 2019 / Revised: 20 October 2019 / Accepted: 24 October 2019 / Published: 28 October 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review to examine the effectiveness of tobacco dependence education versus usual or no tobacco dependence education on entry-level health professional student practice and client smoking cessation. Sixteen published databases, seven grey literature databases/websites, publishers’ websites, books, and pertinent reference lists were searched. Studies from 16 health professional programs yielded 28 RCTs with data on 4343 healthcare students and 3122 patients. Two researchers independently assessed articles and abstracted data about student knowledge, self-efficacy, performance of tobacco cessation interventions, and patient smoking cessation. All forms of tobacco were included. We did not find separate interventions for different kinds of tobacco such as pipes or flavoured tobacco. We computed effect sizes using a random-effects model and applied meta-analytic procedures to 13 RCTs that provided data for meta-analysis. Students’ counseling skills increased significantly following the 5As model (SMD = 1.03; 95% CI 0.07, 1.98; p < 0.00001, I2 94%; p = 0.04) or motivational interviewing approach (SMD = 0.90, 95% CI 0.59, 1.21; p = 0.68, I2 0%; p < 0.00001). With tobacco dependence counseling, 78 more patients per 1000 (than control) reported quitting at 6 months (OR 2.02; 95% CI 1.49, 2.74, I2 = 0%, p = 0.76; p < 0.00001), although the strength of evidence was moderate or low. Student tobacco cessation counseling improved guided by the above models, active learning strategies, and practice with standardized patients.

1. Introduction

Bilano and colleagues project that by 2025 more than one billion people will remain tobacco users if recent trends remain unchanged [1]. Tobacco use may account for over eight million deaths by 2030, with over 80% in low- and middle-income countries [2]. Recent meta-analyses provide evidence that tobacco use is a risk factor for cancer, heart and cerebrovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, nephritis, and chronic liver disease [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10], chronic kidney disease [11], bladder cancer [12], multiple sclerosis [13], poor surgical outcomes [14,15,16,17,18,19], pregnancy complications [20,21,22], and poor oral health and tooth loss [23,24].
Educating health professionals to address tobacco use and dependence has been endorsed in Canada [25,26] and globally [27,28,29]. Article 12 (a, d) and Article 14 of the World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) describe the need for comprehensive education programs for health professionals to address health and addiction risks of tobacco consumption, as well as treatment of tobacco use and dependence within a comprehensive tobacco control strategy [29]. Tobacco dependence treatment includes brief advice and counseling for smoking prevention and cessation and recommending or prescribing approved cessation medications [27,29,30]. Health professionals who receive training in smoking cessation counseling are one-and-a-half- to two-times more likely to offer clients smoking cessation interventions and client quit rates increase when counseling is delivered by a variety of healthcare providers [30,31,32,33,34,35,36]. Health professionals continue to report a lack of training and doubt their effectiveness in treating client tobacco use and dependence despite having direct access to clients who smoke [25,31,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44] and available evidence-based guidelines [30,45,46].
In this systematic review, we assessed entry-level education programs which prepare students for entry into regulated health disciplines and for providing direct patient care. Entry-level education aims to prepare future health professionals for a desired standard of practice where all providers would intervene with tobacco users and offer a brief intervention at each health visit [27,28,29,30,47,48]. The 5As model [30] (Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, Arrange) has been in use since 1990 in clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) [30,45,46,49] and in educational curricula [28,47,48,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62]. This brief intervention approach includes asking all clients if they use tobacco, advising them not to start smoking or to quit tobacco use, assessing clients for interest in quitting if they use tobacco, and assisting them to quit using discipline-specific interventions. Arrange involves scheduling follow-up contact that could be a return visit, a telephone call, or a referral for more intensive treatment. A key question is whether entry-level education equips students to assess and treat client tobacco use and dependence [63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70]. An understanding of the effects of educational programming on health professional student performance in treating client tobacco use and dependence and on clients’ quitting behaviors would enhance health professional schools’ capacity to equip graduates with the knowledge and skills to address an identified global health priority. This is the first systematic review to examine the effect of tobacco dependence education implemented in 16 disciplines on students’ practice in treating client tobacco use and dependence.

Review Question

What is the effect of entry-level tobacco dependence education on (1) health professional students’ knowledge and self-efficacy, (2) performance of the specific skills in the individual tobacco cessation interventions, and (3) client smoking cessation behaviors?

2. Materials and Methods

This systematic review followed an a priori published protocol [71]. The protocol was registered with the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) on 8 August 2016 as CRD42016044106. We utilized the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology [72] and the Cochrane Handbook [73] for systematic reviews of effectiveness. The RevMan 5.3 program generated Forest plots [74].

2.1. Criteria for Inclusion

2.1.1. Inclusion Criteria: Participants

This review considered studies of health professional students within 16 programs of study and 23 post-graduate medical programs (Table 1). Medical resident trainees and advanced practice nursing students were included as entry-level because they provide specialized care to patients with health concerns commonly linked to tobacco use. We excluded non-entry-level educational programs, programs in which graduates do not have daily, direct interactions with clients, and programs from non-regulated disciplines whose graduates can practice without qualifying for a license.

2.1.2. Inclusion Criteria: Intervention

This review considered reports on the implementation and evaluation of an entry-level program, curricular activity or component in smoking prevention or smoking cessation, and its impact on student practice in promoting client health. The educational intervention and its impact on student practice must have occurred during the entry-level program. The review described the nature of the intervention delivery, settings, and models used.

2.1.3. Inclusion Criteria: Comparator

This review considered studies that compared the educational intervention (including pre- and post-training results) to usual or no educational program.

2.1.4. Inclusion Criteria: Outcomes

This review considered studies that reported evaluations of health professional student outcomes in treating tobacco use and dependence: knowledge, self-efficacy, and clinical performance of tobacco prevention and cessation interventions. Student knowledge was measured by scores on exams and questionnaires and student efficacy in treating tobacco use and dependence by instruments designed to rate self-confidence in treating tobacco use. Student clinical performance was assessed by faculty observations, standardized patients (SPs), and client reports. The primary client outcome, smoking cessation, was measured by client reports or biochemical measures of smoking abstinence at either six- or 12-months following smoking cessation intervention.

2.1.5. Inclusion Criteria: Study Types

All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effectiveness of educational programming on student knowledge, self-efficacy and performance of tobacco use prevention and treatment interventions were included. Studies were included that reported pre- and post-training results and compared the findings to a control or comparison group experiencing usual teaching or another educational intervention. Editorials, opinion pieces, quasi-experimental studies, before and after studies, cohort studies (with control), and case-controlled studies were excluded. Observational studies were excluded because known confounders may be only partially controlled and unknown confounders are not controlled.

2.2. Search Strategy

We searched and undertook new searches in 15 systematic review databases from 2010 to 2017 to identify similar systematic reviews or protocols and identified none (Table 2).
We searched 16 health professional databases for publications in any January 1990 to December 2017 (Table 2). Authors analyzed subject headings to identify the most efficient search string for each database to capture all relevant articles. An initial limited search of PubMed and CINAHL was undertaken, followed by analysis of text words contained in the title, abstract, and the index terms. Then, all the identified keywords and index terms across all included databases, information sources, and health professional student programs were entered. Initial keywords included tobacco cessation, smoking cessation or nicotine cessation, prevention, intervention, addiction, counseling, education programs, curriculum, curricula, training, and health professionals and individual professions were listed. WorldCat was used to access books and book chapters. Reference lists of all included articles selected for critical appraisal were assessed for relevance based on study title and abstract.
The publishers’ websites of Tobacco Control, Nicotine and Tobacco Research, and Preventive Medicine journals were also searched. The dates and search strategy for each published database are in Supplementary Section S1. Searches for grey literature from January 1990 to January 2018, in English, included Theses Canada Portal and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) database, and relevant documents in five websites (Table 2).

2.3. Study Selection

All identified citations were loaded into RefWorks 2.0 (ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, USA), and duplicates removed. All studies identified in the database, book, and website searches for relevance based on the information in the title, descriptor terms, and abstract for published and grey literature were assessed. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts and assessed full texts, with disagreements resolved by discussion or by consultation with a third reviewer. The study selection process is in Figure 1 for the published literature and in Supplementary Figure S1 for the grey literature. Of 7853 unique articles from the published literature, 7725 were not further assessed because of inappropriate study design or because they were not relevant to the review topic. After reading the full text, 101 studies of the previously screened 128 articles (78.9%) were excluded because they did not meet the inclusion criteria, resulting in 27 published studies for critical appraisal. Reasons for exclusion upon full-text read are in Supplementary Section S2. Nearly all (7914/7930 = 99.8%) of the grey literature articles focused on summaries of evidence, practice guidelines, pharmacotherapy and reports of the need for tobacco intervention education and these were excluded from this review. One unpublished study was selected for critical review, making a total of 28 articles for the critical appraisal process. The grey literature was an unproductive source of information for the review objectives. Reasons for exclusion upon full-text read are given in Supplementary Section S3.

