Impact of a long-term tobacco-free policy at a comprehensive cancer center: a series of cross-sectional surveys

Smoking is not closely related to revision for periprosthetic joint infection after primary total knee and hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The influence of smoking on the risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains unclear. The objective was to explore the impact of smoking on PJI after primary total knee (TKA) and hip (THA) arthroplasty.

HYPOTHESIS

Current smoking patients should have an increased risk of PIJ compared with nonsmoking patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective registry-based observational cohort study was performed. A total of 4591 patients who underwent primary TKA (3076 patients) or THA (1515) were included. According to the smoking status at the time of arthroplasty, patients were classified as nonsmokers (3031 patients), ex-smokers (688), and smokers (872). Multivariate analysis included smoking status, age, gender, education level, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, diagnosis (osteoarthritis, rheumatism), diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, perioperative blood transfusion, site of arthroplasty (knee, hip), length of operation, and length of stay.

RESULTS

There were PJI after 59 (1.9%) TKA and 27 (1.8%) THA (p=0.840). There were PJI in 47 (1.6%) nonsmokers, 12 (1.7%) ex-smokers, and 17 (1.9%) smokers (p=0.413). There were wound complications (delayed wound healing and superficial wound infection) in 34 (0.7%) nonsmokers, 9 (1.3%) in ex-smokers, and 17 (1.9%) in smokers (p=0.045). In multivariate analysis, only the female gender was a significant predictor of PJI (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-2.4 [p=0.039]). Specifically, the categories of ex-smokers (OR 0.8, 95% CI 0.2-1.7 [p=0.241]) and smokers (OR 1.1, 95% CI 0.6-1.5 [p=0.052]) were not significant predictors. The 4-year arthroplasty survival with PJI as the endpoint was 99.1% (95% CI: 99.0-99.7) for nonsmokers, 99.0% (95% CI: 98.8-99.2) for ex-smokers, and 98.7% (95% CI: 98.2-99.0) for smokers was not significantly different between smoking status groups (p=0.318).

DISCUSSION

Smoking was not identified as a significant predictor for PJI following primary TKA or THA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, prospective cohort study.

Smoking Prevalence, Knowledge and Perceptions on Tobacco Control Among Healthcare Professionals: A Survey in an Italian Cancer Center

Smoking is recognized as the major cause of lung cancer. Healthcare professionals play an important role in lung cancer prevention policies, as they act as a source of guidance for patients and advocates. The following survey evaluated prevalence, knowledge, and attitudes toward tobacco smoking among a sample of workers in "IRCCS Istituto Tumori "Giovanni Paolo II" of Bari, an Italian cancer hospital. An anonymous questionnaire was completed by 104 healthcare professionals to collect personal and occupational data about smoking status, knowledge about the harms of smoking, current legislation in place, Second-Hand Smoke (SHS) awareness, and, for ex-smokers, the reasons for quitting. Among participants, 17.8% were current smokers, 26.2% former smokers, and 56% never smoked. Only 40% acknowledged that the smoking ban is generally respected, and 63.2% reported that they smoke during working hours. Most of the participants perceived tobacco control policy as an efficient way to protect public health. Currently, the implementation of Italian anti-smoking legislation has so far improved neither smoking cessation rates nor the will to quit smoking completely. Our experience highlights that to date the anti-smoking strategies have limited efficacy even in a cancer center; in fact, there is still a large prevalence of smokers among hospital personnel. Therefore, it is strongly suggested that interventions be shared with all healthcare workers, specifically aimed at developing a culture of health promotion.

Prevalence of tobacco use in healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To estimate tobacco use prevalence in healthcare workers (HCW) by country income level, occupation and sex, and compare the estimates with the prevalence in the general population.

METHODS

We systematically searched five databases; Medline, EMBASE, CINHAL Plus, CAB Abstracts, and LILACS for original studies published between 2000 and March 2016 without language restriction. All primary studies that reported tobacco use in any category of HCW were included. Study extraction and quality assessment were conducted independently by three reviewers, using a standardised data extraction and quality appraisal form. We performed random effect meta-analyses to obtain prevalence estimates by World Bank (WB) country income level, sex, and occupation. Data on prevalence of tobacco use in the general population were obtained from the World Health Organisation (WHO) Global Health Observatory website. The review protocol registration number on PROSPERO is CRD42016041231.

