ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: We assessed the knowledge of patients with regard to the association between smoking and bladder cancer, and examined the impact of a novel smoking warning label on raising awareness of this issue. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective cross-sectional study involving patients who presented to urology and family practice clinics. A questionnaire was used to assess knowledge regarding the association between smoking and various diseases. Participants were also asked to evaluate a novel smoking warning label for bladder cancer. RESULTS: A total of 291 (97%) patients responded to the questionnaire including 143 (95.3%) at urology clinics and 148 (98.7%) at family practice clinics. Overall only 45.2% of respondents were aware of the association between smoking and bladder cancer compared to 97.4% who knew that there was an association between smoking and lung cancer. There were no significant differences in knowledge between those at urology and family practice clinics. After viewing the warning label, 58.1% of respondents stated that it had changed their opinion on smoking and bladder cancer, and 74.8% felt that this label would be an effective tool to raise awareness of the issue. Patients who changed their opinion had statistically significantly less initial knowledge about the association between smoking and bladder cancer (36.7% vs 57.5% for those who did not change their opinion, p <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Awareness of the link between smoking and bladder cancer remains low. The use of a smoking warning label may help raise awareness of this important public health issue.
Subject(s)
Awareness , Product Labeling , Smoking Cessation , Smoking/adverse effects , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/etiology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Chi-Square Distribution , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Pilot Projects , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Recent evidence demonstrates that decreasing shock wave frequency from the previous standard of 120 to 60 shocks per minute results in improved fragmentation of stones located within the renal collecting system. We report the first randomized trial to our knowledge to examine the effect of a slower shock wave frequency for shock wave lithotripsy on stones located in the proximal ureter. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 163 patients with a previously untreated radiopaque calculus in the upper ureter measuring at least 5 mm underwent stratified block randomization according to stone size, and shock wave lithotripsy at 60 or 120 shocks per minute. Stone-free status at 3 months was confirmed with noncontrast computerized tomography or a plain abdominal x-ray and ultrasound study. RESULTS: Of the patients 77 were randomized to 60 shocks per minute and 86 were randomized to 120 shocks per minute. The groups were similar in gender, age, body mass index and initial stone area. At 3 months the 60 shocks per minute group had a higher overall stone-free rate (64.9% vs 48.8%, p = 0.039). Significantly fewer shocks were administered to patients treated at 60 shocks per minute (mean 2,680 vs 2,940, p <0.001). However, mean treatment times were longer (44.3 vs 24.5 minutes, p <0.001). Patients treated with 60 shocks per minute required fewer auxiliary procedures (29.9% vs 45.4%) (p = 0.031). CONCLUSIONS: Decreasing the rate of shock wave administration from 120 to 60 shocks per minute results in improved stone-free rates. A slower treatment rate of proximal ureteral stones reduces the need for additional shock wave lithotripsy or more invasive treatments to render patients stone-free, without any increase in morbidity, and with an acceptable increase in treatment time.
Subject(s)
Lithotripsy/methods , Ureteral Calculi/therapy , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Ureteral Calculi/pathologyABSTRACT
214 teachers and headmasters of Bucharest high schools were questioned in respect of their smoking habits to find out how widespread smoking is among teachers and how this influences the pupils. 33% of the teachers and 38.9% of the headmasters smoked. 69.2% of the smokers belonged to the age group above 35 years, i.e. the majority, whereas the age group below 20 years included 56.9% smokers. Although 93.8% of the teachers and headmasters are convinced that smoking is harmful to health, 7.4% of them smoke in the classroom and 37% in the presence of pupils. The results of this investigation show that attention should be paid to the smoking habits of teachers since setting a good example for adolescents is as important in the case of teachers as it is in the case of physicians.
