Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 150
Filter
2.
Sci Rep ; 12(1): 20335, 2022 Nov 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2133614

ABSTRACT

Empirical evidence, primarily based on hospital-based or voluntary samples, suggests that current smokers have a lower risk of COVID-19 infection than never smokers. In this study, we used nationally representative data to examine the association between tobacco use and the risk of having a confirmed COVID-19 case. We explored several forms of tobacco use, contributing to separate the role of nicotine from smoking. We used data from 44,199 participants from three pooled national health surveys in Finland (FinSote 2018-2020). The primary outcome was a confirmed COVID-19 case. We examined current smoking, moist smokeless tobacco (snus), e-cigarettes with and without nicotine and nicotine replacement therapy products. Current daily smokers had a relative risk of 1.12 of a confirmed COVID-19 case (95% CI 0.65; 1.94) in fully adjusted models compared with never smokers. Current snus use was associated with a 68% higher risk of a confirmed COVID-19 case (RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.02; 2.75) than never users. We did not find conclusive evidence of associations between e-cigarettes with and without nicotine and nicotine replacement therapy products and the risk of confirmed COVID-19 cases. Our findings suggest that nicotine might not have a protective role in the risk of COVID-19 as previously hypothesized.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems , Smoking Cessation , Humans , Finland/epidemiology , Nicotine , Tobacco Use Cessation Devices , COVID-19/epidemiology , Tobacco Use/adverse effects , Tobacco Use/epidemiology
3.
Lancet ; 400(10363): 1581-1583, 2022 11 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2106184
4.
Front Public Health ; 10: 908646, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2089927

ABSTRACT

Background: Implementation mapping (IM) is a promising five-step method for guiding planning, execution, and maintenance of an innovation. Case examples are valuable for implementation practitioners to understand considerations for applying IM. This pilot study aimed to determine the feasibility of using IM within a federally qualified health center (FQHC) with limited funds and a 1-year timeline. Methods: An urban FQHC partnered with an academic team to employ IM for implementing a computerized strategy of tobacco cessation: the 5A's (Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, Arrange). Each step of IM was supplemented with theory-driven methods and frameworks. Data collection included surveys and interviews with clinic staff, analyzed via rapid data analysis. Results: Medical assistants and clinicians were identified as primary implementers of the 5A's intervention. Salient determinants of change included the perceived compatibility and relative priority of 5A's. Performance objectives and change objectives were derived to address these determinants, along with a suite of implementation strategies. Despite indicators of adoptability and acceptability of the 5A's, reductions in willingness to adopt the implementation package occurred over time and the intervention was not adopted by the FQHC within the study timeframe. This is likely due to the strain of the COVID-19 pandemic altering health clinic priorities. Conclusions: Administratively, the five IM steps are feasible to conduct with FQHC staff within 1 year. However, this study did not obtain its intended outcomes. Lessons learned include the importance of re-assessing barriers over time and ensuring a longer timeframe to observe implementation outcomes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Smoking Cessation , Tobacco Use Cessation , Humans , Pandemics , Pilot Projects , Smoking Cessation/methods
5.
BMJ ; 379: e071522, 2022 10 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2078902