RESULTS

229 studies met our inclusion criteria, representing 457,415 HCW and 63 countries: 29 high-income countries (HIC), 21 upper-middle-income countries (UMIC), and 13 lower-middle-and-low-income countries (LMLIC). The overall pooled prevalence of tobacco use in HCW was 21%, 31% in males and 17% in females. Highest estimates were in male doctors in UMIC and LMLIC, 35% and 45%, and female nurses in HIC and UMIC, 21% and 25%. Heterogeneity was high (I2 > 90%). Country level comparison suggest that in HIC male HCW tend to have lower prevalence compared with males in the general population while in females the estimates were similar. Male and female HCW in UMIC and LMLIC tend to have similar or higher prevalence rates relative to their counterparts in the general population.

CONCLUSIONS

HCW continue to use tobacco at high rates. Tackling HCW tobacco use requires urgent action as they are at the front line for tackling tobacco use in their patients.

Impact of an Online Training Program in Smoking Cessation Interventions in Hospitals

PURPOSE

To assess changes in the self-reported performance of smoking cessation interventions according to the 5A's model (Ask; Advise; Assess; Assist; and Arrange follow-up) among clinicians; and to identify the main barriers and facilitators in smoking cessation implementation before and after an online smoking cessation training program.

DESIGN

Pre-post evaluation.

METHODS

We assessed self-reported smoking cessation interventions in the implementation of the 5A's model among clinicians working in Catalan hospitals (Spain). In addition, we assessed individual-, behavioral-, and organizational-level factors that act as barriers and facilitators in the implementation of the 5A's model. We used a questionnaire of 63 items reflecting each of the 5A's performance (scored from 0 = none to 10 = most possible). The questionnaire was completed both immediately before and 6 months after the training. We analyzed the data of those participants who had a clinical role and answered pre- and post-questionnaires. We used the nonparametric test for paired data (Wilcoxon) to examine changes in scores.

FINDINGS

A total of 127 clinicians completed the pre-post questionnaire; 63.0% were registered nurses, 17.3% were nursing assistants, 7.9% were physicians, and 11.8% were other professionals (p < .001). Overall, there were significant increases in the implementation of the assist component (from a score of 4.5 to 5.2; p < .003) and arrange a follow-up component (from 3.6 to 4.5; p < .001) of the intervention. Scores in the perception of the level of overall preparation, preparedness in using smoking cessation drugs, level of competence, and organizational recognition improved (p < .001) at the follow-up; however, the score in the perception that implementing smoking cessation is part of their job decreased (from 6.3 to 4.4; p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The online training had a positive impact on the implementation of assist and arrange follow-up components. Although self-preparedness in the management of smokers increased, the motivation and involvement of key professionals decreased. Organizational factors related to the incorporation of resources (such as protocols, records, etc.) should be improved for the correct progression of smoking cessation interventions within the institutions.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Smoking cessation training programs should incorporate some motivational content to increase the engagement of health professionals in smoking cessation interventions in their clinical practice.

Smoking among hospitalized patients: A multi-hospital cross-sectional study of a widely neglected problem

INTRODUCTION

A comprehensive smoking ban was recently enacted for acute-care hospital campuses in Spain. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and patterns of smoking among inpatients before and during hospitalization.

METHODS

Multi-center cross-sectional study was conducted in 13 hospitals in the province of Barcelona, Spain from May 2014 to May 2015. Participants were adults who provided informed consent. The sample size was calculated to be representative of each hospital (prevalence 29.4%, precision ± 5%, error 5%). We approached 1228 subjects, 888 accepted to participate and 170 were replaced (were not available or declined to participate). Final sample comprised 1047 subjects. We used a computer-assisted personal interview system to collect data, including sociodemographic variables and use of tobacco before and during hospitalization. Smoking status was validated with exhaled carbon monoxide. We calculated overall tobacco prevalence and investigated associations with participant and center characteristics. We performed multiple polytomous and multilevel logistic regression analyses to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), with adjustments for potential confounders.

