"因为这样做是正确的":关于澳大利亚专家对肺癌筛查中提供戒烟支持的观点的焦点小组研究。

IF 3 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Nicotine & Tobacco Research Pub Date : 2025-02-24 DOI:10.1093/ntr/ntae215
Nathan J Harrison, Rachael H Dodd, Ashleigh R Sharman, Henry M Marshall, Emily Stone, Joel J Rhee, Mei Ling Yap, Sue McCullough, Christine Paul, Jacqueline A Bowden, Billie Bonevski, Nicole M Rankin
{"title":"\"因为这样做是正确的\":关于澳大利亚专家对肺癌筛查中提供戒烟支持的观点的焦点小组研究。","authors":"Nathan J Harrison, Rachael H Dodd, Ashleigh R Sharman, Henry M Marshall, Emily Stone, Joel J Rhee, Mei Ling Yap, Sue McCullough, Christine Paul, Jacqueline A Bowden, Billie Bonevski, Nicole M Rankin","doi":"10.1093/ntr/ntae215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Lung cancer screening (LCS) trials, targeting people with a smoking history, have demonstrated reduced mortality. How to optimally embed evidence-based smoking cessation support in LCS, including in Australia, needs to be better understood. We sought experts' perspectives to identify potential barriers and effective implementation strategies.</p><p><strong>Aims and methods: </strong>Perceptions of providing smoking cessation support in LCS were elicited in 24 focus groups and three individual interviews with clinicians, cancer screening program managers/policymakers, and researchers during 2021. We conducted framework analysis and mapped key topics to the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Experts (N = 84 participants) strongly supported capitalizing on an \"opportune time\" for smoking cessation and new LCS participant contact opportunities throughout the screening and assessment pathway. Many advocated for adapting existing cessation resources to the LCS setting and providing support without participant costs. Experts generally considered referral alone to established programs (eg, telephone Quitline) as insufficient, but likely helpful in follow-up, and dedicated cessation specialist roles as essential. Broader cessation messaging (via mass media/community channels) was also suggested to reinforce individualized support. Experts described inherent alignment, and an ethical responsibility, to deliver smoking cessation as a core LCS component. It was suggested that LCS-eligible participants' varied experiences of stigma, health literacy, and motivation, be considered in cessation support. Primary care support and individualized interventions were suggested to facilitate implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Experts considered smoking cessation support essential in LCS. The expert-identified and multi-level implementation strategies described here can directly inform smoking cessation-specific planning for Australia's forthcoming National LCS Program.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>The international literature includes few examples considering how best to provide smoking cessation support within a LCS program in advance of program commencement. Our analysis, using the updated CFIR, is one of the first to explore experts' perspectives within this context. Experts identified multiple implementation barriers to providing smoking cessation support within and outside of an Australian LCS program, including key work infrastructure barriers, and advocated for providing tailored interventions within this program. Our foundational work in a new targeted screening program's preimplementation phase will allow international comparisons to be made.</p>","PeriodicalId":19241,"journal":{"name":"Nicotine & Tobacco Research","volume":" ","pages":"387-397"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11847784/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"Because That is the Right Thing to do\\\": A Focus Group Study of Australian Expert Perspectives on Offering Smoking Cessation Support in Lung Cancer Screening.\",\"authors\":\"Nathan J Harrison, Rachael H Dodd, Ashleigh R Sharman, Henry M Marshall, Emily Stone, Joel J Rhee, Mei Ling Yap, Sue McCullough, Christine Paul, Jacqueline A Bowden, Billie Bonevski, Nicole M Rankin\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ntr/ntae215\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Lung cancer screening (LCS) trials, targeting people with a smoking history, have demonstrated reduced mortality. How to optimally embed evidence-based smoking cessation support in LCS, including in Australia, needs to be better understood. We sought experts' perspectives to identify potential barriers and effective implementation strategies.</p><p><strong>Aims and methods: </strong>Perceptions of providing smoking cessation support in LCS were elicited in 24 focus groups and three individual interviews with clinicians, cancer screening program managers/policymakers, and researchers during 2021. We conducted framework analysis and mapped key topics to the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Experts (N = 84 participants) strongly supported capitalizing on an \\\"opportune time\\\" for smoking cessation and new LCS participant contact opportunities throughout the screening and assessment pathway. Many advocated for adapting existing cessation resources to the LCS setting and providing support without participant costs. Experts generally considered referral alone to established programs (eg, telephone Quitline) as insufficient, but likely helpful in follow-up, and dedicated cessation specialist roles as essential. Broader cessation messaging (via mass media/community channels) was also suggested to reinforce individualized support. Experts described inherent alignment, and an ethical responsibility, to deliver smoking cessation as a core LCS component. It was suggested that LCS-eligible participants' varied experiences of stigma, health literacy, and motivation, be considered in cessation support. Primary care support and individualized interventions were suggested to facilitate implementation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Experts considered smoking cessation support essential in LCS. The expert-identified and multi-level implementation strategies described here can directly inform smoking cessation-specific planning for Australia's forthcoming National LCS Program.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>The international literature includes few examples considering how best to provide smoking cessation support within a LCS program in advance of program commencement. Our analysis, using the updated CFIR, is one of the first to explore experts' perspectives within this context. Experts identified multiple implementation barriers to providing smoking cessation support within and outside of an Australian LCS program, including key work infrastructure barriers, and advocated for providing tailored interventions within this program. Our foundational work in a new targeted screening program's preimplementation phase will allow international comparisons to be made.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19241,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nicotine & Tobacco Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"387-397\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11847784/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nicotine & Tobacco Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntae215\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nicotine & Tobacco Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntae215","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