2.4. Methodological Quality

Two independent reviewers critically appraised all eligible quantitative papers selected for retrieval using the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool [73,74] and the JBI critical appraisal instrument [71,72]. The critical appraisal results are in Supplementary Table S1. Using both tools provided a rigorous assessment of methodological validity of the educational interventions reported in the meta-analyses [75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87]. We visually examined funnel plots for student counseling performance, student self-efficacy in tobacco cessation counseling, and for patient smoking cessation at six and 12 months. Although we had fewer than the recommended ten studies [74] in each meta-analysis, the funnel plots showed the studies (n’s for all funnel plots were less than five) to be distributed symmetrically around the mean effect size. This observation may indicate a lower chance of publication bias [74]. The assessment of bias in the meta-analysis studies [75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87] reflected an unclear risk of selection and performance bias related to incomplete or missing information. We interpreted publication bias in the meta-analyses articles as follows: the impact is not trivial and likely modest, but the major finding is still valid [88] p.286,290.
Thirty-eight per cent of studies used a strong method of randomization and were at low risk of bias for randomization; in 62% it was unclear. In 7.5% of RCTs, the researchers did not know the allocation to the intervention or control groups; in 85% it was unclear and in 7.5%, allocation was disclosed. Those delivering the intervention were blind to group identity in 7.5%; in 85% it was unclear and in 7.5% it was known. In 62%, group identity was unknown to the outcome assessors and in 38%, it was unclear. In 54%, there was either minimal attrition, or an intention-to-treat analysis, or a differential attrition analysis demonstrated no differences between the groups on baseline characteristics or characteristics related to the outcome. In 7.5%, attrition bias was unclear and in 39%, the amount of attrition was of concern. There was no selective reporting detected in 100% of studies (Figure 2 and Figure 3).

2.5. Data Extraction

Two reviewers independently extracted data to assess the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome(s), and Study Design construct [72]. Two reviewers piloted the data extraction tool prior to use. Disagreements were resolved by discussion or by consultation with a third reviewer. We contacted authors of primary studies to request missing or additional data. Data for interventions, populations, study methods, student learning outcomes of knowledge, self-efficacy and behavioral performance in tobacco use prevention and cessation counseling, and patient smoking cessation were extracted.

2.6. Data Synthesis

Quantitative data from 13 RCTs were pooled for statistical meta-analysis using the Cochrane RevMan program [74]. All results were subject to double data entry. We used a random-effects model [74,88,89] to calculate effect sizes expressed as standardized mean differences (for continuous data), odds ratios (for categorical data) and their 95% confidence intervals. The odds ratio (OR) is consistent with a random-effects model [72,88]. The Cochrane Handbook [73] guided our assessment of heterogeneity in the meta-analysis studies. Heterogeneity was first assessed statistically [74,88] using the standard chi squared and I2. If I2 is near 0, then nearly almost all of the observed variance is spurious, which means there is nothing to explain. If I2 is large (above 70%), it is necessary to assess the reasons for the variance [88] p.119. We conducted sensitivity analyses to explore reasons for heterogeneity and reported the results with each analysis. We interpreted the sensitivity analyses as follows: if results remain consistent across the different analyses, the results can be considered robust. If the results differ across analyses, the results may need to be interpreted with caution [90].

3. Results

A total of 28 RCTs in English were identified that included 4343 health care students and 3122 patients. Of the studies sampled, 13 RCTs provided data for meta-analysis. Data from the 15 RCTs [91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105] where statistical pooling and meta-analysis were not possible will be reported in a subsequent qualitative analysis. The 28 studies represented five countries: The United States of America (21/28, 78.3%); Switzerland (2/28, 8.7%); Australia (3/28, 4.3%); Denmark (1/28, 4.3%); and Germany (1/28, 4.3%). The language of publications other than English in the area of tobacco use cessation intervention education is in Supplementary Figure S2.
Students attended universities for 86% of studies, and educational location was not clearly identified in 11% of studies [83,91,100]. In one study (3%), the institute of learning included university plus associate and diploma schools of nursing [103]. Student populations included undergraduate medical students [82,92,95,96,97,98,99,102,104], dental students [76,80], dental hygiene students [86,87], and nursing students [83,100,103]. Carpenter et al. [77] studied groups of students. Graduate medical programs included family practice and internal medicine [75,78,79,81,105], pediatric residencies [93,94], and a surgical residency [84]. Strecher et al. [85] studied internal medicine, family practice, and pediatric residents. Thirteen studies (46%) reported one theory or model; 15 studies (54%) applied two or more theories or models to guide the students’ educational intervention (Supplementary Table S2). The reviewed studies focused on cessation; no prevention-focused studies were located. The clients were patients encountered by the health professional students and all were adults.
The systematic review findings regarding knowledge could not be meta-analyzed due to the reported variability in the timing and assessment of knowledge and the lack of consistency of the measurement tools. Knowledge outcomes were focused on the ill health effects of smoking and smoking as a risk factor rather than on smoking cessation counseling (Supplementary Table S3).

3.1. Meta-Analysis Study Characteristics

Among the meta-analysis articles, the most frequently used models were the 5As model [75,76,78,82,83,84,85,86,87], the Trans-Theoretical Model of Change [78,80,83,86,87], and Self-Efficacy theory [79,81,82,87]. Motivational Interviewing [77,80] was also used as a clinical approach to support tobacco cessation interventions. All studies used a combination of educational strategies. Fifteen percent of the studies [78,83] were conducted outside the United States of America. Meta-analysis study characteristics are given in Supplementary Table S4.
The intervention length was variable. Ten studies (77%) implemented educational interventions of two to four hours in duration [75,76,77,79,81,82,84,85,86,87]. Two studies (15%) were eight to 12 hours in length [78,80] and one study [83] (8%) was three days. Eleven studies (85%) utilized a combination of lectures, videotapes, rehearsal of content in role-play with peers, or through interaction with SPs [75,76,78,79,80,82,83,84,85,86,87]. Two studies [77,81] (15%) were delivered via the Internet.
Fidelity refers to direct observation of students using a checklist to monitor that students learned to deliver the intervention correctly and completely. Five studies (39%) identified author or researcher direct supervision [76,79,81,84,85]. Trained preceptors or SPs provided direct observation and feedback to students in three (23%) studies [82,83,86]. No faculty supervision was evident in three (23%) studies [77,78,87], and in two studies (15%) it was unclear if faculty supervision had occurred [75,80].
Certainty of the evidence was either moderate or low using the GRADE method [106,107]. We downgraded the evidence to account for unclear documentation of methods of randomization, high risk of attrition bias, allocation concealment and blinding of participants, and for high levels of heterogeneity and imprecision in self-report of smoking cessation. Within educational institutions, it is challenging to randomize and blind students, who may talk and share information, to create comparable groups. If no detail was available to appraise studies, it does not necessarily mean it was inappropriate, it means it was not reported (Supplemetary Table S5).

3.2. Student Tobacco Cessation Counseling Skills

Ten of the studies assessing tobacco cessation counseling skills assigned them to counsel SPs [76,77,78,79,80,81,82,84] or real patients [75,85]. No SP or real patient co-morbidities were reported. Four studies [76,78,82,84] assessed whether students (n = 1255) demonstrated an increase in 5As tobacco counseling behaviors after instruction compared to control. (Figure 4) The combined studies showed an overall increase in 5As counseling skills (SMD 1.03; 95% CI 0.07, 1.98; p < 0.00001, I2 94%). In Figure 4, the I2 of 94% indicates considerable statistical heterogeneity and for this group of four studies, the overall group effect is significant (p = 0.04). We conducted a sensitivity analysis by temporarily “excluding” Cannick [76] (Year 1), Ockene [82] and Steinemann [84] because of high risk of attrition. When Cornuz [78] and Ockene [82] are excluded, the group effect becomes non-significant at p = 0.41 and p = 0.14, respectively. When Steinemann [84] is excluded, the I2 remains high at 95% but the group results remain significant (p = 0.03).
We conducted a second sensitivity analysis by temporarily “excluding” Cannick [76] (Year 1), Cornuz [78], Ockene [82], and Steinemann [84] because of notable differences in magnitude of the reported outcome measures. When Cannick (Year 1) was temporarily excluded because of the magnitude of outcome measures and high performance bias, I2 remains high at 94% but the group results remain significant (p = 0.02). With Cornuz temporarily “excluded”, I2 remains high at 91% and the group effect becomes non-significant (p = 0.41) With Ockene temporarily “excluded”, I2 remains high at 94% and the group effect becomes non-significant (p = 0.14). When Steinemann is “excluded”, the I2 remains high at 95% but the group results remain significant (p = 0.03). These findings should be interpreted with caution because the I2 values above 91% in all studies reveal marked heterogeneity.
Two small studies [77,80] assessed whether students (n = 174) showed an increase in counseling skills for tobacco cessation following a motivational interviewing approach after instruction compared to control (Figure 5). The combined studies showed an overall increase in tobacco cessation counseling skills (SMD = 0.90, 95% CI 0.59, 1.21; p = 0.68, I2 0%); the overall group effect is significant (p < 0.00001). The I2 of 0% indicates that heterogeneity might not be important [73].