RESULTS

In all, 20.5% (95% CI: 18.1–23.0) of hospitalized patients were smokers. Smoking was most common among men (aOR=7.47; 95% CI: 4.88–11.43), young age groups (18–64 years), and individuals with primary or less than primary education (aOR=2.76; 95% CI: 1.44–5.28). Of the smokers, 97.2% were daily consumers of whom 44.9% had medium nicotine dependence. Of all smokers, three-quarters expressed a wish to quit, and one-quarter admitted to consuming tobacco during hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate the need to offer smoking cessation interventions among hospitalized patients in all units and service areas, to avoid infringements and increase patient safety, hospital efficiency, and improve clinical outcomes. Hospitalization represents a promising window for initiating smoking interventions addressed to all patients admitted to smoke-free hospitals, specially after applying a smoke-free campus ban.

Changing the smoking habit: prevalence, knowledge and attitudes among Umbrian hospital healthcare professionals

BACKGROUND

Health care professionals should work against smoking habit to promote a correct life style. This study aimed to evaluate smoking prevalence and attitudes towards tobacco among Umbrian hospital professionals in a period between 2006 and 2015, since the approbation of the law that ban smoking in hospitals and all public areas in 2003.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was carried out using a questionnaire administered in 2006, 2011 and 2015 to healthcare professionals. It consists of 53 multiple-choice questions. Potential predictors of current smoking habits were evaluated using univariate and multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

The sample included 475 healthcare professionals. Current smokers constituted 34.53% of the sample and no significant difference (p = 0.257) emerged in prevalence over time (33.74% in 2006; 36.02% in 2011 and 33.77% in 2015). The risk of being a smoker increased by not considering the smoking habit as the main cause of preventable deaths (OR = 2.25; 95% CI: 1.47- 3.45). The strongest risk factor, which was significant in both models (p < 0.01), was being against the "No Smoking" law (OR = 18.90; 95% CI: 2.43-147.71; adjusted OR = 22.10; 95% CI: 1.85-264.78).

CONCLUSIONS

The hospital staff has higher prevalence of smoking than the general population. The No Smoking law alone has been shown to be inadequate. Effective results can be achieved only by a common strategy and shared intervention programmes that are based on a workplace health promotion strategy. That for the moment has demonstrated to give interesting outcomes in modifying deep-rooted behaviour patterns.

The role of middle managers in tobacco control after a national smoke-free hospital campus ban

BACKGROUND

Much of the recent health services research on tobacco control implementation has explored general views and perceptions of health professionals and has rarely taken into account middle management's perspectives. We state that middle managers may facilitate the implementation of smoke-free campus bans and thereby improve their effectiveness. The aim of this study was to assess middle managers' behaviors to enforce a new national smoke-free hospital campus ban, to evaluate their perceptions of the level of compliance of the new regulation, and to explore their attitudes towards how smoking affects the work environment.

METHODS

We used a cross-sectional survey, conducted online to evaluate middle managers of a general hospital in Catalonia, Spain. Close-ended and open-ended questions were included. Results were analyzed by using quantitative and qualitative methods. The managers' open opinions to the proposed topics were assessed using UCINET, and a graph was generated in NetDraw.

RESULTS

Sixty-three of the invited managers (78.7 %) participated in the survey. 87.2 % of them agreed that the hospital complied with the smoke-free campus ban and 79.0 % agreed that managers have an important role in enforcing the ban. They also perceived that smoking disturbs the dynamics of work, is a cause of conflict between smokers and non-smokers, and harms both the professional and the organization images. However, 96.8 % of respondents have never given out fines or similar measures and their active role in reminding others of the policy was limited; in addition, 68.2 % considered that hospitals should provide tobacco cessation treatments. Smoker middle managers were more likely than non-smokers to perceive that smoking has little impact on work.

CONCLUSIONS

Middle managers play a limited role in controlling tobacco consumption; smokers are less prone to think that smoking disturbs work dynamics than non-smokers. Tailored training and clear proceedings for middle managers could encourage more active roles.