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To examine effectiveness, cost effectiveness, generalisability, and acceptability of financial incentives for smoking cessation during pregnancy in addition to variously organised UK stop smoking services. DESIGN: Pragmatic, multicentre, single blinded, phase 3, randomised controlled trial (Cessation in Pregnancy Incentives Trial phase 3 (CPIT III)). SETTING: Seven UK stop smoking services provided in primary and secondary care facilities in Scotland, Northern Ireland, and England. PARTICIPANTS: 944 pregnant women (age ≥16 years) who self-reported as being smokers (at least one cigarette in the past week) when asked at first maternity visit, less than 24 weeks' gestation, and notified to the trial team by routine stop smoking services. INTERVENTIONS: Participants in the control group were offered the standard stop smoking services, which includes the offer of counselling by specially trained workers using withdrawal orientated therapy and the offer of free nicotine replacement therapy. The intervention was the offer of usual support from the stop smoking services and the addition of up to £400 ($440; €455) of LoveToShop financial voucher incentives for engaging with current stop smoking services or to stop smoking, or both, during pregnancy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported smoking cessation in late pregnancy (between 34 and 38 weeks' gestation) corroborated by saliva cotinine (and anabasine if using nicotine replacement products). Results were adjusted for age, smoking years, index of multiple deprivation, Fagerström score, before or after covid, and recruitment site. Secondary outcomes included point and continuous abstinence six months after expected date of delivery, engagement with stop smoking services, biochemically validated abstinence from smoking at four weeks after stop smoking date, birth weight of baby, cost effectiveness, generalisability documenting formats of stop smoking services, and acceptability to pregnant women and their carers. RESULTS: From 9 January 2018 to 4 April 2020, of 4032 women screened by stop smoking services, 944 people were randomly assigned to the intervention group (n=471) or the control group (n=470). Three people asked for their data to be removed. 126 (27%) of 471 participants stopped smoking from the intervention group and 58 (12%) of 470 from the control group (adjusted odds ratio 2.78 (1.94 to 3.97) P<0.001). Serious adverse events were miscarriages and other expected pregnancy events requiring hospital admission; all serious adverse events were unrelated to the intervention. Most people who stopped smoking from both groups relapsed after their baby was born. CONCLUSIONS: The offer of up to £400 of financial voucher incentives to stop smoking during pregnancy as an addition to current UK stop smoking services is highly effective. This bolt-on intervention supports new guidance from the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, which includes the addition of financial incentives to support pregnant women to stop smoking. Continuing incentives to 12 months after birth is being examined to prevent relapse. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN15236311.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Smoking Cessation , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Adolescent , Smoking Cessation/methods , Motivation , Pregnant Women , Tobacco Use Cessation Devices , Cotinine , Anabasine , Smoking/adverse effects , Scotland
6.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(20)2022 Oct 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2071417

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 epidemic and its psychological, economic and social consequences could have an impact on the evolution of tobacco-smoking prevalence and attitudes towards quitting. The aim of this study is to analyse the specific characteristics of the motivations for and barriers against smoking cessation in this period. The study is based on qualitative data collected from late 2020 to early 2021 in France from 89 smokers with a low or intermediate socio-economic level. Among the motivations for quitting smoking, health concerns and the financial cost of cigarettes carried increased importance among the smokers in this period. Inversely, perceived stress, isolation, and a lack of social or healthcare support prevented some smokers from attempting to quit. These results are useful for explaining the evolution of smoking prevalence and preparing future interventions in the context of the health crisis and its aftermath. They highlight the relevance of educational messages, of the promotion of validated smoking-cessation aids and, in particular, remote support, as well as the implementation of community-based actions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Smoking Cessation , Humans , Smoking Cessation/methods , Motivation , COVID-19/epidemiology , Smoking/epidemiology , Smoking/psychology , Smokers/psychology
7.
BMJ Open Respir Res ; 9(1)2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2064177

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Treating tobacco dependency in patients admitted to hospital is a key priority in the National Health Service long-term plan. This service evaluation assessed the perception, needs and experience of care within an opt-out hospital-based tobacco dependency treatment service (the Conversation, Understand, Replace, Experts and Evidence Base (CURE) team) in North-West England. METHODS: A survey was offered to all eligible patients between 1 July 2020 and 30 September 2020. Eligibility criteria were adult patients identified as an active smoker being approached by the CURE team as part of the standard opt-out service model, on a non-covid ward without a high suspicion of COVID-19 infection and able to read and write in English. RESULTS: 106 completed surveys were evaluated. Participants demonstrated high levels of tobacco dependency with an average of 37 years smoking history and 66% describing the onset of cravings within 30 min of hospital admission. The average number quit attempts in the previous 12 months was 1.3 but only 9% had used the most effective National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommended treatments. 100% felt the opt-out service model was appropriate and 96% stated the treatment and support they had received had prompted them to consider a further quit attempt. 82% of participants rated their experience of care as 9/10 or 10/10. Participants wanted a broad range of support post discharge with the most popular option being with their general practitioner. 66% and 65% of participants would have been interested in a vaping kit as stop smoking intervention and support vaping-friendly hospital grounds respectively. CONCLUSION: These results suggest this hospital-based, opt-out tobacco dependency treatment service delivers high-quality experience of care and meets the needs of the patients it serves. It also highlights the opportunity to enhance outcomes by providing access to NICE recommended most-effective interventions (varenicline, vaping and combination nicotine replacement therapy) and providing flexible, individualised discharge pathways.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Smoking Cessation , Adult , Aftercare , COVID-19/therapy , Hospitals , Humans , Patient Discharge , Smoking Cessation/methods , State Medicine , Tobacco , Tobacco Use Cessation Devices , Varenicline
8.
J Med Internet Res ; 24(9): e37900, 2022 09 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2054774