摘要

简介:针对有吸烟史人群的肺癌筛查(LCS)试验已证明可降低死亡率。如何将以证据为基础的戒烟支持以最佳方式植入肺癌筛查中,包括在澳大利亚,需要更好地理解。我们征求了专家的意见,以确定潜在的障碍和有效的实施策略:在 2021 年期间,我们与临床医生、癌症筛查项目经理/政策制定者和研究人员进行了 24 次焦点小组讨论和 3 次个别访谈,了解了他们对在地方保健中心提供戒烟支持的看法。我们进行了框架分析,并将关键主题映射到更新的实施研究综合框架中:专家(N=84 位参与者)强烈支持在整个筛查和评估过程中利用戒烟的 "恰当时机 "和新的LCS 参与者接触机会。许多人主张将现有的戒烟资源调整到LCS环境中,并在不增加参与者费用的情况下提供支持。专家们普遍认为,仅仅转介到已有的项目(如电话戒烟热线)是不够的,但可能对后续治疗有帮助,而专门的戒烟专家角色也是必不可少的。专家还建议通过大众媒体/社区渠道进行更广泛的戒烟宣传,以加强个性化支持。专家们认为,提供戒烟服务是本地社区服务的核心内容,这既是内在的一致性,也是一种道德责任。有专家建议,在提供戒烟支持时,应考虑符合当地社区服务条件的参与者在耻辱感、健康知识和动机方面的不同经历。专家建议,基层医疗支持和个性化干预措施可促进戒烟支持的实施:专家们认为戒烟支持在地方保健服务中至关重要。这里描述的由专家确定的多层次实施策略可以直接为澳大利亚即将实施的国家LCS计划的戒烟专项规划提供参考:国际文献中很少有案例考虑如何在肺癌筛查(LCS)项目开始前最好地提供戒烟支持。我们的分析采用了最新的实施研究综合框架,是在此背景下探讨专家观点的首批分析之一。专家们发现了在澳大利亚 LCS 项目内外提供戒烟支持的多种实施障碍,包括关键的工作基础设施障碍,并主张在该项目内提供量身定制的干预措施。我们在一项新的定向筛查计划实施前阶段所做的基础性工作将有助于进行国际比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
"Because That is the Right Thing to do": A Focus Group Study of Australian Expert Perspectives on Offering Smoking Cessation Support in Lung Cancer Screening.

Introduction: Lung cancer screening (LCS) trials, targeting people with a smoking history, have demonstrated reduced mortality. How to optimally embed evidence-based smoking cessation support in LCS, including in Australia, needs to be better understood. We sought experts' perspectives to identify potential barriers and effective implementation strategies.

Aims and methods: Perceptions of providing smoking cessation support in LCS were elicited in 24 focus groups and three individual interviews with clinicians, cancer screening program managers/policymakers, and researchers during 2021. We conducted framework analysis and mapped key topics to the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

Results: Experts (N = 84 participants) strongly supported capitalizing on an "opportune time" for smoking cessation and new LCS participant contact opportunities throughout the screening and assessment pathway. Many advocated for adapting existing cessation resources to the LCS setting and providing support without participant costs. Experts generally considered referral alone to established programs (eg, telephone Quitline) as insufficient, but likely helpful in follow-up, and dedicated cessation specialist roles as essential. Broader cessation messaging (via mass media/community channels) was also suggested to reinforce individualized support. Experts described inherent alignment, and an ethical responsibility, to deliver smoking cessation as a core LCS component. It was suggested that LCS-eligible participants' varied experiences of stigma, health literacy, and motivation, be considered in cessation support. Primary care support and individualized interventions were suggested to facilitate implementation.

Conclusions: Experts considered smoking cessation support essential in LCS. The expert-identified and multi-level implementation strategies described here can directly inform smoking cessation-specific planning for Australia's forthcoming National LCS Program.

Implications: The international literature includes few examples considering how best to provide smoking cessation support within a LCS program in advance of program commencement. Our analysis, using the updated CFIR, is one of the first to explore experts' perspectives within this context. Experts identified multiple implementation barriers to providing smoking cessation support within and outside of an Australian LCS program, including key work infrastructure barriers, and advocated for providing tailored interventions within this program. Our foundational work in a new targeted screening program's preimplementation phase will allow international comparisons to be made.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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
Demographic trends in e-cigarette social media marketing: perceiving gender presentation and facial age via computer vision. Bidirectional relationships between sleep quality and nicotine vaping: studying young adult e-cigarette users in real time and real life. Evaluation of Dual Use: Real Time Reductions in Combustible Cigarette Smoking During Co-Occurring Use of E-Cigarettes A Secondary Analysis of a Naturalistic Randomized Clinical Trial. Psychological Distress is Associated with Blunt Use Among Youth in the US: Insights from the 2021-2023 National Youth Tobacco Surveys. The Influence of Perimenstrual Daily Ovarian Hormones on Anxiety and Cigarette Craving.
×
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