Impact of institutional smoking bans on reducing harms and secondhand smoke exposure

BACKGROUND

Smoking bans or restrictions can assist in eliminating nonsmokers' exposure to the dangers of secondhand smoke and can reduce tobacco consumption amongst smokers themselves. Evidence exists identifying the impact of tobacco control regulations and interventions implemented in general workplaces and at an individual level. However, it is important that we also review the evidence for smoking bans at a meso- or organisational level, to identify their impact on reducing the burden of exposure to tobacco smoke. Our review assesses evidence for meso- or organisational-level tobacco control bans or policies in a number of specialist settings, including public healthcare facilities, higher education and correctional facilities.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the extent to which institutional smoking bans may reduce passive smoke exposure and active smoking, and affect other health-related outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the reference lists of identified studies. We contacted authors to identify completed or ongoing studies eligible for inclusion in this review. We also checked websites of state agencies and organisations, such as trial registries. Date of latest searches was 22nd June 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered studies that reported the effects of tobacco bans or policies, whether complete or partial, on reducing secondhand smoke exposure, tobacco consumption, smoking prevalence and other health outcomes, in public healthcare, higher educational and correctional facilities, from 2005 onwards.The minimum standard for inclusion was having a settings-level policy or ban implemented in the study, and a minimum of six months follow-up for measures of smoking behaviour. We included quasi-experimental studies (i.e. controlled before-and-after studies), interrupted time series as defined by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group, and uncontrolled pre- and post-ban data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two or more review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion in the review. Due to variation in the measurement of outcomes we did not conduct a meta-analysis for all of the studies included in this review, but carried out a Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect meta-analysis, pooling 11 of the included studies. We evaluated all studies using a qualitative narrative synthesis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 observational studies in this review. We found no randomized controlled trials. Twelve studies are based in hospitals, three in prisons and two in universities. Three studies used a controlled before-and-after design, with another site used for comparison. The remaining 14 studies used an uncontrolled before-and-after study design. Five studies reported evidence from two participant groups, including staff and either patients or prisoners (depending on specialist setting), with the 12 remaining studies investigating only one participant group.The four studies (two in prisons, two in hospitals) providing health outcomes data reported an effect of reduced secondhand smoke exposure and reduced mortality associated with smoking-related illnesses. No studies included in the review measured cotinine levels to validate secondhand smoke exposure. Eleven studies reporting active smoking rates with 12,485 participants available for pooling, but with substantial evidence of statistical heterogeneity (I² = 72%). Heterogeneity was lower in subgroups defined by setting, and provided evidence for an effect of tobacco bans on reducing active smoking rates. An analysis exploring heterogeneity within hospital settings showed evidence of an effect on reducing active smoking rates in both staff (risk ratio (RR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval ( CI) 0.64 to 0.78) and patients (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.98), but heterogeneity remained in the staff subgroup (I² = 76%). In prisons, despite evidence of reduced mortality associated with smoking-related illnesses in two studies, there was no evidence of effect on active smoking rates (1 study, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.16).We judged the quality of the evidence to be low, using the GRADE approach, as the included studies are all observational.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found evidence of an effect of settings-based smoking policies on reducing smoking rates in hospitals and universities. In prisons, reduced mortality rates and reduced exposure to secondhand smoke were reported. However, we rated the evidence base as low quality. We therefore need more robust studies assessing the evidence for smoking bans and policies in these important specialist settings.

A cross sectional evaluation of a total smoking ban at a large Australian university

BACKGROUND

Total smoking bans have been found to contribute positively to the health of non-smokers by reducing exposure to second-hand smoke, and to enhance the likelihood of cessation among smokers.

METHODS

Two cross-sectional electronic surveys of staff and students at a large Australian university were conducted prior (n = 969) and 1 year post (n = 670) the implementation of a smoke free campus policy. Demographics, tobacco use, intention to quit, attitudes towards smoking and smoking restrictions and awareness of and attitudes towards the campus smoking policy were measured.

RESULTS

Exposure to second-hand smoke (SHS) reduced significantly (p < 0.001) one year after policy implementation. Smoking prevalence was similar at both time periods (T1 9.3 %; T2 8.4 %) and over half of smokers indicated they were planning to quit smoking in the future (T1 65.5 vs T2 62.3 %). There was a significant increase in positive responses to the statement the campus should be totally smoke free including all outdoor areas at T2 compared to T1 (T1 60.8 vs T2 71.4 %; p < 0.001), however respondents felt there should be places on campus for smokers to smoke (T1 53.6 vs T2 47 %; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study found a significant positive difference in exposure SHS after implementation of the total ban. Although prevalence of smoking in this study was low, the proportion of respondents who were contemplating smoking cessation suggests support for smokers would be beneficial. Continued awareness raising, education and enforcement is likely to enhance the long term outcomes of the total ban.