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: People who smoke have other risk factors for chronic diseases, such as low levels of physical activity and poor diet. Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) might help health care practitioners integrate interventions for diet and physical activity into their smoking cessation programming but could worsen quit rates. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study are to assess the effects of the addition of a CDSS for physical activity and diet on smoking cessation outcomes and to assess the implementation of the study. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic hybrid type I effectiveness-implementation trial with 232 team-based primary care practices in Ontario, Canada, from November 2019 to May 2021. We used a 2-arm randomized controlled trial comparing a CDSS addressing physical activity and diet to treatment as usual and used the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework to measure implementation outcomes. The primary outcome was self-reported 7-day tobacco abstinence at 6 months. RESULTS: We enrolled 5331 participants in the study. Of these, 2732 (51.2%) were randomized to the intervention group and 2599 (48.8%) to the control group. At the 6-month follow-up, 29.7% (634/2137) of respondents in the intervention arm and 27.3% (552/2020) in the control arm reported abstinence from tobacco. After multiple imputation, the absolute group difference was 2.1% (95% CI -0.5 to 4.6; F1,1000.42=2.43; P=.12). Mean exercise minutes changed from 32 (SD 44.7) to 110 (SD 196.1) in the intervention arm and from 32 (SD 45.1) to 113 (SD 195.1) in the control arm (group effect: B=-3.7 minutes; 95% CI -17.8 to 10.4; P=.61). Servings of fruit and vegetables changed from 2.64 servings to 2.42 servings in the intervention group and from 2.52 servings to 2.45 servings in the control group (incidence rate ratio for intervention group=0.98; 95% CI 0.93-1.02; P=.35). CONCLUSIONS: A CDSS for physical activity and diet may be added to a smoking cessation program without affecting the outcomes. Further research is needed to improve the impact of integrated health promotion interventions in primary care smoking cessation programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04223336 https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04223336. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/19157.


Subject(s)
Decision Support Systems, Clinical , Smoking Cessation , Delivery of Health Care , Diet, Healthy , Exercise , Humans , Ontario
10.
Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 19(18)2022 Sep 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2032975

ABSTRACT

The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of smoking and e-cigarette use among primary care patients during the COVID-19 pandemic and to assess the frequency of minimal anti-tobacco interventions by family doctors. A cross-sectional study was conducted from January 2020 to December 2021 encompassing 896 patients over 18 years of age who used primary health care in the city of Lodz, Poland. In total, 21.2% of the respondents were smokers, 11.6% were e-cigarette users, and 7.3% dual users. In addition, 68.4% of smokers had been asked about smoking, while 62.9% of non-smokers and 33.7% of smokers were advised to quit smoking; furthermore, 71.1% of e-cigarette users and 72.3% of dual users were asked about tobacco use, and 17.3% and 21.5%, respectively, had been advised to quit smoking. Multivariate logistic regression analysis found men and alcohol users to receive more minimal anti-tobacco advice than women and non-alcohol users (OR = 1.46; p < 0.05 and OR = 1.45; p < 0.05), socio-demographic and health correlates did not increase the chances of obtaining minimal anti-tobacco interventions among smokers. People with a medium level of education had a higher chance of receiving minimal anti-tobacco intervention from their family doctor when using e-cigarettes and when they were dual users (OR = 2.06; p < 0.05 and OR = 2.51; p < 0.05). Smokers were less likely to receive minimal anti-tobacco interventions than reported in previous studies. Measures should be implemented to increase the minimum interventions provided by GPs in their daily work among all patients, not only those who use tobacco. Non-smokers should be encouraged to abstain.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems , Smoking Cessation , Tobacco Products , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Poland/epidemiology , Primary Health Care , Smoking/epidemiology , Tobacco , Tobacco Smoking/epidemiology , Tobacco Use
11.
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev ; 23(8): 2551-2552, 2022 Aug 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2026526

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 has affected many health services including Tobacco cessation measures. To continue with the strategies used for the de-addiction of tobacco, we need to adapt to the changing times. The use of Artificial Intelligence will help dental health care professionals to reach a larger population, effectively implement measures for tobacco cessation, and meticulous follow-up of patients.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Smoking Cessation , Tobacco Use Cessation , Artificial Intelligence , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Hotlines , Humans , Tobacco Use
12.
BMJ Open ; 12(8): e049644, 2022 08 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2020025