3.3. Student Self-Efficacy Outcomes

Four studies [80,83,86,87] assessed whether students (n = 1031) showed an increase in smoking cessation counseling self-efficacy after instruction compared to control (Figure 6). The combined studies showed an overall increase in smoking cessation counseling self-efficacy (SMD = 0.38, 95% CI −0.11, 0.87; p = 0.05, I2 62%). For these four studies, the group effect is non-significant at p = 0.13. The I2 statistic of 62% may represent considerable heterogeneity [73]. A sensitivity analysis was conducted “excluding” Rapp [83] because of a high risk of attrition bias. The results with Rapp excluded show a small increase in I2 from 62% to 74%, and the overall group effect remains non-significant (p = 0.45). The results are similar and, therefore, can be considered robust.

3.4. Patient Smoking Cessation Outcomes

Three studies [79,81,85] measured cessation by patients (n = 1615) at six months after counseling compared to control. The combined studies demonstrated an increase in cessation (OR 2.02; 95% CI 1.49, 2.74, p = 0.76, I2 = 0%) and the group effect was significant (p < 0.00001) (Figure 7). The I2 = 0% and p = 0.76 indicate that heterogeneity may not be important. We conducted a sensitivity analysis temporarily “excluding” Strecher [85] because of high risk of attrition bias. I2 remains 0% and the test for overall effect remains strongly positive (p < 0.0001). The results are similar and, therefore, can be considered robust.
Three studies [75,78,83] measured cessation (n = 1507) at 12 months after counseling compared to control and the combined studies demonstrated similar cessation rates between the treatment groups (OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.54, 2.01, p = 0.04, I2 = 69%). The overall group effect was not significant, p = 0.91 (Figure 8). Allen’s [75] study assessed smoking status at three months and 12 months after study enrolment. Because of the difference in timing of the first measure (3 compared to 6 months), the Allen study was included with the studies measuring cessation at 12 months. The I2 = 69% may represent substantial heterogeneity. We conducted a sensitivity analysis temporarily excluding Rapp [83] and Cornuz [78] because of high risk of attrition bias. The Cornuz study was well executed and if Cornuz is temporarily deleted, the I2 decreases to 0% and the group effect remains non-significant (p = 0.14). When Rapp is excluded, I2 increases from 69% to 82% and the result remains non-significant (p = 0.62). Therefore, Cornuz is a source of heterogeneity.

4. Discussion

Evidence from our meta-analysis demonstrated that entry-level students can learn brief tobacco counseling skills and can assist patient quitting behaviors. At six months, 78/1000 more patients (than control) counseled by entry-level students reported quitting smoking. These findings are consistent with previously reported research that entry-level education programs are appropriate to enhance health professional student capacity to address client tobacco use [57,62]. Educational institutions can contribute positively to tobacco control measures by implementing entry-level student education programs on treating tobacco use and dependence detailed in Article 12 and 14 of the WHO FCTC [29,108,109]. Brief cessation counseling is politically feasible [110] and cost-effective clinically compared to other medical and disease prevention interventions, and is also a recognized avenue to strengthen health systems globally [30,34,45,46,109].
The majority of entry-level students represented in this systematic review are similar to clinical disciplines offering tobacco dependence counseling: medicine [51,52,53,54,60,61,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121]; nursing [47,59,62,122,123,124,125,126,127]; pharmacy [10,48,55,128,129]; dentistry [67,130,131,132,133,134]; dental hygiene [9,135,136]; chiropractic therapy [137,138,139]; physical therapy [140]; and midwifery [39,40,141]. Pharmacy [55,56,129] and advanced practice nursing students [58] use the Rx for Change program [56] to counsel against tobacco use. Optometry is considering implementing tobacco dependence education [142].
Eleven of 13 meta-analysis studies utilized a combination of lectures, videotapes, rehearsal or role-play with peers, or interaction with SPs. These findings compare similarly to other basic health professional education programs that use a combination of teaching strategies [136,143,144], role playing [113,123,145], SPs [135], and follow-up contact with participants [145]. SPs assessed student performance and provided feedback in 62% of meta-analysis studies. Feedback is important when learning a new skill and enhances behavioral capacity [146]. The timing and duration of the educational interventions were designed to align student learning with future clinical practice settings, which is important in basic health professional education [55,130]. In addition to multi-component strategies, the most common theoretical approaches were the 5As model, the trans-theoretical model of change, and the motivational interviewing approach to tobacco cessation interventions.
An important consideration is to understand how the effectiveness of student performance compares to that of professionals. Two meta-analysis studies demonstrated that training healthcare professionals to provide smoking cessation interventions had a measureable effect on professional performance. Fiore et al. [30] demonstrated the efficacy of non-physician clinician delivered smoking cessation interventions. Carson et al. [31] found a statistically significant effect in favor of the intervention indicating that trained health care professionals were more likely in all areas to perform tasks of smoking cessation than untrained controls. Our review findings support the premise by Fiore et al. [30] that when health professionals receive training, they are more likely to integrate interventions; when health professionals address their clients’ tobacco use, the odds of successful client quitting increase.
Six studies in our meta-analysis demonstrated a statistically significant intervention effect in student counseling behaviors after instruction compared to control. The strength of evidence was moderate to low. The average change or difference in 5As tobacco-cessation counseling skills with SPs or real patients was significantly higher in the intervention group based on data from 1255 students in four studies. Specific 5As use was reported in three studies [78,82,84]; in one study, students used all of the 5As but were least likely to use Arrange [76]. Health professional student use of the 5As is similar to licensed providers who are asking, assessing, and advising while not assisting or arranging as frequently [147,148,149,150,151]. The average change or difference in tobacco-cessation counseling skills with SPs following a motivational interviewing approach was significantly higher in the intervention group based on data from 174 students in two studies. The models guiding the tobacco-dependence intervention education and the multi-modal learning strategies may have contributed to health professional students’ application of cessation counseling skills.
Student tobacco cessation counseling self-efficacy improved based on data from 1031 students in four studies. The strength of evidence was low. Similar to our findings, Ye et al.’s [152] narrative synthesis regarding pre-licensure students described an increase in confidence or self-efficacy in tobacco cessation counseling outcomes in six of 15 studies. Our review finding, although not statistically significant, is consistent with Social Cognitive theory [153,154,155,156] and is important in skill development [157].
Three of six studies measured cessation by patients at six months after counseling compared to control (OR 2.02; 95% CI 1.49, 2.74, p = 0.76, I2 = 0%), and the overall group effect was significant (p < 0.0001). The strength of evidence was moderate. With a usual curriculum and no education on tobacco dependence cessation counseling, 93 out of 1000 patients will report quitting. With entry-level tobacco dependence counseling, 172 out of 1000 will report smoking cessation, based on 1615 patients in three studies. This finding means that 78 more patients per thousand counseled by entry-level students (than control) will report quitting smoking at six months.
Three studies measured cessation at 12 months after counseling compared to control (OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.54, 2.01, p = 0.04, I2 = 69%). The overall intervention effect at 12 months was modest and not significant (p = 0.91), and the overall strength of evidence was low. With the usual curriculum or no educational program on tobacco dependence counseling, 101 out of 1000 patients will report quitting. The odds ratio at 12 months indicates that with tobacco dependence counseling, only four more patients per 1000 will report smoking cessation, based on 1615 patients in three studies. It was unclear whether students were informed of the ultimate cessation or relapse rates of the patients they counseled. Provision of such feedback may further enhance students’ behavioral capacity. There is an opportunity for future reviews with larger sample sizes to examine the 12-month impact of entry-level student tobacco cessation counseling on patient quitting behaviors.
Tobacco use may account for millions of deaths by 2030 with over 80% of smokers who live in low- and middle-income countries [2,108]. Tobacco-dependence intervention education evidence to date is from high-income countries. The 28 RCTs in this systematic review were from Australia, Denmark, Germany, Switzerland and the United States of America. Guidelines containing the 5As [30] and the Rx for Change [56] models are available at no cost on the Internet. These and other WHO materials [29] may offer low- and middle-income countries available resources for faculty development, student and health care provider education, and policy development. Full implementation of the 5As model, and, in particular, Arrange, may be affected because of varying availability of resources such as inconsistent or no access to Smokers’ Quit Lines.
This systematic review has strengths and limitations. It is the first to focus exclusively on entry-level students. We selected only RCTs because of their ability to control unknown confounders. The theoretical direction and evidence base to guide student instruction and evaluation was evident. Direct observations of student counseling performance contributed to high fidelity of the educational interventions. Although we searched all languages, all included studies in this review were in English and this may represent a bias towards research in English-language countries. Our study may also be at risk of selective outcome reporting bias because only one research protocol was available to critique planned versus reported outcomes, and we did not specify the timing of smoking cessation outcomes ahead of time. Reporting quality versus methodological quality was an issue.
Researchers conducting studies of teaching health professional students’ tobacco dependence counseling should describe in detail the measures they took to reduce risks of bias. Researchers should provide pre- and post-intervention means and standard deviations for control and intervention groups to facilitate future data aggregation. Instruments with strong validity and reliability could reduce heterogeneity arising from variation in outcome measurements. Self-reports of smoking cessation should be validated biochemically to address potential patient deception. Researchers should post research protocols at study outset (e.g., on PROSPERO) to allow for assessment of reporting bias in published studies.

