The Context of the Emergency Department as a Location for a Smoking Cessation Intervention-Process Evaluation Findings From the Cessation of Smoking Trial in the Emergency Department Trial.

IF 3 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Nicotine & Tobacco Research Pub Date : 2024-11-07 DOI:10.1093/ntr/ntae223
Caitlin Notley, Pippa Belderson, Emma Ward, Lucy V Clark, Allan Clark, Susan Stirling, Steve Parrott, Jinshuo Li, Timothy J Coats, Linda Bauld, Richard Holland, Sarah Gentry, Sanjay Agrawal, Benjamin M Bloom, Adrian Boyle, Alasdair Gray, M Geraint Morris, Ian Pope
{"title":"The Context of the Emergency Department as a Location for a Smoking Cessation Intervention-Process Evaluation Findings From the Cessation of Smoking Trial in the Emergency Department Trial.","authors":"Caitlin Notley, Pippa Belderson, Emma Ward, Lucy V Clark, Allan Clark, Susan Stirling, Steve Parrott, Jinshuo Li, Timothy J Coats, Linda Bauld, Richard Holland, Sarah Gentry, Sanjay Agrawal, Benjamin M Bloom, Adrian Boyle, Alasdair Gray, M Geraint Morris, Ian Pope","doi":"10.1093/ntr/ntae223","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Hospital emergency departments (ED) offer an opportunity to engage with large numbers of people who smoke to prompt cessation, although the acceptability of opportunistic intervention in this context has been questioned. This process evaluation study was embedded into the Cessation of Smoking Trial in the Emergency Department (COSTED) randomized controlled trial and sought to explore the context of intervention delivery within the ED.</p><p><strong>Aims and methods: </strong>Qualitative interviews were conducted with participants and staff across six EDs participating in the COSTED randomized controlled trial. Interview data were thematically analyzed specifically exploring contextual influences. Data were triangulated with ethnographic observations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In participant interviews (N = 34), it was acceptable overall to receive a brief opportunistic smoking cessation intervention in the ED. Contextual factors are impacted at a range of levels. At the micro level participant views and experiences combined with staff tailoring were important. Being given an e-cigarette starter kit by a \"credible source\" helped to legitimize vaping for smoking cessation and gave confidence in personal ability to switch away from tobacco. At the meso level, adaptations to intervention delivery were made in response to the context of the ED. Stop smoking advisors (N = 11) had to adapt and deliver the intervention flexibly depending on space and clinical need. At the macro level, hospital policies supportive of vaping legitimized the approach.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Smoking cessation outcomes reported in the main trial across sites were very similar because of the high credibility, acceptability, and flexible approach to delivering the COSTED intervention in the ED.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>Attending a hospital ED is the right time and place to receive smoking cessation intervention, even for those not motivated to quit. People are willing to receive intervention, and clinical staff are willing to support intervention delivery. Despite challenges, overall the context is helpful in supporting people to switch away from tobacco. The intervention, with flexible and tailored implementation, is adaptable to different ED contexts. This suggests that wider implementation across NHS Trusts of the effective COSTED intervention is feasible and will ultimately support smoking cessation for people attending EDs, who may not otherwise have sought support.</p>","PeriodicalId":19241,"journal":{"name":"Nicotine & Tobacco Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nicotine & Tobacco Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntae223","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Hospital emergency departments (ED) offer an opportunity to engage with large numbers of people who smoke to prompt cessation, although the acceptability of opportunistic intervention in this context has been questioned. This process evaluation study was embedded into the Cessation of Smoking Trial in the Emergency Department (COSTED) randomized controlled trial and sought to explore the context of intervention delivery within the ED.

Aims and methods: Qualitative interviews were conducted with participants and staff across six EDs participating in the COSTED randomized controlled trial. Interview data were thematically analyzed specifically exploring contextual influences. Data were triangulated with ethnographic observations.