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of cytisine over and above brief behavioural support (BS) for smoking cessation among patients who are newly diagnosed with pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) in low-income and middle-income countries. DESIGN: An incremental cost-utility analysis was undertaken alongside a 12-month, double-blind, two-arm, individually randomised controlled trial from a public/voluntary healthcare sector perspective with the primary endpoint at 6 months post randomisation. SETTING: Seventeen subdistrict hospitals in Bangladesh and 15 secondary care hospitals in Pakistan. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (aged ≥18 years in Bangladesh and ≥15 years in Pakistan) with pulmonary TB diagnosed within the last 4 weeks who smoked tobacco daily (n=2472). INTERVENTIONS: Two brief BS sessions with a trained TB health worker were offered to all participants. Participants in the intervention arm (n=1239) were given cytisine (25-day course) while those in the control arm (n=1233) were given placebo. No significant difference was found between arms in 6-month abstinence. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs of cytisine and BS sessions were estimated based on research team records. TB treatment costs were estimated based on TB registry records. Additional smoking cessation and healthcare costs and EQ-5D-5L data were collected at baseline, 6-month and 12-month follow-ups. Costs were presented in purchasing power parity (PPP) adjusted US dollars (US$). Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were derived from the EQ-5D-5L. Incremental total costs and incremental QALYs were estimated using regressions adjusting for respective baseline values and other baseline covariates. Uncertainty was assessed using bootstrapping. RESULTS: Mean total costs were PPP US$57.74 (95% CI 49.40 to 83.36) higher in the cytisine arm than in the placebo arm while the mean QALYs were -0.001 (95% CI -0.004 to 0.002) lower over 6 months. The cytisine arm was dominated by the placebo arm. CONCLUSIONS: Cytisine plus BS for smoking cessation among patients with TB was not cost-effective compared with placebo plus BS. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN43811467.


Subject(s)
Alkaloids , Smoking Cessation , Tuberculosis, Pulmonary , Adolescent , Adult , Azocines , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Humans , Quinolizines
13.
JAMA Intern Med ; 182(8): 814-824, 2022 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2003579

ABSTRACT

Importance: Smoking cessation interventions for hospitalized patients must continue after discharge to improve long-term tobacco abstinence. How health systems can best deliver postdischarge tobacco treatment is uncertain. Objective: To determine if health system-based tobacco cessation treatment after hospital discharge produces more long-term tobacco abstinence than referral to a community-based quitline. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial was conducted September 2018 to November 2020 in 3 hospitals in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee. Cigarette smokers admitted to a study hospital who received brief in-hospital tobacco treatment and wanted to quit smoking were recruited for participation and randomized for postdischarge treatment to health system-based Transitional Tobacco Care Management (TTCM) or electronic referral to a community-based quitline (QL). Both multicomponent interventions offered smoking cessation counseling and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for up to 3 months. Data were analyzed from February 1, 2021, to April 25, 2022. Interventions: TTCM provided 8 weeks of NRT at discharge and 7 automated calls with a hospital-based counselor call-back option. The QL intervention sent referrals from the hospital electronic health record to the state quitline, which offered 5 counseling calls and an NRT sample. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was biochemically verified past 7-day tobacco abstinence at 6 months. Self-reported point-prevalence and continuous tobacco abstinence and tobacco treatment utilization were assessed 1, 3, and 6 months after discharge. Results: A total of 1409 participants (mean [SD] age, 51.7 [12.6] years; 784 [55.6%] women; mean [SD] 16.4 [10.6] cigarettes/day) were recruited, including 706 randomized to TTCM and 703 randomized to QL. Participants were comparable at baseline, including 216 Black participants (15.3%), 82 Hispanic participants (5.8%), and 1089 White participants (77.3%). At 1 and 3 months after discharge, more TTCM participants than QL participants used cessation counseling (1 month: 245 participants [34.7%] vs 154 participants [21.9%]; 3 months: 248 participants [35.1%] vs 123 participants [17.5%]; P < .001) and pharmacotherapy (1 month: 455 participants [64.4%] vs 324 participants [46.1%]; 3 months: 367 participants [52.0%] vs 264 participants [37.6%]; P < .001). More TTCM than QL participants reported continuous abstinence for 3 months (RR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.06-1.58) and point-prevalence abstinence at 1 month (RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.08-1.35) and 3 months (RR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.09-1.37) but not at 6 months (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.99-1.29). The primary outcome, biochemically verified point-prevalence abstinence at 6 months, was not statistically significantly different between groups (19.9% vs 16.9%; RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.92-1.50). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, biochemically verified tobacco abstinence rates were not significantly different between groups at the 6-month follow-up. However, the health system-based model was superior to the community-based quitline model throughout the 3 months of active treatment. A longer duration of postdischarge treatment may sustain the superiority of the health system-based model. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03603496.