5. Conclusions

Academic institutions can play a vital role in tobacco control strategies through tobacco-dependence intervention education. We strongly recommend that faculty in health professional programs based in universities or colleges in all countries begin, or continue, to incorporate tobacco prevention and cessation intervention education into their curricula. Cessation counseling offers patients who smoke a meaningful and safe intervention that considers their preferences. We encourage the use of the 5As model or a motivational interviewing approach with multi-modal learning activities and performance feedback to promote student behavior change. Findings demonstrate that entry-level students can implement brief tobacco cessation counseling and can effect healthier patient outcomes. As future licensed professionals, graduates will have the knowledge and abilities to offer clients brief tobacco cessation counseling tailored to their specific health concerns and address an identified global health priority.
In summary, we recommend:
  • Comparative studies of the 5As, Trans-theoretical Model of Change, Self-Efficacy theory and Motivational Interviewing approaches in appropriately powered and carefully monitored RCTs to assess which approach produces the best results for trainees and patients. Currently, educators use a combination of these approaches.
  • Identify the ideal length of instruction time to optimise outcomes. Currently, it ranges from 8 to 12 hours.
  • Identify the best combination of lectures, videotaping and role play with peers and trained professionals to optimise outcomes.
  • Observe and train preceptors to ensure that they provide optimum feedback and monitor improvements in trainee competence.
  • Observe trainees to ensure they conduct the interventions correctly and completely according to the manual.
  • Measure the counselling skills of trainees and identify those who need more training and provide it.
  • Have trainees observe trained professionals, observe how the trainees implement new skills they observed and discuss how well they implemented them.
  • Ask preceptors to provide feedback on the patient-centredness and quality of the patient–trainee relationship and how to improve it.
  • Maintain good contact with the clients to avoid attrition by the 6- or 12-month follow ups.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/21/4158/s1, Supplementary Section S1: Search strategy, Supplementary Section S2: Published studies excluded on full text read, Supplementary Section S3: Grey literature studies excluded on full text read; Figure S1: PRISMA flow diagram of search results and study selection process for grey literature, 1990-2018, Figure S2: Smoking cessation counseling publications, other than English, 1990-2017, N=239; Table S1: Assessment of quality for meta-analysis articles, 1990 – 2017, n=13, Table S2: Theoretical underpinnings of RCT studies, 1990–2017, n=28,Table S3: Student knowledge outcome summary table, n=9, Table S4: Characteristics of meta-analyses studies, n=13,Table S5: Entry-level tobacco dependence education compared to usual or no educational program in health professional student training to promote client health. References [157,158,159,160,161,162,163] are cited in the supplementary materials.

Author Contributions

K.H., R.E.T., S.K.P., S.M.C., J.B. conceptualized the study; H.R.S. and K.H. conducted systematic searches of published literature; K.H. and J.B. reviewed published abstracts and selected articles for appraisal; KH and K.C. conducted searches of the grey literature; H.R.S. established and maintained bibliographic software; R.E.T. and K.H. critically appraised all articles, conducted the analyses, and drafted the original manuscript. Funding acquisition, K.H.; K.C; H.R.S; R.E.T. All authors reviewed and edited manuscript drafts and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

This work was funded in part by Brandon University internal research grant of $2492.60 secured by three university-based researchers (grant number 2537, 2015-2017).

