Missed opportunities for tobacco use screening and brief cessation advice in South African primary health care: a cross-sectional study.
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Primary health care (PHC) settings offer opportunities for tobacco use screening and brief cessation advice, but data on such activities in South Africa are limited. The aim of this study was to determine the extent to which participants were screened for and advised against tobacco use during consultations. METHODS: This cross-sectional study involved 500 participants, 18 years and older, attended by doctors or PHC nurses. Using an exit-interview questionnaire, information was obtained on participants' tobacco use status, reason(s) for seeking medical care, whether participants had been screened for and advised about their tobacco use and patients' level of comfort about being asked about and advised to quit tobacco use. Main outcome measures included patients' self-reports on having been screened and advised about tobacco use during their current clinic visit and/or any other visit within the last year. Data analysis included the use of chi-square statistics, t-tests and multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of the 500 participants, 14.9% were current smokers and 12.1% were smokeless tobacco users. Only 12.9% of the participants were screened for tobacco use during their current visit, indicating the vast majority were not screened. Among the 134 tobacco users, 11.9% reported being advised against tobacco use during the current visit and 35.1% during any other visit within the last year. Of the participants not screened, 88% indicated they would be 'very comfortable' with being screened. A pregnancy-related clinic visit was the single most significant predictor for being screened during the current clinic visit (OR = 4.59; 95%CI = 2.13-9.88). CONCLUSION: Opportunities for tobacco use screening and brief cessation advice were largely missed by clinicians. Incorporating tobacco use status into the clinical vital signs as is done for pregnant patients during antenatal care visits in South Africa has the potential to improve tobacco use screening rates and subsequent cessation.
Project description:Thirty percent of all cancers are directly attributable to smoking, yet tobacco cessation treatment is not commonly provided at cancer clinics.To assess current tobacco cessation practices among Wisconsin cancer clinics and to measure their receptivity to onsite training and technical assistance to increase their delivery of evidence-based tobacco cessation treatment.An online survey to assess current tobacco use identification and treatment clinical practice at 16 Wisconsin cancer clinics affiliated with the Wisconsin Oncology Network.Fifteen clinics responded to the survey and 11 agreed to onsite academic detailing. Most clinics reported that they identify tobacco users, but fewer advised smokers to quit or provided evidence-based tobacco cessation treatments.Less than half of Wisconsin cancer clinics consistently seize the oncology visit to address tobacco use, and the majority of cancer clinics are receptive to onsite academic detailing to increase the frequency and effectiveness of their tobacco cessation interventions.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Tobacco Cessation on Prescription (TCP) is a new intervention that is being evaluated in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas in Swedish primary health care (PHC). Patients' perceptions of TCP are important to understand as this may have implications for the acceptability and adherence to treatment and explain cessation outcomes. Patients' general experiences of tobacco cessation are also important to explore to improve cessation support in this setting. AIM:To explore experiences of tobacco cessation and TCP among patients in Swedish PHC focusing on socioeconomically disadvantaged areas. METHODS:Inductive content analysis of transcripts from eight semi-structured interviews with patients recruited from the intervention group in a randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of TCP in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas in PHC in Stockholm. RESULTS:Two themes were identified: needing individualized support to quit, taking differences in patients' experiences of tobacco use and cessation into account, acknowledging individual factors such as impact of health and wellbeing on tobacco use and differing attitudes towards tobacco and cessation and needing a supportive environment to facilitate tobacco cessation, taking contextual factors like professional support from the health care system, the importance of the social environment and supportive societal structures into account. Regarding TCP, the prescription form was perceived as useful for providers but did not appear to have a direct impact on tobacco cessation from the informants' perspective. However, individualized counseling from a tobacco cessation specialist, an empathetic approach in the treatment and long-term follow-up was considered important. CONCLUSION:A holistic approach may be needed in cessation treatment, combined with interventions outside the health care system, to facilitate tobacco cessation among patients in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas in Swedish PHC. The TCP prescription form may be helpful for PHC providers but counseling and follow-up appear to be the most important components of TCP for patients in this setting.