Subject(s)
Smoking Cessation , Aftercare , Counseling , Female , Hospitals , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Discharge , Tobacco Use Cessation Devices
15.
Salud Publica Mex ; 63(2, Mar-Abr): 262-267, 2021 Feb 26.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1272141

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To describe the possible risks associated to smoking in the spread and complications of Covid-19, em-phasizing in the benefits of quitting smoking. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The narrative review methodology and the established process for Cochrane rapid reviews were used. RESULTS: The scientific evidence related to smoking and Covid-19 remains limited. However, there is an already documented trend in cross-sectional, clinical studies and meta-analyses on the increased risk of adverse outcomes with Covid-19 associated with tobacco use. CONCLUSIONS: It is necessary to issue a warning that persons who smoke would have greater risks in the Covid-19 pandemic, which add to the many already known risks of tobacco use. Thus, quitting smoking becomes a relevant preventive measure to better confront SARS-CoV-2.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , Smoking Cessation , Smoking/adverse effects , Humans , Risk Factors
16.
Addiction ; 117(9): 2504-2514, 2022 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1973531

ABSTRACT

AIM: To measure whether the prevalence of use and real-world effectiveness of different smoking cessation aids has changed in England since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. DESIGN: Representative monthly cross-sectional surveys, January 2015-June 2021. SETTING: England. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 7300 adults (≥18 y) who had smoked within the previous 12 months and had made ≥1 quit attempt during that period. MEASUREMENTS: The independent variable was the timing of the COVID-19 pandemic (pre-pandemic [January 2015-February 2020] vs pandemic [April 2020-June 2021]). We analysed (i) the association between the pandemic period and self-reported use (vs non-use) during the most recent quit attempt of: prescription medication (nicotine replacement therapy [NRT]/varenicline/bupropion), NRT bought over-the-counter, e-cigarettes, traditional behavioural support and traditional remote support (telephone support/written self-help materials/websites) and (ii) the interaction between the pandemic period and use of these cessation aids on self-reported abstinence from quit date to survey. Covariates included age, sex, social grade, level of cigarette addiction and characteristics related to the quit attempt. FINDINGS: After adjustment for secular trends, there was a significant increase from the pre-pandemic to pandemic period in the prevalence of use of traditional remote support by past-year smokers in a quit attempt (OR = 2.18; 95% CI, 1.42-3.33); specifically telephone support (OR = 7.16; 95% CI, 2.19-23.45) and websites (OR = 2.39; 95% CI, 1.41-4.08). There was also an increase in the prevalence of use of prescription medication (OR = 1.47; 95% CI, 1.08-2.00); specifically varenicline (OR = 1.66; 95% CI, 1.09-2.52). There were no significant changes in prevalence of use of other cessation aids after adjustment for secular trends. People who reported using prescription medication (OR = 1.41; 95% CI, 1.09-1.84) and e-cigarettes (OR = 1.87; 95% CI, 1.62-2.16) had greater odds of reporting abstinence than people who did not. There were no significant interactions between the pandemic period and use of any cessation aid on abstinence, after adjustment for covariates and use of the other aids, although data were insensitive to distinguish no change from meaningful modest (OR = 1.34) effects (Bayes factors 0.72-1.98). CONCLUSIONS: In England, the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with an increase in use of remote support for smoking cessation and varenicline by smokers in a quit attempt up to June 2021. The data were inconclusive regarding an association between the pandemic and changes in the real-world effectiveness of popular smoking cessation aids.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems , Smoking Cessation , Adult , Bayes Theorem , Cross-Sectional Studies , England/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , Prevalence , Smokers , Smoking/epidemiology , Smoking/therapy , Tobacco Use Cessation Devices , Varenicline/therapeutic use
17.
JAMA Netw Open ; 5(8): e2225149, 2022 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1971184