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Annette Schultz and Jeff Taylor for their valuable contributions in the conceptualization of an earlier research protocol, and Christina Godfrey for her important contributions to the development of the 2016 research protocol.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Bilano, V.; Gilmour, S.; Moffiet, T.; D’Espaignet, E.T.; Stevens, A.; Commar, A.; Tuyl, F.; Hudson, I.; Shibuya, K. Global trends and projections for tobacco use, 1990–2025: An analysis of smoking indicators from the WHO Comprehensive Information Systems for Tobacco Control. Lancet 2015, 385, 966–976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Mathers, C.; Loncar, D. Projections of global mortality and burden of disease from 2002 to 2030. PLoS Med. 2006, 3, e442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Ezzati, M.; Lopez, A.D. Estimates of global mortality attributable to smoking in 2000. Lancet 2003, 362, 847–852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. World Health Organization and the Secretariat of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. The Economic and Health Benefits of Tobacco Taxation [Online]; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2015; Available online: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/179423/WHO_NMH_PND_15.6_eng.pdf?sequence=1 (accessed on 29 September 2019).
  5. Ellison, L.F.; Morrison, H.I.; De Groh, M.; Villeneuve, P.J. Health consequences of smoking among Canadian smokers: An update. Chronic Dis. Can. 1999, 20, 36–39. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  6. Makomaski Illing, E.M.; Kaiserman, M.J. Mortality attributable to tobacco use in Canada and its regions, 1994 and 1996. Chronic Dis. Can. 1999, 20, 111–117. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  7. Shafey, O.; Eriksen, M.; Ross., H.; Mackay, J. The Tobacco Atlas, 3rd ed.; American Cancer Society: Atlanta, GA, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  8. Canadian Cancer Society. Why Tobacco Control Is Important. 2019. Available online: http://www.cancer.ca/en/get-involved/take-action/what-we-are-doing/tobacco-control/?region=mb (accessed on 29 September 2019).
  9. Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada. Smoking and Tobacco. 2018. Available online: http://www.heartandstroke.ca/heart/risk-and-prevention/lifestyle-risk-factors/smoking-and-tobacco (accessed on 29 September 2019).
  10. Canadian Lung Association. Smoking and Tobacco. Updated 10 December 2016. Available online: https://www.lung.ca/lung-health/smoking-and-tobacco (accessed on 29 September 2019).
  11. Xia, J.; Wang, L.; Ma, Z.; Zhong, L.; Wang, Y.; Gao, Y.; He, L.; Su, X. Cigarette smoking and chronic kidney disease in the general population: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Nephrol. Dial. Transplant. 2017, 32, 475–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Van Osch, F.H.M.; Jochems, S.H.J.; Van Schooten, F.-J.; Bryan, R.T.; Zeegers, M.P. Quantified relations between exposure to tobacco smoking and bladder cancer risk: A meta-analysis of 89 observational studies. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2016, 45, 857–870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zhang, P.; Wang, R.; Li, Z.; Wang, Y.; Gao, C.; Lv, X.; Song, W.; Li, B. The risk of smoking on multiple sclerosis: A meta-analysis based on 20,626 cases from case-control and cohort studies. PeerJ 2016, 4, e1797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Bluman, L.G.; Mosca, L.; Newman, N.; Simon, D.G. Preoperative smoking habits and postoperative pulmonary complications. Chest 1998, 113, 883–889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Akrawi, W.; Benumof, J.L. A pathophysiological basis for informed preoperative smoking cessation counseling. J. Cardiothorac. Vasc. Anesth. 1997, 11, 629–640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Moller, A.M.; Villebro, N.; Pedersen, T.; Tonnesen, H. Effect of preoperative smoking intervention on postoperative complications: A randomised clinical trial. Lancet 2002, 359, 113–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kwiatkowski, T.C.; Hanley, E.N.; Ramp, W.K. Cigarette smoking and its orthopedic consequences. Am. J. Orthop. 1996, 25, 590–597. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  18. Haverstock, B.D.; Mandracchia, V.J. Cigarette smoking and bone healing: Implications in foot and ankle surgery. J. Foot Ankle Surg. 1998, 37, 69–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Krueger, J.K.; Rohrich, R.J. Clearing the smoke: The scientific rationale for tobacco abstention with plastic surgery. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 2001, 108, 1063–1073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Myrha, W.; Davis, M.; Mueller, B.A.; Hickok, D. Maternal smoking and the risk of polyhydramnios. Am. J. Public Health 1992, 82, 176–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Wainwright, R.L. Change in observed birth weight associated with change in maternal cigarette smoking. Am. J. Epidemiol. 1983, 117, 668–675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Silins, J.; Semenciw, R.M.; Morrison, H.I.; Lindsay, J.; Sherman, G.J.; Mao, Y.; Wigle, D.T. Risk factors for perinatal mortality in Canada. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 1985, 133, 1214–1219. [Google Scholar]
  23. Edwards, D.; Freeman, T.; Roche, A.M. Dentists’ and dental hygienists’ role in smoking cessation: An examination and comparison of current practice and barriers to service provision. Health Promot. J. Aust. 2006, 17, 145–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Simansalam, S.; Shamsudin, S.H.; Mohamed, M.H.N. Malaysian pharmacy students’ intention to provide smoking cessation counseling. Curr. Pharm. Teach. Learn. 2017, 9, 918–924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Canadian Nurses Association. The Role of Health Professionals in Tobacco Cessation [Online]. 2011. Available online: https://www.cna-aiic.ca/-/media/cna/page-content/pdf-en/jps_tobacco_cessation_2011_e.pdf (accessed on 29 September 2019).
  26. Schultz, A.S.H.; Tremblay, M.; Quinlan, B.; Brewster, J.; Hyndman, K.; Compton, S.; Fisher, K.; Brown, J. Canadian Health Professionals, Health Organizations, and Tobacco Control; Final Report; The University of Manitoba: Winnipeg, MB, Canada, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  27. World Health Organization. Policy Recommendations for Smoking Cessation and Treatment of Tobacco Dependence. June 2003. Available online: https://www.who.int/tobacco/publications/smoking_cessation/recommendations/en/ (accessed on 29 September 2019).
  28. Muramoto, M.L.; Lando, H. Faculty development in tobacco cessation: Training health professionals and promoting tobacco control in developing countries. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2009, 28, 498–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. World Health Organization. WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. 2005. Available online: http://www.who.int/fctc/text_download/en/ (accessed on 29 September 2019).
  30. Fiore, M.C.; Jaén, C.R.; Baker, T.B.; Bailey, W.C.; Benowitz, N.L.; Curry, S.J.; Dorfman, S.F.; Froelicher, E.S.; Goldstein, M.G.; Healton, C.G.; et al. Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence, 2008 Update; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service: Rockville, MD, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  31. Carson, K.V.; Verbiest, M.E.A.; Crone, M.R.; Brinn, M.P.; Esterman, A.J.; Assendelft, W.J.J.; Smith, B.J. Training health professionals in smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Sheffer, C.E.; Barone, C.P.; Anders, M.E. Training health care providers in the treatment of tobacco use and dependence: Pre- and post-training results. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2009, 15, 607–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Gorin, S.S.; Heck, J.E. Meta-analysis of the efficacy of tobacco counseling by health care providers. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2004, 13, 2012–2022. [Google Scholar]
  34. Hopkins, D.P.; Husten, C.G.; Fielding, J.E.; Rosenquist, J.N.; Westphal, L.L. Evidence reviews and recommendations on interventions to reduce tobacco use and exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2001, 20, 67–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Taylor, M.C.; Dingle, J.L. Prevention of tobacco-caused disease. In The Canadian Guide to Clinical Preventive Health Care; Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination, Ed.; Canada Communication Group Publishing: Ottawa, ON, Canada, 1994; pp. 500–511. [Google Scholar]
  36. Canadian Nurses Association. Working with Canadians Affected by Tobacco: Guidelines for Registered Nurses; University of British Columbia: Vancouver, BC, Canada, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  37. Hyndman, K. An Evaluation of a Dissemination Intervention to Enhance Registered Nurses’ Use of Clinical Practice Guidelines on Tobacco Reduction. Master’s Thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  38. Cooke, M.; Mattick, R.P.; Campbell, E. The influence of individual and organizational factors on the reported smoking intervention practices of staff in 20 antenatal clinics. Drug Alcohol Rev. 1998, 17, 175–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Cooke, M.; Mattick, R.P.; Barclay, L. Predictors of brief smoking intervention in a midwifery setting. Addiction 1996, 91, 1715–1725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Clasper, P.; White, M. Smoking cessation interventions in pregnancy: Practice and views of midwives, GPs and obstetricians. Health Educ. J. 1995, 54, 150–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Walsh, R.A.; Redman, S.; Brinsmead, M.W.; Arnold, B. Smoking cessation in pregnancy: A survey of the medical and nursing directors of public antenatal clinics in Australia. Aust. N. Z. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 1995, 35, 144–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Zapka, J.G.; Pbert, L.; Stoddard, A.M.; Ockene, J.K.; Goins, K.V.; Bonollo, D. Smoking cessation counseling with pregnant and postpartum women: A survey of community health center providers. Am. J. Public Health 2000, 90, 78–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Canadian Lung Association. Making Quit Happen: Canada’s Challenges to Smoking Cessation. Updated 17 January 2018. Available online: https://www.lung.ca/news/advocacy-tools/our-publications (accessed on 29 September 2019).
  44. Schultz, A.S.H.; Johnson, J.L.; Bottorff, J.L. Registered nurses’ perspectives on tobacco reduction: Views from western Canada. Can. J. Nurs. Res. 2006, 38, 192–211. [Google Scholar]