Project description:<h4>Objective</h4>Cancer care providers' (CCPs) attitudes towards smoking cessation are influenced by many factors, including their smoking status and knowledge. Our objective was to assess CCPs' characteristics, tobacco use and smoking cessation practices in two Latin American cancer centres.<h4>Design</h4>Cross-sectional survey.<h4>Settings</h4>Two urban cancer centres located in Colombia and Mexico.<h4>Participants</h4>A total of 238 CCPs.<h4>Measures</h4>Online survey consisted of 28 close-ended questions adapted from the 2012 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer survey and the Global Adult Tobacco Survey developed by the WHO. Means, frequencies and proportions were reported for each country. Factors associated to providing of smoking cessation treatment or referral at initial visit were evaluated using logistic regression.<h4>Results</h4>Current smoking prevalence was 10.5% and 12.3% among Colombian and Mexican CCPs, respectively. Around three quarters of the Colombian (86.4%) and Mexican CCPs (66.1%) considered to have inadequate training in smoking cessation. Approximately two-thirds of Colombian (67.5%) and Mexican CCPs (63.9%) reported always or most of the time asking patients about tobacco use during the initial visit. In Colombia and Mexico, the most relevant barriers for providing cessation services were (1) difficulties for motivating patients with cancer, (2) patient resistance in quitting smoking, (3) lack of local resources or referral centres for smoking cessation and (4) lack of training in smoking cessation. CCPs appointed at Instituto Nacional de Cancerología were less likely to provide cessation treatment or referral to their patients if they had less than 50% of their time devoted to patient care and were former or current smokers. The regression model for Instituto de Cancerología did not retain statistically significant variables.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Our findings highlight an urgent need for assisting Latin American CCPs in their quitting efforts as well as expanding formal smoking cessation training specifically tailored to these professionals for improving patients' cancer prognosis and quality of life.
Project description:Importance:Despite the availability of free and effective treatment, few pediatric practices identify and treat parental tobacco use. Objective:To determine if the Clinical Effort Against Secondhand Smoke Exposure (CEASE) intervention can be implemented and sustained in pediatric practices and test whether implementing CEASE led to changes in practice-level prevalence of smoking among parents over 2 years. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted from April 2015 to October 2017. Ten pediatric practices in 5 states were randomized to either implement the CEASE protocol or maintain usual care (as a control group). All parents who screened positive for tobacco use by exit survey after their child's clinical visit 2 weeks (from April to October 2015) and 2 years after intervention implementation (April to October 2017) were eligible to participate. Data analysis occurred from January 2018 to March 2019. Interventions:The CEASE intervention is a practice-change intervention designed to facilitate both routine screening in pediatric settings of families for tobacco use and delivery of tobacco cessation treatment to individuals in screened households who use tobacco. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was delivery of meaningful tobacco treatment, defined as the prescription of nicotine replacement therapy or quit line enrollment. Furthermore, changes in practice-level smoking prevalence and cotinine-confirmed quit rates over the 2 years of intervention implementation were assessed. Results:Of the 8184 parents screened after their child's visit 2 weeks after intervention implementation, 961 (27.1%) were identified as currently smoking in intervention practices; 1103 parents (23.9%) were currently smoking in control practices. Among the 822 and 701 eligible parents who completed the survey in intervention and control practices, respectively 364 in the intervention practices (44.3%) vs 1 in a control practice (0.1%) received meaningful treatment at that visit (risk difference, 44.0% [95% CI, 9.8%-84.8%]). Two years later, of the 9794 parents screened, 1261 (24.4%) in intervention practices and 1149 (25.0%) in control practices were identified as currently smoking. Among the 804 and 727 eligible parents completing the survey in intervention and control practices, respectively, 113 in the intervention practices (14.1%) vs 2 in the control practices (0.3%) received meaningful treatment at that visit (risk difference, 12.8% [95% CI, 3.3%-37.8%]). Change in smoking prevalence over the 2 years of intervention implementation favored the intervention (-2.7% vs 1.1%; difference -3.7% [95% CI, -6.3% to -1.2%]), as did the cotinine-confirmed quit rate (2.4% vs -3.2%; difference, 5.5% [95% CI, 1.4%-9.6%]). Conclusions and Relevance:In this trial, integrating screening and treatment for parental tobacco use in pediatric practices showed both immediate and long-term increases in treatment delivery, a decline in practice-level parental smoking prevalence, and an increase in cotinine-confirmed cessation, compared with usual care. Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01882348.