Hospital doctors' smoking behavior and attitude towards smoking cessation interventions for patients: a survey in an Italian Comprehensive Cancer Centre

PURPOSE

Tobacco control guidelines recommend all healthcare professionals to ask patients about their smoking status and to offer them at least minimal cessation advice. However, few data are available about the daily practice of hospital clinicians who work with smoking cancer patients. This study assesses, in a comprehensive cancer center, the physicians' smoking habit, their clinical practice in offering a smoking cessation intervention to patients who smoke, and the training they received in this field.

METHODS

A Web-based survey was sent to 285 physicians.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 75%. Sixty-two percent, 24%, and 14% of responders were never, former, and current smokers, respectively. Six percent of all responding physicians have already participated in smoking cessation training and 43% of them declared their willingness to be trained. Eighty-six percent of all responding physicians asked about the patients' smoking status, 50% routinely advised patients to quit smoking, and 32% assessed their motivation to do so. Smoking cessation guidelines were not followed mostly for lack of time, fear to increase patients' stress, and lack of smoking cessation training. Ninety-four percent of responding physicians knew the smoking cessation service for outpatients and 65% referred at least one patient, 66% of responding physicians knew the service for inpatients, and 36% of them asked for at least one intervention in the ward.

CONCLUSIONS

This study pointed out partial adherence of the physicians working in a leading cancer center to the smoking cessation guidelines. The clinicians' smoking habits did not influence the training and the clinical practice in offering patients smoking cessation interventions.

[Smoking prevalence in hospital workers: meta-analysis in 45 Catalan hospitals]

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the prevalence of smoking in workers from hospitals within the Catalan Network for Smoke-free hospitals from 2009 to 2012 according to workers' sociodemographic characteristics and the type of hospital.

METHOD

A meta-analysis was performed of prevalence surveys from representative samples of workers from 45 hospitals. The combined prevalence for all hospitals was calculated using a regression model with a random effects model weighted by sample size.

RESULTS

The overall prevalence of smoking was 28.1% (95%CI: 26.1 to 30.0%) with a maximum and minimum of 40.3% and 19.1%, respectively. The health professionals with the lowest prevalence of smoking were physicians (16.4%; 95%CI: 12.9 to 19.9) and nurses (25.4%; 95%CI 21.6 to 29.2).

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of smoking in hospital health workers was lower than in the general population of working age. Physicians were the group with the lowest smoking prevalence. Smoking cessation should be promoted among other professional groups.

Association of Cigarette Prices with the Prevalence of Smoking in Korean University Students: Analysis of Effects of the Tobacco Control Policy

BACKGROUND

Increased pricing of cigarettes might be one of the most effective approaches for reducing the prevalence of smoking. This study aimed to investigate the effects of increasing cigarette prices through taxation by a tobacco intervention policy on the changes in smoking prevalence in Korean university students.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The participants in this study were 23,047 healthy university students aged 18-29 years from a health examination in 2011-2015. We investigated the adjusted prevalence of daily and occasional smoking before and after increasing cigarette prices through taxation.

RESULTS

The prevalence of occasional smoking was significantly decreased in 2015 from 2014 in both male (from 10.7% in 2014 to 5.4%) and female (from 3.6% to 1.1%) students, but the prevalence of daily smoking did not decrease significantly. The frequency of individuals who had attempted smoking cessation during the past year was significantly higher among occasional smokers in male students (90.2%) compared with daily smokers (64.9%). For female students, there were no differences in experience of smoking cessation, willingness for smoking cessation, or E-cigarette experience between daily and occasional smokers.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that a policy of increasing cigarette prices through taxation is associated with decreases in the prevalence of occasional smokers, who have relatively lower nicotine dependence compared with individuals who smoke daily. The results of our study suggest that social support and direct intervention for smoking cessation at the community level are needed for university students alongside the pricing policy.