  45. Fiore, M.C.; Bailey, W.C.; Cohen, S.J.; Dorfman, S.F.; Goldstein, M.G.; Gritz, E.R.; Heyman, R.B.; Jaén, C.R.; Kotte, T.E.; Lando, H.A.; et al. Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence: Clinical Practice Guideline; Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service: Rockville, MD, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  46. Fiore, M.C. US public health service clinical practice guideline: treating tobacco use and dependence. Respir. Care 2000, 45, 1200–1262. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  47. Sarna, L.; Bialous, S.A.; Rice, V.H.; Wewers, M.E. Promoting tobacco dependence treatment in nursing education. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2009, 28, 507–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Williams, D.M. Preparing pharmacy students and pharmacists to provide tobacco cessation counselling. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2009, 28, 533–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario. Integrating Smoking Cessation into Daily Practice: Nursing Best Practice Guideline; Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario: Toronto, ON, Canada, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  50. Halperin, A.C.; Thompson, L.A.; Hymer, J.C.; Peterson, A.K.; Thompson, B. A case-based clinician training program for treating tobacco use in college students. Public Health Rep. 2006, 121, 557–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Richmond, R. The process of introducing a tobacco curriculum in medical school. Respirology 2004, 9, 165–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Pederson, L.L.; Blumenthal, D.S.; Dever, A.; McGrady, G. A web-based smoking cessation and prevention curriculum for medical students: Why, how, what, and what next. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2006, 25, 39–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Brown, R.L.; Pfeifer, J.M.; Gjerde, C.L.; Seibert, C.S.; Haq, C.L. Teaching patient-centered tobacco intervention to first-year medical students. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 2004, 19, 534–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Humair, J.P.; Cornuz, J. A new curriculum using active learning methods and standardized patients to train residents in smoking cessation. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 2003, 18, 1023–1027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Corelli, R.L.; Kroon, L.A.; Chung, E.P.; Sakamoto, L.M.; Gundersen, B.; Fenlon, C.M.; Hudmon, K.S. Statewide evaluation of a tobacco cessation curriculum for pharmacy students. Prev. Med. 2005, 40, 888–895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Hudmon, K.S.; Kroon, L.A.; Corelli, R.L.; Saunders, K.C.; Spitz, M.R.; Bates, T.R.; Liang, D. Training future pharmacists at a minority educational institution: Evaluation of the Rx for Change tobacco cessation training program. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2004, 13, 477–481. [Google Scholar]
  57. Hudmon, K.S.; Corelli, R.L.; Chung, E.; Gundersen, B.; Kroon, L.A.; Sakamoto, L.M.; Hemberger, K.K.; Fenlon, C.; Prokhorov, A.V. Development and implementation of a tobacco cessation training program for students in the health professions. J. Cancer Educ. 2003, 18, 142–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Kelley, F.J.; Heath, J.; Crowell, N. Using the Rx for Change tobacco curriculum in advanced practice nursing education. Crit. Care Nurs. Clin. N. Am. 2006, 18, 131–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Wewers, M.C.; Kidd, K.; Armbruster, D.; Sarna, L. Tobacco dependence curricula in U.S. baccalaureate and graduate nursing education. Nurs. Outlook 2004, 52, 95–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Richmond, R.; Zwar, N.; Taylor, R.; Hunnisett, J.; Hyslop, F. Teaching about tobacco in medical schools: A worldwide study. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2009, 28, 484–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Ling Leong, S.; Lewis, P.R.; Curry, W.J.; Gingrich, D.L. Tobacco world: Evaluation of a tobacco cessation training program for third-year medical students. Acad. Med. 2008, 83, S25–S28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Heath, J.; Andrews, J.; Thomas, S.A.; Kelley, F.J.; Friedman, E. Tobacco dependence curricula in acute care nurse practitioner education. Am. J. Crit. Care 2002, 11, 27–33. [Google Scholar]
  63. Campbell, H.S.; Sletten, M.; Petty, T. Patient perceptions of tobacco cessation services in dental offices. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 1999, 130, 219–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Ellerbeck, E.F.; Choi, W.S.; McCarter, K.; Jolicoeur, D.G.; Greiner, A.; Ahluwalia, J.S. Impact of patient characteristics on physician’s smoking cessation strategies. Prev. Med. 2003, 36, 464–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Ossip-Klein, D.J.; McIntosh, S.; Utman, C.; Burton, K.; Spada, J.; Guido, J. Smokers ages 50+: Who gets physician advice to quit? Prev. Med. 2000, 31, 364–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Ratner, P.A.; Johnson, J.L.; Richardson, C.G.; Bottorff, J.L.; Moffat, B.; Mackay, M.; Fofonff, D.; Kingsbury, K.; Miller, C.; Budz, B. Efficacy of smoking-cessation intervention for elective-surgical patients. Res. Nurs. Health 2004, 27, 148–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Rikard-Bell, G.; Donnelly, N.; Ward, J. Preventive dentistry: What do Australian patients endorse and recall of smoking cessation advice by their dentists? Br. Dent. J. 2003, 194, 159–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Slama, K.J.; Redman, S.; Cockburn, J.; Sanson-Fisher, R.W. Community views about the role of general practitioners in disease prevention. Fam. Pract. 1989, 6, 203–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Stanford, J.B.; Solberg, L.I. Rural patients’ interests in preventive medical care. J. Am. Board Fam. Pract. 1991, 4, 11–18. [Google Scholar]
  70. Wallace, P.G.; Haines, A.P. General practitioner and health promotion: What patients think. Br. Med. J. 1984, 289, 533–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Hyndman, K.; Thomas, R.; Patterson, S.; Compton, S.; Schira, R.; Godfrey, C.; Bradley, J.; Chachula, K. Effectiveness of tobacco intervention education in health professional students’ practice: A systematic review protocol. JBI Database Syst. Rev. Implement. Rep. 2016, 14, 78–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. The Joanna Briggs Institute. Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer’s Manual [Online]; Joanna Briggs Institute: Adelaide, Australia, 2014; Available online: http://joannabriggs.org/assets/-docs/sumari/reviewersmanual-2014.pdf (accessed on 24 April 2019).
  73. Higgins, J.P.T.; Green, S. (Eds.) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions [Online], Version 5.1.0; The Cochrane Collaboration. 2011. Available online: https://web.archive.org/web/20190907014421/http://handbook-5-1.cochrane.org/ (accessed on 7 September 2019).
  74. Review Manager (RevMan) [Computer Program]; Version 5.3; The Cochrane Collaboration: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2014; Available online: https://web.archive.org/web/20190914183308/https://community.cochrane.org/help/tools-and-software/revman-5 (accessed on 14 September 2019).
  75. Allen, B.; Pederson, L.L.; Leonard, E.H. Effectiveness of physicians-in-training counseling for smoking cessation in African Americans. J. Natl. Med. Assoc. 1998, 90, 597–604. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  76. Cannick, G.F.; Horowitz, A.M.; Garr, D.R.; Reed, S.G.; Neville, B.W.; Day, T.A.; Woolson, R.F.; Lackland, D.T. Use of the OSCE to evaluate brief communication skills training for dental students. J. Dent. Educ. 2007, 71, 1203–1209. [Google Scholar]
  77. Carpenter, K.M.; Cohn, L.G.; Glynn, L.H.; Stoner, S.A. Brief interventions for tobacco users: Using the Internet to train healthcare providers. Int. Electron. J. Health Educ. 2008, 11, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  78. Cornuz, J.; Humair, J.-P.; Seematter, L.; Stoianov, R.; van Melle, G.; Stalder, H.; Pécoud, A. Efficacy of resident training in smoking cessation: A randomized, controlled trial of a program based on application of behavioral theory and practice with standardized patients. Ann. Intern. Med. 2002, 136, 429–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Hebert, J.R.; Kristeller, J.; Ockene, J.K.; Landon, J.; Luippold, R.; Goldberg, R.J.; Kalan, K. Patient characteristics and the effect of three physician-delivered smoking interventions. Prev. Med. 1992, 21, 557–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Koerber, A.; Crawford, J.; O’Connell, K. The effects of teaching dental students brief motivational interviewing for smoking-cessation counseling: A pilot study. J. Dent. Educ. 2003, 67, 439–447. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  81. Ockene, J.K.; Kristeller, J.; Goldberg, R.; Amick, T.L.; Pekow, P.S.; Hosmer, D.; Quirk, M.; Kalan, K. Increasing the efficacy of physician-delivered smoking interventions. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 1991, 6, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Ockene, J.K.; Hayes, R.B.; Churchill, L.C.; Crawford, S.L.; Jolicoeur, D.G.; Murray, D.M.; Shoben, A.B.; David, S.P.; Ferguson, K.J.; Huggett, K.N.; et al. Teaching medical students to help patients quit smoking: Outcomes of a 10-school randomized controlled trial. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 2016, 31, 172–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Rapp, K.; Büchele, G.; Jähnke, A.G.; Weiland, S.K. A cluster-randomized trial on smoking cessation in German student nurses. Prev. Med. 2006, 42, 443–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Steinemann, S.; Roytman, T.; Chang, J.; Holzman, J.; Hishinuma, E.; Nagoshi, M.; Tam, E.; Murakami, S.; Wong, J. Impact of education on smoking cessation counseling by surgical residents. Am. J. Surg. 2005, 189, 44–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Strecher, V.J.; O’Malley, M.S.; Villagra, V.G.; Campbell, E.E.; Gonzalez, J.J.; Irons, T.C.; Kenney, R.D.; Turner, R.C.; Rogers, C.S.; Lyles, M.F.; et al. Can residents be trained to counsel patients about quitting smoking? J. Gen. Intern. Med. 1991, 6, 9–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Adkins, J.R. The Effects of Standardized Patient Training on Dental Hygiene Students’ Confidence in Delivering Tobacco Cessation Counseling. Master’s Thesis, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  87. Brame, J.L.; Martin, R.; Tavoc, T.; Stein, M.; Curran, A.E. A randomized controlled trial of the effect of standardized patient scenarios on dental hygiene students’ confidence in providing tobacco dependence counseling. J. Dent. Hyg. 2012, 86, 282–291. [Google Scholar]
  88. Borenstein, M.; Hedges, L.V.; Higgins, J.P.T.; Rothstein, H.R. Introduction to Meta-Analysis; John Wiley & Sons: Chichester, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  89. Tufaranu, C.; Munn, Z.; Stephenson, M.; Aromataris, E. Fixed or random effects meta-analysis? Common methodological issues in systematic reviews of effectiveness. Int. J. Evid.-Based Healthc. 2015, 13, 196–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  90. Tufanaru, C.; Munn, Z.; Aromataris, E.; Campbell, J.; Hopp, L. Systematic reviews of effectiveness. In Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer’s Manual [Online]; Chapter 3; Aromataris, E., Munn, Z., Eds.; The Joanna Briggs Institute: Adelaide, Australia, 2017; Available online: https://reviewersmanual.joannabriggs.org (accessed on 29 September 2019).