Project description:Background:Many smokers report using e-cigarettes to help them quit smoking, but whether e-cigarettes aid cessation efforts is uncertain. Objective:To determine whether e-cigarette use after hospital discharge is associated with subsequent tobacco abstinence among smokers who plan to quit and are advised to use evidence-based treatment. Design:Secondary data analysis of a randomized controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01714323 [parent trial]). Setting:3 hospitals. Participants:1357 hospitalized adult cigarette smokers who planned to stop smoking, received tobacco cessation counseling in the hospital, and were randomly assigned at discharge to a tobacco treatment recommendation (control) or free tobacco treatment (intervention). Measurements:Self-reported e-cigarette use (exposure) was assessed 1 and 3 months after discharge; biochemically validated tobacco abstinence (outcome) was assessed 6 months after discharge. Results:Twenty-eight percent of participants used an e-cigarette within 3 months after discharge. In an analysis of 237 propensity score-matched pairs, e-cigarette users were less likely than nonusers to abstain from tobacco use at 6 months (10.1% vs. 26.6%; risk difference, -16.5% [95% CI, -23.3% to -9.6%]). The association between e-cigarette use and quitting varied between intervention patients, who were given easy access to conventional treatment (7.7% vs. 29.8%; risk difference, -22.1% [CI, -32.3% to -11.9%]), and control patients, who received only treatment recommendations (12.0% vs. 24.1%; risk difference, -12.0% [CI, -21.2% to 2.9%]) (P for interaction = 0.143). Limitations:Patients self-selected e-cigarette use. Unmeasured confounding is possible in an observational study. Conclusion:During 3 months after hospital discharge, more than a quarter of smokers attempting to quit used e-cigarettes, mostly to aid cessation, but few used them regularly. This pattern of use was associated with less tobacco abstinence at 6 months than among smokers who did not use e-cigarettes. Additional study is needed to determine whether regular use of e-cigarettes aids or hinders smoking cessation. Primary Funding Source:National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.
Project description:BACKGROUND:A new intervention, Tobacco Cessation on Prescription (TCP), has been developed in the Swedish primary health care (PHC) setting to address inequalities in health caused by tobacco use. It consists of counseling for at least 10 minutes, an individualized prescription of tobacco cessation treatment and follow-up on at least one occasion. TCP is currently being tested in clinical practice for the first time but there is a lack of knowledge about how it is perceived by health care providers. AIM:To explore PHC provider's perceived barriers and facilitators of implementing TCP as an intervention targeting a context with socioeconomically disadvantaged groups in Sweden. METHODS:Directed content analysis of transcripts from eight semi-structured interviews and one focus group interview with PHC providers with personal experience of TCP as informants. Data collection and analysis was guided by The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. RESULTS:Perceived facilitators of implementing TCP were increased self-efficacy among the informants and involvement in the treatment among patients, which led to more intensive counseling and advice being taken more seriously by patients. Lack of resources, routines, and collaboration to work with tobacco cessation and lack of knowledge, motivation and self-efficacy among colleagues were perceived as barriers. Motivation and self-efficacy to quit was perceived as low among some patients, which was explained by low social support to quit, negative attitude and low adherence to treatment and tobacco being used as a coping strategy for life stress. Access to treatment for patients was limited by cost of treatment, long waiting times and focus on face-to-face counseling. CONCLUSION:TCP was perceived positively by the informants but access to treatment for patients was partly limited by how tobacco cessation services were organized. Lack of structural support, resources and differing attitudes among PHC providers need to be addressed to facilitate its implementation.
Project description:<h4>Introduction</h4>Tobacco use is associated with poor outcomes in cancer patients, but there is little information from oncology providers on their practice patterns or perceptions regarding tobacco use and smoking cessation in these patients.<h4>Methods</h4>An online survey of practices, perceptions, and barriers to tobacco assessment and cessation in cancer patients was conducted in members of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC). Responses of physician-level respondents were analyzed and reported.<h4>Results</h4>Responses from 1507 IASLC members who completed the survey are reported as representing 40.5% of IASLC members. More than 90% of physician respondents believe current smoking affects outcome and that cessation should be a standard part of clinical care. At the initial patient visit, 90% ask patients about tobacco use, 79% ask patients whether they will quit, 81% advise patients to stop tobacco use, but only 40% discuss medication options, 39% actively provide cessation assistance, and fewer yet address tobacco at follow-up. Dominant barriers to physician cessation effort are pessimism regarding their ability to help patients stop using tobacco (58%) and concerns about patient resistance to treatment (67%). Only 33% report themselves to be adequately trained to provide cessation interventions.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Physicians who care for lung cancer patients recognize the importance of tobacco cessation as a necessary part of clinical care, but many still do not provide assistance to their patients as a routine part of cancer care. Increasing tobacco cessation activities will require increased assessment and cessation at diagnosis and during follow-up, increased clinician education, and improved tobacco cessation methods.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Trauma-exposed individuals with and without posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are more likely to smoke and less successful in quit attempts than individuals without psychopathology. Contingency management (CM) techniques (i.e., incentives for abstinence) have demonstrable efficacy for smoking cessation in some populations with psychopathology, but have not been well tested in PTSD. This pilot study examined the feasibility of CM plus brief cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in promoting smoking cessation among trauma-exposed individuals with and without PTSD. METHODS:Fifty trauma-exposed smokers (18 with PTSD) were asked to abstain from tobacco and nicotine replacement therapy for one month. During week one of cessation, CBT was provided daily and increasing CM stipends were paid for each continuous day of biochemically-verified abstinence; CM stipends were withheld in response to smoking lapses and reset to the initial payment level upon abstinence resumption. CBT and fixed payments for study visits were provided during the subsequent three weeks. RESULTS:Of the 50 eligible participants who attended at least one pre-quit visit (49% female, 35% current PTSD), 43 (86%) attended the first post-quit study visit, 32 (64%) completed the first week of CM/CBT treatment, and 26 (52%) completed the study. Post-quit seven-day point prevalence abstinence rates for participants with and without PTSD, respectively, were similar: 39% vs. 38% (1?week), 33% vs. 28% (2?weeks), 22% vs. 19% (3?weeks), and 22% vs. 13% (4?weeks). CONCLUSIONS:Use of CM?+?CBT to support tobacco abstinence is a promising intervention for trauma-exposed smokers with and without PTSD.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Tobacco smoking is one of the most important risk factors of coronary heart disease (CHD). Hence, smoking cessation is considered pivotal in the prevention of CHD. The current study aimed to evaluate smoking cessation patterns and determine factors associated with smoking cessation in patients with established CHD. METHODS:The fourth European Survey of Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and Diabetes investigated quality of CHD care in 24 countries across Europe in 2012/13. In the German subset, smoking cessation patterns and clinical characteristics were repetitively assessed a) during index event due to CHD by medical record abstraction, b) as part of a face-to-face interview 6 to 36?months after the index event (i.e. baseline visit), and c) by telephone-based follow-up interview two years after the baseline visit. Logistic regression analysis was performed to search for factors determining smoking status at the time of the telephone interview. RESULTS:Out of 469 participants available for follow-up, 104 (22.2%) had been classified as current smokers at the index event. Of those, 65 patients (62.5%) had quit smoking at the time of the telephone interview, i.e., after a median observation period of 3.5?years (quartiles 3.0, 4.1). Depressed mood at baseline visit and higher education level were less prevalent amongst quitters vs non-quitters (17.2% vs 35.9%, p?=?0.03 and 15.4% vs 33.3%, p?=?0.03), cardiac rehabilitation programs were more frequently attended by quitters (83.1% vs 48.7%, p?<?0.001), and there was a trend for a higher prevalence of diabetes at baseline visit in quitters (37.5% vs 20.5%, p?=?0.07). In the final multivariable model, cardiac rehabilitation was associated with smoking cessation (OR 5.19; 95%CI 1.87 to 14.46; p?=?0.002). DISCUSSION:Attending a cardiac rehabilitation program after a cardiovascular event was associated with smoking cessation supporting its use as a platform for smoking cessation counseling and relapse prevention.
Project description:The dental visit is a unique opportunity for tobacco control. Despite evidence of effectiveness in dental settings, brief provider-delivered cessation advice is underutilized.To evaluate an Internet-delivered intervention designed to increase implementation of brief provider advice for tobacco cessation in dental practice settings.Dental practices (N = 190) were randomized to the intervention website or wait-list control. Pre-intervention and after 8 months of follow-up, each practice distributed exit cards (brief patient surveys assessing provider performance, completed immediately after the dental visit) to 100 patients. Based on these exit cards, we assessed: whether patients were asked about tobacco use (ASK) and, among tobacco users, whether they were advised to quit tobacco (ADVISE). All intervention practices with follow-up exit card data were analyzed as randomized regardless of whether they participated in the Internet-delivered intervention.Of the 190 practices randomized, 143 (75%) dental practices provided follow-up data. Intervention practices' mean performance improved post-intervention by 4% on ASK (29% baseline, adjusted odds ratio = 1.29 [95% CI 1.17-1.42]), and by 11% on ADVISE (44% baseline, OR = 1.55 [95% CI 1.28-1.87]). Control practices improved by 3% on ASK (Adj. OR 1.18 [95% CI 1.07-1.29]) and did not significantly improve in ADVISE. A significant group-by-time interaction effect indicated that intervention practices improved more over the study period than control practices for ADVISE (P = 0.042) but not for ASK.This low-intensity, easily disseminated intervention was successful in improving provider performance on advice to quit.clinicaltrials.gov NCT00627185, http://www.webcitation.org/5c5Kugvzj.