ABSTRACT

Importance: Smoking cessation is an urgent public health priority given that smoking is associated with increased risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes and other diseases. It is unknown how smoking cessation changed nationally during the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective: To investigate changes in smoking cessation-related behaviors in the US during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study was conducted using 2011 to 2020 data on 788 008 individuals who had smoked in the past year from the nationally representative Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey. Representative retail scanner sales data between January 2017 and July 2021 for 1004 unique nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) universal product codes in 31 US states from NielsenIQ were also used. Exposures: Calendar year and 4-week sales periods. Main Outcomes and Measures: Changes in annual self-reported prevalence of past-year quit attempts and recent successful cessation before (ie, 2011-2019) and during (ie, 2020) the COVID-19 pandemic and changes in sales volumes in millions of pieces of nicotine gum, lozenge, and patch brands before (1271 four-week sales periods between January 2017 and February 2020) and during (558 four-week sales periods between March 2020 and July 2021) the COVID-19 pandemic were calculated. Results: The 2011 to 2020 pooled BRFSS sample (response rate range, 45.2%-49.9%) included 788 008 respondents (243 061 individuals ages 25-44 years [weighted percentage, 42.5%]; 374 519 men [weighted percentage, 55.7%]). For the first time since 2011, annual past-year quit attempt prevalence decreased between 2019 and 2020, from 65.2% (95% CI, 64.5% to 65.9%) to 63.2% (95% CI, 62.3% to 64.0%), with the largest relative decreases among individuals ages 45 to 64 years (61.4% [95% CI, 60.3% to 62.5%] vs 57.7% [95% CI, 56.3% to 59.2%]), those with 2 or more comorbidities (67.1% [95% CI, 66.0% to 68.2%] to 63.0% [95% CI, 61.6% to 64.4%]), and Black individuals (72.5% [95% CI, 70.3 to 74.6] vs 68.4% [95% CI, 65.3% to 71.3%]). Recent successful cessation remained unchanged during 2019 to 2020. Observed mean (SD) 4-week NRT sales volume in the prepandemic period was 105.6 (66.2) million gum pieces, 51.9 (31.6) million lozenges, and 2.0 (1.1) million patches. Compared with expected sales, observed sales during the COVID-19 pandemic were lower by 13.0% (95% CI, -13.7% to -12.3%) for lozenges, 6.4% (95% CI, -7.3% to -5.5%) for patches, and 1.2% (95% CI, -1.7% to -0.7%) for gum. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that serious smoking cessation activity among US adults decreased immediately and remained depressed for more than a year during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings suggest that smokers experiencing disproportionately negative outcomes during the pandemic should be reengaged and assisted in quit attempts.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Smoking Cessation , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Smoking Prevention , Tobacco Use Cessation Devices
18.
Int J Drug Policy ; 108: 103818, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1966496

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: People who are homeless and using substances frequently encounter barriers to accessing support. This paper aims to inform policy and practice by analysing changes in the tobacco, alcohol and illicit drug use of people experiencing homelessness. METHODS: Data derive from a qualitative longitudinal study (undertaken 2020/2021) and involving telephone interviews (n = 310) conducted with 34 people accommodated in two London hotels provided as part of a UK policy response to COVID-19. The hotels offered various supports, including opioid replacement therapy, prescribed alcohol, licensed nicotine replacement therapy, and e-cigarettes. Participants' substance use data were organised by Iterative Categorization and subjected to a content analysis to identify patterns and themes.. RESULTS: At entry to the hotel, 5/34 participants (14.7%) had never used alcohol nor illicit drugs; 10/34 (29.4%) had only ever used alcohol (mostly without a problem); 11/34 (32.4%) had ever used illicit drugs but without a problem; and 8/34 (23.5%) had ever had a problem with illicit drugs. Sub-groups had different socio-demographic characteristics, particularly regarding being/not being a UK national, sex, and homelessness duration. Tobacco smoking was common across all sub-groups (18/34; 52.9%). Participants were often anxious about living with others who were using substances, and some worried about their own substance use. Substance use was changeable, with more decreases than increases. Changes related to intrapersonal (psychological), interpersonal (social) and structural (resource-based) factors. For example, decreases were precipitated by people feeling motivated to change, separation from others who used drugs, and receiving treatment or support. CONCLUSION: Findings indicate that various interventions and accommodation models may benefit people who are homeless and using substances. An initiative that combined shelter and basic amenities, pharmacological treatment, psychosocial support, and space where substances were not available and other people using substances could be avoided resulted in an overall reduction in substance use amongst those accommodated.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems , Homeless Persons , Illicit Drugs , Smoking Cessation , Substance-Related Disorders , COVID-19/epidemiology , Homeless Persons/psychology , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Policy , Qualitative Research , Substance-Related Disorders/epidemiology , Substance-Related Disorders/psychology , Tobacco Use Cessation Devices
19.
BMJ Open ; 12(7): e061013, 2022 07 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1962307