  91. Carpenter, K.M.; Watson, J.M.; Raffety, B.; Chabal, C. Teaching brief interventions for smoking cessation via an interactive computer-based tutorial. J. Health Psychol. 2003, 8, 149–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Coultas, D.B.; Klecan, D.A.; Whitten, R.M.; Obenshain, S.S.; Rubin, R.H.; Wiese, W.H.; Wilson, B.E.; Woodall, G.W.; Stidley, C.A. Training medical students in smoking-cessation counseling. Acad. Med. 1994, 69, S48–S50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Garg, A.; Butz, A.M.; Dworkin, P.H.; Lewis, R.A.; Thompson, R.E.; Serwint, J.R. Improving the management of family psychosocial problems at low-income children’s well-child care visits: The WE CARE project. Pediatrics 2007, 120, 547–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Hymowitz, N.; Schwab, J.V.; Haddock, C.K.; Pyle, S.A.; Schwab, L.M. The pediatric residency training on tobacco project: Four-year resident outcome findings. Prev. Med. 2007, 45, 481–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  95. Mounsey, A.L.; Bovbjerg, V.; White, L.; Gazewood, J. Do students develop better motivational interviewing skills through role-play with standardised patients or with student colleagues? Med. Educ. 2006, 40, 775–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Papadakis, M.A.; Croughan-Minihane, M.; Fromm, L.J.; Wilkie, H.A.; Ernster, V.L. A comparison of two methods to teach smoking-cessation techniques to medical students. Acad. Med. 1997, 72, 725–727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Prochaska, J.J.; Gali, K.; Miller, B.; Hauer, K.E. Medical students’ attention to multiple risk behaviors: A standardized patient examination. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 2012, 27, 700–707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Roche, A.M.; Eccleston, P.; Sanson-Fisher, R. Teaching smoking cessation skills to senior medical students: A block-randomized controlled trial of four different approaches. Prev. Med. 1996, 25, 251–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Seim, H.C.; Verhoye, J.R. Comparison of training techniques using a patient-centred approach to smoking cessation. Med. Educ. 1995, 29, 139–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Sejr, H.S.; Osler, M. Do smoking and health education influence student nurses’ knowledge, attitudes, and professional behavior? Prev. Med. 2002, 34, 260–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Stolz, D.; Langewitz, W.; Meyer, A.; Pierer, K.; Tschudi, P.; S’ng, C.T.; Strobel, W.; Perruchoud, A.P.; Fagerström, K.; Tamm, M. Enhanced didactic methods of smoking cessation training for medical students-a randomized study. Nicotine Tob. Res. 2012, 14, 224–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Roche, A.M.; Eccleston, P.; Jordan, D. Smoking-related knowledge and attitudes of senior Australian medical students. Tob. Control 1996, 5, 271–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Royce, J.M.; Gorin, S.S.; Edelman, B.; Rendino-Perrone, R.; Orlandi, M.A. Student nurses and smoking cessation. Prog. Clin. Biol. Res. 1990, 339, 49–71. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  104. Strayer, S.M.; Pelletier, S.L.; Martindale, J.R.; Rais, S.; Powell, J.; Schorling, J.B. A PDA-based counseling tool for improving medical student smoking cessation counseling. Fam. Med. 2010, 42, 350–357. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  105. Ward, J.; Sanson-Fisher., R. Does a 3-day workshop for family medicine trainees improve preventive care? A randomized control trial. Prev. Med. 1996, 25, 741–747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Schünemann, H.; Brożek, J.; Guyatt, G.; Oxman, A. (Eds.) GRADE Handbook for Grading Quality of Evidence and Strength of Recommendations [Online]; The GRADE Working Group; 2013; Available online: https://gdt.gradepro.org/app/handbook/handbook.html (accessed on 29 September 2019).
  107. Evidence Prime, Inc. GRADEpro Guideline Development Tool [Online]; McMaster University: Hamilton, ON, Canada, 2015; Available online: https://gradepro.org/cite/ (accessed on 29 September 2019).
  108. World Health Organization. Tobacco. Available online: https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/tobacco (accessed on 29 September 2019).
  109. WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Guidelines for Implementation of Article 14. Demand Reduction Measures Concerning Tobacco Dependence and Cessation. Available online: https://www.who.int/fctc/treaty_instruments/adopted/Guidelines_Article_14_English.pdf (accessed on 29 September 2019).
  110. World Health Organization. Offer Help to Quit Tobacco Use. Available online: https://www.who.int/tobacco/mpower/publications/en_tfi_mpower_brochure_o.pdf?ua=1 (accessed on 29 September 2019).
  111. Leone, F.T.; Evers-Casey, S.; Veloski, J.; Patkar, A.A.; Kanzleiter, L. Short-, intermediate-, and long-term outcomes of Pennsylvania’s continuum of tobacco education pilot project. Nicotine Tob. Res. 2009, 11, 387–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Geller, A.C.; Brooks, D.R.; Powers, C.A.; Brooks, K.R.; Rigotti, N.A.; Bognar, B.; McIntosh, S.; Zapka, J. Tobacco cessation and prevention practices reported by second and fourth year students at US medical schools. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 2008, 23, 1071–1076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Geller, A.C.; Prout, M.N.; Miller, D.R.; Siegel, B.; Sun, T.; Ockene, J.; Koh, H.K. Evaluation of a cancer prevention and detection curriculum for medical students. Prev. Med. 2002, 35, 78–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Kosowicz, L.Y.; Pfeiffer, C.A.; Vargas, M. Long-term retention of smoking cessation counseling skills learned in the first year of medical school. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 2007, 22, 1161–1165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Spangler, J.G.; George, G.; Foley, K.L.; Crandall, S.J. Tobacco intervention training: Current efforts and gaps in US medical schools. JAMA 2002, 288, 1102–1109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Hayes, R.B.; Geller, A.C.; Crawford, S.L.; Jolicoeur, D.G.; Churchill, L.C.; Okuyemi, K.S.; David, S.P.; Adams, M.; Waugh, J.; Allen, S.E.; et al. Medical school curriculum characteristics associated with intentions and frequency of tobacco dependence treatment among 3rd year U.S. medical students. Prev. Med. 2015, 72, 56–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  117. Cornuz, J.; Zellweger, J.; Mounoud, C.; Decrey, H.; Pecoud, A.; Burnand, B. Smoking cessation counseling by residents in an outpatient clinic. Prev. Med. 1997, 26, 292–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Collins, R.L.; D’Angelo, S.; Stearns, S.D.; Campbell, L.R. Training pediatric residents to provide smoking cessation counseling to parents. Sci. World J. 2005, 5, 410–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Secker-Walker, R.H.; Solomon, L.J.; Flynn, B.S.; LePage, S.S.; Crammond, J.E.; Worden, J.K.; Mead, P.B. Training obstetric and family practice residents to give smoking cessation advice during prenatal care. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 1992, 166, 1356–1363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Mitchell, J.; Brown, J.B.; Smith, C. Interprofessional education: A nurse practitioner impacts family medicine residents’ smoking cessation counseling experiences. J. Interprofessional Care 2009, 23, 401–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  121. Geller, A.C.; Hayes, R.B.; Leone, F.; Churchill, L.C.; Leung, K.; Reed, G.; Jolicoeur, D.; Okuliar, C.; Adams, M.; Murray, D.; et al. Tobacco dependence treatment teaching by medical school clerkship preceptors: Survey responses from more than 1000 US medical students. Prev. Med. 2013, 57, 81–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  122. Butler, K.M.; Rayens, M.K.; Zhang, M.; Maggio, L.G.; Riker, C. Tobacco dependence treatment education for baccalaureate nursing students. J. Nurs. Educ. 2009, 48, 249–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Chan, S.S.; So, W.K.; Wong, D.C.; Lam, T.H. Building an integrated model of tobacco control education in the nursing curriculum: Findings of a students’ survey. J. Nurs. Educ. 2008, 47, 223–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  124. Lenz, B.K. Beliefs, knowledge, and self-efficacy of nursing students regarding tobacco cessation. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2008, 35, S494–S500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Davies, B.L.; Matte-Lewis, L.; O’Connor, A.M.; Dulberg, C.S.; Drake, E.R. Evaluation of the “Time to Quit” self-help smoking cessation program. Can. J. Public Health 1992, 83, 19–23. [Google Scholar]
  126. Shishani, K.; Stevens, K.; Dotson, J.; Riebe, C. Improving nursing students’ knowledge using online education and simulation to help smokers quit. Nurse Educ. Today 2013, 33, 210–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Sohn, M.; Ahn, Y.; Park, H.; Lee, M. Simulation-based smoking cessation intervention education for undergraduate nursing students. Nurse Educ. Today 2012, 32, 868–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Hudmon, K.S.; Bardel, K.; Kroon, L.A.; Fenlon, C.M.; Corelli, R.L. Tobacco education in U.S. schools of pharmacy. Nicotine Tob. Res. 2005, 7, 225–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  129. Kristina, S.A.; Thavorncharoensap, M.; Pongcharoensuk, P.; Montakantikul, P.; Suansanae, T.; Prabandari, Y.S. Effectiveness of tobacco education for pharmacy students in Indonesia. Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. 2014, 15, 10783–10786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  130. Gordon, J.S.; Severson, H.H.; Seely, J.R.; Christiansen, S. Development and evaluation of an interactive tobacco cessation CD-ROM educational program for dental students. J. Dent. Educ. 2004, 68, 361–369. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  131. Singleton, J.A.; Carrico, R.M.; Myers, J.A.; Scott, D.A.; Wilson, R.W.; Worth, C.T. Tobacco cessation treatment education for dental students using standardized patients. J. Dent. Educ. 2014, 78, 895–905. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  132. Romito, L.; Schrader, S.; Zahl, D. Using experiential learning and OSCEs to teach and assess tobacco dependence education with first-year dental students. J. Dent. Educ. 2014, 78, 703–713. [Google Scholar]
  133. Romito, L.; Budyn, C.; Oklak, M.A.; Gotlib, J.; Eckert, G.J. Tobacco use and health risks in two dental clinic populations: Implementation and evaluation of a brief targeted intervention. Gen. Dent. 2012, 60, e326–e334. [Google Scholar]
  134. Ehizele, A.O.; Azodo, C.C.; Ezeja, E.B.; Ehigiator, O. Nigerian dental students’ compliance with the 4As approach to tobacco cessation. J. Prev. Med. Hyg. 2011, 52, 12–16. [Google Scholar]
  135. Walsh, S.E.; Singleton, J.A.; Worth, C.T.; Krugler, J.; Moore, R.; Wesley, G.C.; Mitchell, C.K. Tobacco cessation counseling training with standardized patients. J. Dent. Educ. 2007, 71, 1171–1178. [Google Scholar]
  136. Boyd, L.D.; Fun, K.; Madden, T.E. Initiating tobacco curricula in dental hygiene education. Subst. Abus. 2006, 27, 53–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Evans, M.W.; Hawk, C.; Boyd, J. Smoking cessation for chiropractic interns: A theory-driven intervention. J. Am. Chiropr. Assoc. 2006, 43, 13–19. [Google Scholar]
  138. Evans, M.W.; Hawk, C.; Strasser, S.M. An educational campaign to increase chiropractic intern advising roles on patient smoking cessation. Chiropr. Osteopat. 2006, 14, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  139. Hawk, C.; Kaeser, M.A.; Beavers, D.V. Feasibility of using a standardized patient encounter for training chiropractic students in tobacco cessation counseling. J. Chiropr. Educ. 2013, 27, 135–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  140. Pignataro, R.M.; Gurka, M.; Jones, D.L.; Kershner, R.E.; Ohtake, P.J.; Stauber, W.; Swisher, A.K. Educating physical therapist students in tobacco cessation counseling: Feasibility and preliminary outcomes. J. Phys. Ther. Educ. 2015, 29, 68–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  141. Price, J.H.; Mohamed, I.; Jeffrey, J.D. Tobacco intervention training in American College of Nurse-Midwives accredited education programs. J. Midwifery Women’s Health 2008, 53, 68–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Spafford, M.M.; Iley, M.D.; Schultz, A.S.H.; Kennedy, R.D. Tobacco dependence education in Optometry: A Canadian pilot study assessing practices and opportunities. Optom. Educ. 2010, 36, 38–44. [Google Scholar]
  143. Coan, L.L.; Christen, A.; Romito, L. Evolution of a tobacco cessation curriculum for dental hygiene students at Indiana University School of Dentistry. J. Dent. Educ. 2007, 71, 776–784. [Google Scholar]
  144. Schmelz, A.N.; Nixon, B.; McDaniel, A.; Hudmon, K.S.; Zillich, A.J. Evaluation of an online tobacco cessation course for health professions students. Am. J. Pharm. Educ. 2010, 74, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Zwar, N.; Richmond, R.; Davidson, D.; Hasan, I. Postgraduate education for doctors in smoking cessation. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2009, 28, 466–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Lewis, F.M. Perspectives on Models of Interpersonal Health Behavior. In Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice, 3rd ed.; Glanz, K., Rimer, B.K., Lewis, F.M., Eds.; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2002; pp. 265–273. [Google Scholar]
  147. Gould, G.S.; Twyman, L.; Stevenson, L.; Gribbin, G.R.; Bonevski, B.; Palazzi, K.; Zeev, Y.B. What components of smoking cessation care during pregnancy are implemented by health providers? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Br. Med. J. Open 2019, 9, e026037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  148. Geller, A.C.; Brooks, D.R.; Woodring, B.; Oppenheimer, S.; McCabe, M.; Rogers, J.; Timm, A.; Resnick, E.A.; Winicko, J.P. Smoking cessation counseling for parents during child hospitalization: A national survey of pediatric nurses. Public Health Nurs. 2011, 28, 475–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Vijayaraghavan, M.; Yuan, P.; Gregorich, S.; Lum, P.; Appelle, N.; Napoles, A.M.; Kalkhoran, S.; Satterfield, J. Disparities in receipt of 5As for smoking cessation in diverse primary care and HIV clinics. Prev. Med. Rep. 2017, 6, 80–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  150. Baltaci, D.; Aydin, L.Y.; Alasan, F.; Deler, M.H.; Karacam, M.S.; Turker, Y.; Gur, M.; Sariguzel, F. Evaluation of smoking cessation practice by physicians for hospitalized patients in a tertiary hospital. J. Pak. Med. Assoc. 2016, 66, 1547–1553. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  151. Katz, D.A.; Vander Weg, M.W.; Holman, J.; Nugent, A.; Baker, L.; Johnson, S.; Hillis, S.L.; Titler, M. The Emergency Department Action in Smoking Cessation (EDASC) Trial: Impact on delivery of smoking cessation counseling. Acad. Emerg. Med. 2012, 19, 409–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  152. Ye, L.; Goldie, C.; Sharma, T.; John, S.; Bamford, M.; Smith, P.M.; Selby, P.; Schultz, A.S.H. Tobacco-nicotine education and training for health-care professional students and practitioners: A systematic review. Nicotine Tob. Res. 2018, 20, 531–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Bandura, A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory; Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1986. [Google Scholar]
  154. Bandura, A. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control; W.H. Freeman and Company: New York, NY, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  155. Bandura, A. Social Learning Theory; Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1977. [Google Scholar]
  156. O’Leary, A. Self-efficacy and health. Behav. Res. Ther. 1985, 23, 437–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Baranowski, T.; Perry, C.L.; Parcel, G.S. How Individuals, Environments, and Health Behavior Interact. In Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice, 3rd ed.; Glanz, K., Rimer, B.K., Lewis, F.M., Eds.; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2002; pp. 165–184. [Google Scholar]
  158. Prochaska, J.O.; DiClemente, C.C. Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: Toward an integrative model of change. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 1983, 51, 390–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Prochaska, J.O.; DiClemente, C.C.; Norcross, J.C. In search of how people change: Applications to addictive behaviors. Am. Psychol. 1992, 47, 1102–1114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Miller, W.R.; Rollnick, S. Motivational Interviewing: Preparing People for Change; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
  161. Miller, W.R.; Rollnick, S. Motivational Interviewing: Preparing People for Change, 2nd ed.; The Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  162. Green, L.; Kreuter, M. Health Promotion Planning: An Educational and Ecological Approach, 4th ed.; McGraw-Hill: Boston, MA, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  163. Di Sessa, A.A.; Minstrell, J. Cultivating Conceptual Change with Benchmark Lessons. In Thinking Practices; Greeno, J.G., Ed.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 1998; pp. 220–243. [Google Scholar]
Ijerph 16 04158 g001 550
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram of search results and study selection process for published studies, 1990–2017. Note: PRISMA = Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram of search results and study selection process for published studies, 1990–2017. Note: PRISMA = Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.
Ijerph 16 04158 g001
Ijerph 16 04158 g002 550
Figure 2. Review authors’ judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all meta-analysis articles.
Figure 2. Review authors’ judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all meta-analysis articles.
Ijerph 16 04158 g002
Ijerph 16 04158 g003 550
Figure 3. Risk-of-bias summary for meta-analysis articles. Note: To avoid double-counting the risk-of-bias in the assessment for Cannick et al. [76], Year 2 students is left blank. The risk of bias is a summary for both years.
Figure 3. Risk-of-bias summary for meta-analysis articles. Note: To avoid double-counting the risk-of-bias in the assessment for Cannick et al. [76], Year 2 students is left blank. The risk of bias is a summary for both years.
Ijerph 16 04158 g003
Ijerph 16 04158 g004 550
Figure 4. Forest plot for change in tobacco cessation counseling skills using the 5As with standardized or real patients.
Figure 4. Forest plot for change in tobacco cessation counseling skills using the 5As with standardized or real patients.
Ijerph 16 04158 g004
Ijerph 16 04158 g005 550
Figure 5. Forest plot for change in tobacco cessation counseling skills with standardized patients guided by Motivational Interviewing.
Figure 5. Forest plot for change in tobacco cessation counseling skills with standardized patients guided by Motivational Interviewing.
Ijerph 16 04158 g005
Ijerph 16 04158 g006 550
Figure 6. Forest plot for change in students’ self-efficacy in tobacco cessation counseling.
Figure 6. Forest plot for change in students’ self-efficacy in tobacco cessation counseling.
Ijerph 16 04158 g006
Ijerph 16 04158 g007 550
Figure 7. Forest plot for patient smoking cessation at six months after counseling.
Figure 7. Forest plot for patient smoking cessation at six months after counseling.
Ijerph 16 04158 g007
Ijerph 16 04158 g008 550
Figure 8. Forest plot for patient smoking cessation at one year after counseling.
Figure 8. Forest plot for patient smoking cessation at one year after counseling.
Ijerph 16 04158 g008
Table
Table 1. Health professional program participants.
Table 1. Health professional program participants.
Health Professional ProgramsPost-Graduate Medical Programs
Chiropractic Therapy; Dental Hygiene; Dental Therapy; Dentistry; Medicine; Midwifery; Naturopathic Medicine; Nursing (Registered Nurses, Registered Psychiatric Nurses, Advanced Practice Nurses/Nurse Practitioners; Licensed Practical Nurses); Occupational Therapy; Optometry; Pharmacy; Physical Therapy; Psychology; Respiratory Therapy; Social Work; and Speech Language TherapyAnesthesia; Cardiac Surgery; Cardiology; Community Medicine; Critical Care Medicine; Dermatology; Endocrinology and Metabolism; Emergency Medicine; Family Medicine; General Medicine; Medical Oncology; Nephrology; Neurology; Obstetrics/Gynecology; Ophthalmology; Orthopedic Surgery; Otolaryngology; Pediatrics; Plastic Surgery; Psychiatry; Radiation Oncology; Respiratory Medicine; Surgery; and Vascular Surgery
Table
Table 2. Databases searches.
Table 2. Databases searches.
Systematic Review DatabasesPublished Studies DatabasesGrey Literature
JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports; the Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews (including the Tobacco Addiction Group Reviews); the Campbell Collaboration Library. The National Health Centre Reviews and Dissemination databases [Database of Systematic Reviews; Health Technology Assessment; Economic Evaluation Database]; Health Technology Assessment International; Evidence of Policy and Practice Information; Physiotherapy Evidence Database; Occupational Therapy Systematic Evaluation of Evidence; PROSPERO; PubMed; CINAHL and Epistemonikos from July 2015 Allied and Complementary Medicine; CINAHL; PubMed; EMBASE; Scopus; SocIndex; PsychInfo; Academic Search Premier; Education Resources Information Center; Education Search Complete; Health Source-Nursing/Academic Edition; Translating Research into Practice; Google Scholar; Web of Science; and Natural StandardTheses Canada Portal; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses; CADTH; Directory of Grey Literature via New York Academy of Medicine website; websites of the Canadian Council of Tobacco Control (until March 30, 2012); Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse; Health Canada; and Canadian Public Health Association

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Hyndman, K.; Thomas, R.E.; Schira, H.R.; Bradley, J.; Chachula, K.; Patterson, S.K.; Compton, S.M. The Effectiveness of Tobacco Dependence Education in Health Professional Students’ Practice: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 4158. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16214158

AMA Style

Hyndman K, Thomas RE, Schira HR, Bradley J, Chachula K, Patterson SK, Compton SM. The Effectiveness of Tobacco Dependence Education in Health Professional Students’ Practice: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2019; 16(21):4158. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16214158

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hyndman, Kathryn, Roger E. Thomas, H. Rainer Schira, Jenifer Bradley, Kathryn Chachula, Steven K. Patterson, and Sharon M. Compton. 2019. "The Effectiveness of Tobacco Dependence Education in Health Professional Students’ Practice: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16, no. 21: 4158. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16214158

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop