4.4 Review

Effectiveness of multimodal interventions focused on smoking cessation in patients with schizophrenia: A systematic review

期刊

SCHIZOPHRENIA RESEARCH
卷 231, 期 -, 页码 145-153

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2021.03.012

关键词

Schizophrenia; Nicotine; Smoking; Multimodal intervention

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Multimodal smoking cessation interventions are effective in reducing smoking rates among patients with schizophrenia without worsening psychiatric symptoms. Additional studies are needed to improve long-term smoking abstinence outcomes.
Background: Smoking is a significant risk factor for mortality and morbidity among patients with schizophrenia. Objective: To clarify the effectiveness of multimodal smoking cessation interventions in adult smokers diagnosed with schizophrenia. Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Relevant electronic databases were searched for clinical trials that combined pharmacological and non-pharmacological smoking cessation interventions for patients with schizophrenia, published up to October 2020. Primary outcomes were smoking abstinence and smoking reduction. Secondary outcomes consisted in psychiatric symptoms. Results: A final sample of nine articles was obtained from a total of 208 studies. All studies reported higher biochemically validated smoking reduction rates after treatment. However, the majority of the studies reported low smoking abstinence rates, which progressively decreased over time. Multimodal interventions did not worsen psychiatric symptoms. Conclusion: Evidence suggests that multimodal smoking cessation interventions for individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia should be recommended by clinicians, as they showed to be effective in reducing smoking without worsening psychiatric symptoms. Further studies are needed to understand how interventions can become more effective in helping patients achieve long-term smoking abstinence. (c) 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据