Results: In participant interviews (N = 34), it was acceptable overall to receive a brief opportunistic smoking cessation intervention in the ED. Contextual factors are impacted at a range of levels. At the micro level participant views and experiences combined with staff tailoring were important. Being given an e-cigarette starter kit by a "credible source" helped to legitimize vaping for smoking cessation and gave confidence in personal ability to switch away from tobacco. At the meso level, adaptations to intervention delivery were made in response to the context of the ED. Stop smoking advisors (N = 11) had to adapt and deliver the intervention flexibly depending on space and clinical need. At the macro level, hospital policies supportive of vaping legitimized the approach.

Conclusions: Smoking cessation outcomes reported in the main trial across sites were very similar because of the high credibility, acceptability, and flexible approach to delivering the COSTED intervention in the ED.

Implications: Attending a hospital ED is the right time and place to receive smoking cessation intervention, even for those not motivated to quit. People are willing to receive intervention, and clinical staff are willing to support intervention delivery. Despite challenges, overall the context is helpful in supporting people to switch away from tobacco. The intervention, with flexible and tailored implementation, is adaptable to different ED contexts. This suggests that wider implementation across NHS Trusts of the effective COSTED intervention is feasible and will ultimately support smoking cessation for people attending EDs, who may not otherwise have sought support.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
急诊科作为戒烟干预地点的背景--急诊科戒烟试验的过程评估结果。
导言:医院急诊科(ED)为大量吸烟者提供了戒烟的机会,但在这种情况下进行机会性干预的可接受性受到质疑。这项过程评估研究是急诊科戒烟试验(COSTED)随机对照试验的一部分,旨在探索在急诊科进行干预的背景:对参与 COSTED 随机对照试验的六家急诊室的参与者和工作人员进行了定性访谈。对访谈数据进行了主题分析,专门探讨了环境影响因素。数据与人种学观察结果进行了三角测量:在参与者访谈中(N = 34),总体而言,在急诊室接受简短的机会性戒烟干预是可以接受的。情境因素在不同层面产生影响。在微观层面,参与者的观点和经验以及工作人员的量身定制非常重要。由 "可信来源 "提供的电子烟入门套件有助于使吸食电子烟戒烟合法化,并使人们对个人戒烟能力充满信心。在中观层面,根据 ED 的具体情况对干预措施进行了调整。戒烟顾问(11人)必须根据空间和临床需要灵活调整和实施干预。在宏观层面上,医院支持吸烟的政策使这种方法合法化:结论:由于在急诊室实施 COSTED 干预的可信度高、可接受性强、方法灵活,因此主要试验报告的戒烟结果在不同地点非常相似:意义:到医院急诊室就诊是接受戒烟干预的最佳时间和地点,即使对那些没有戒烟动机的人也是如此。人们愿意接受干预,临床工作人员也愿意支持干预的实施。尽管存在挑战,但总体而言,这种环境有助于支持人们戒烟。干预措施的实施具有灵活性和针对性,可适应不同的急诊室环境。这表明,在NHS信托基金中更广泛地实施有效的COSTED干预是可行的,并将最终支持就诊于急诊室的患者戒烟,否则他们可能不会寻求支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nicotine & Tobacco Research
Nicotine & Tobacco Research 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
10.60%
发文量
268
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Nicotine & Tobacco Research is one of the world''s few peer-reviewed journals devoted exclusively to the study of nicotine and tobacco. It aims to provide a forum for empirical findings, critical reviews, and conceptual papers on the many aspects of nicotine and tobacco, including research from the biobehavioral, neurobiological, molecular biologic, epidemiological, prevention, and treatment arenas. Along with manuscripts from each of the areas mentioned above, the editors encourage submissions that are integrative in nature and that cross traditional disciplinary boundaries. The journal is sponsored by the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT). It publishes twelve times a year.
期刊最新文献
The Context of the Emergency Department as a Location for a Smoking Cessation Intervention-Process Evaluation Findings From the Cessation of Smoking Trial in the Emergency Department Trial. Behavioral Interventions for Tobacco Cessation in Low and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Effects of E-Cigarettes on Combustible Cigarette Smoking Among Adults with Opioid Use Disorder on Buprenorphine: Single Arm ERASER Pilot Trial. Vaping and smoking cue reactivity in young adult non-smoking electronic cigarette users: A functional neuroimaging study. Do-it-yourself flavored capsule cigarettes: Exploiting potential regulatory loopholes?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1