Tobacco Prevention & Cessation最新文献

Introduction: Little is known about media exposures to heated tobacco products (HTPs). In this study, we examined sources of HTP exposure, including from paid and unpaid media and social connections, in relation to HTP use and use intentions.

Methods: In the fall of 2021, we conducted a cross-sectional survey among adult online panelists (aged 18-45 years) in the US and Israel, oversampling tobacco users. The current study analyzed data from participants who responded to the question about HTP awareness or use (n=2061). Multivariable linear and logistic regression analyses examined the relationship between sources of HTP exposure, HTP use, and use intentions.

Results: Among those aware of HTPs, both Israelis and Americans reported past-month HTP media exposure via advertisements (58.2% vs 48.0%), non-advertisement sources (49.7% vs 30.7%), and social connections (51.5% vs 33.6%), respectively. Factors associated with HTP awareness (n=677/2061; 32.9%) included media use frequency (AOR=1.13; 95% CI: 1.01-1.28) and social connections using HTPs (AOR=2.45; 95% CI: 1.92-3.15). Among those aware of HTPs, past-month HTP exposure via digital media advertisements (AOR=2.06; 95% CI: 1.09-3.91) and non-advertising promotion via radio, podcast, movie, television or theatre (AOR=2.30; 95% CI: 1.19-4.44) and websites (AOR=2.36; 95% CI: 1.32-4.21) were associated with current HTP use. Exposure to digital media advertisements (β=0.35; 95% CI: 0.07-0.62) and non-advertising promotion via social media (β=0.62; 95% CI: 0.34-0.91) were correlated with higher use intentions. Having social connections using HTPs was correlated with higher use (AOR=2.21; 95% CI: 1.19-4.11) and intentions (β=0.66; 95% CI: 0.42-0.91). No significant differences were found across countries.

Conclusions: Digital media (e.g. online, social media) were particularly salient correlates of HTP intentions and use. Future studies are needed that further examine media exposures to these products, as well as that examine possible regulations to limit HTP promotion via these channels.

Introduction: Patient-provider communication quality is instrumental for healthy outcomes in patients. The objective of this study is to examine the relationships between patient-provider communication quality and participant characteristics, perception of e-cigarette harmfulness, and smoking outcomes.

Methods: A pooled cross-sectional design was used on secondary data obtained from the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) 5 from Cycle 1 through Cycle 4, from 2017-2022. Our final sample contained 3511 observations. Our outcome variable was the perception of electronic cigarette smoking status. The independent variable was patient-provider communication quality (PPCQ), measured from a series of questions with responses on a 4-item Likert scale (always, usually, sometimes, never). Demographic variables such as marital status, health insurance status, occupation status, and health-related variables were used as participant characteristics. Ordinal logistic regression models were used to examine the above relationships.

Results: Compared to males, females had lower odds of being in a higher category of perception of e-cigarette harmfulness compared to other categories of e-cigarette harmfulness (AOR=0.66; 95% CI: 0.57-0.76). Respondents who were non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic had lower odds of being in a higher category of perception of e-cigarettes compared to Whites (AOR=0.52; 95% CI: 0.49-0.78, and AOR=0.51; 95% CI: 0.41-0.65, respectively). Respondents who had higher education level compared to those with less than high school had lower odds (AOR=0.30; 95% CI: 0.17-0.51), and Hispanics compared to Whites had higher odds (AOR=1.59; 95% CI: 1.05-2.40), of being former smokers rather than current smokers.

Conclusions: Providers should invest in staff training and development to target the populations that need conversations regarding e-cigarette usage.

Introduction: Research in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where the majority of global tobacco users reside, is critical to addressing the global tobacco epidemic. This analysis describes the global tobacco control research portfolio funded by the National Cancer Institute from fiscal years 2000 to 2019.

Methods: We used the National Institutes of Health Query, View, Report database to identify extramural grants relevant to global tobacco control research. Abstracts were analyzed to describe grant characteristics, including topic areas, tobacco products, countries, and regions of focus. Bibliometric and co-authorship network analyses were performed for publications associated with relevant grants.

Results: Of the 93 relevant grants with foreign (non-US) involvement, the majority (83.9%) supported research in upper and lower middle-income countries. The majority of grants (86.0%) focused on cigarettes, with a small subset of grants addressing smokeless tobacco, waterpipe use, or other non-cigarette products. Most grants focused on at least one of the six tobacco control policy measures in the World Health Organization MPOWER package; almost half (48.4%) focused on monitoring tobacco use and around one-third (32.3%) focused on offering tobacco cessation treatment, while other MPOWER measures received less attention in the research portfolio. While most of these grants, and the funding initiatives that supported them, emphasized research in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), only 3 of 93 grants were awarded directly to LMIC-based institutions.

Conclusions: There is a critical need for research to develop and test strategies to adapt, implement, and scale up evidence-based interventions across diverse LMIC settings. This study identified gaps in research activity that should be addressed to strengthen global tobacco control research capacity.

Introduction: Smoking cessation support (SCS) in the hospital is essential; patients often struggle to maintain quit attempts, which necessitates assistance from healthcare professionals (HCPs). However, unknown barriers can obstruct the implementation of SCS in hospitals. This study aims to uncover barriers to the implementation of SCS in psychiatric, somatic, inpatient, and outpatient hospital settings.

Methods: In the period from June to September 2021, HCPs in a large secondary care hospital in the Region of Southern Denmark completed an online, cross-sectional study, providing sociodemographic details and listing potential barriers to SCS. They also shared additional barriers in the form of free-text responses. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis of free-text responses were performed.

Results: Of 1645 HCPs surveyed, 409 elaborated their response in the free-text field assessing unlisted barriers. Top listed barriers, reported by more than one-third of participants, included: 'lack of time' (45.1%), 'lack of patient motivation' (34.3%), and 'insufficient knowledge on how to support' (32.2%). Free-text responses revealed three barrier-related, which we grouped under the themes of: 'Concerned about the patient', 'Not part of my job', and 'Inappropriate setting'.

Conclusions: This quantitative and qualitative study identifies barriers to SCS on multiple levels in the hospital setting, i.e. on the patient, provider, and organizational levels. These results can inform healthcare organizations and professionals in the implementation of SCS in routine hospital care.