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To analyse associations between living in social housing and smoking in England and to evaluate progress towards reducing disparities in smoking prevalence among residents of social housing compared with other housing types. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of nationally representative data collected between January 2015 and February 2020. SETTING: England. PARTICIPANTS: 105 562 adults (≥16 years). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Linear and logistic regression were used to analyse associations between living in social housing (vs other housing types) and smoking status, cigarettes per day, time to first cigarette, exposure to others' smoking, motivation to stop smoking, quit attempts and use of cessation support. Analyses were adjusted for sex, age, social grade, region and year. RESULTS: Adults living in social housing had two times the odds of being a smoker (ORadj=2.17, 95% CI 2.08 to 2.27), and the decline in smoking prevalence between 2015 and 2020 was less pronounced in this high-risk group (-7%; ORadj=0.98, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.01) than among adults living in other housing types (-24%; ORadj=0.95, 95% CI 0.94 to 0.96; housing tenure-survey year interaction p=0.020). Smokers living in social housing were more addicted than those in other housing types (smoking within 30 min of waking: ORadj=1.50, 95% CI 1.39 to 1.61), but were no less motivated to stop smoking (ORadj=1.06, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.17) and had higher odds of having made a serious attempt to quit in the past year (ORadj=1.16, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.25). Among smokers who had tried to quit, those living in social housing had higher odds of using evidence-based cessation support (ORadj=1.22, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.39) but lower odds of remaining abstinent (ORadj=0.63, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: There remain stark inequalities in smoking and quitting behaviour by housing tenure in England, with declines in prevalence stalling between 2015 and 2020 despite progress in the rest of the population. In the absence of targeted interventions to boost quitting among social housing residents, inequalities in health are likely to worsen.


Subject(s)
Smoking Cessation , Adult , Cross-Sectional Studies , England/epidemiology , Housing , Humans , Smoking/epidemiology
20.
Health Expect ; 25(4): 1703-1716, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1961579

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: There is limited research exploring how smoking cessation treatment should be implemented into lung cancer screening in the United Kingdom. This study aimed to understand attitudes and preferences regarding the integration of smoking cessation support within lung cancer screening from the perspective of those eligible. METHODS: Thirty-one lung cancer screening eligible individuals aged 55-80 years with current or former smoking histories were recruited using community outreach and social media. Two focus groups (three participants each) and 25 individual telephone interviews were conducted. Data were analysed using the framework approach to thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three themes were generated: (1) bringing lung cancer closer to home, where screening was viewed as providing an opportunity to motivate smoking cessation, depending on perceived personal risk and screening result; (2) a sensitive approach to cessation with the uptake of cessation support considered to be largely dependent on screening practitioners' communication style and expectations of stigma and (3) creating an equitable service that focuses on ease of access as a key determinant of uptake, where integrating cessation within the screening appointment may sustain increased quit motivation and prevent loss to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The integration of smoking cessation into lung cancer screening was viewed positively by those eligible to attend. Screening appointments providing personalized lung health information may increase cessation motivation. Services should proactively support participants with possible fatalistic views regarding risk and decreased cessation motivation upon receiving a good screening result. To increase engagement in cessation, services need to be person-centred. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This study has included patient and public involvement throughout, including input regarding study design, research materials, recruitment strategies and research summaries.


Subject(s)
Attitude to Health , Early Detection of Cancer , Lung Neoplasms , Smoking Cessation , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Attitude , Early Detection of Cancer/psychology , Focus Groups , Humans , Lung Neoplasms/diagnosis , Lung Neoplasms/prevention & control , Lung Neoplasms/psychology , Middle Aged , Motivation , Qualitative Research , Smoking Cessation/psychology , United Kingdom
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL