Implementing Smoking Cessation Interventions for Tobacco Users Within Oncology Settings

Author:

Young Alison L.1,Stefanovska Elena1,Paul Christine1,McCarter Kristen1,McEnallay Melissa1,Tait Jordan1,Vinod Shalini23,White Kate4,Day Fiona15,Stone Emily67

Affiliation:

1. School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia

2. South West Sydney Clinical Campuses, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

3. Cancer Therapy Centre, Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

4. Cancer Research Nursing Group, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

5. Department of Medical Oncology, Calvary Mater Newcastle Hospital, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia

6. School of Clinical Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

7. Department of Thoracic Medicine, St Vincent’s Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

Abstract

ImportancePatients with cancer who continue to smoke tobacco experience greater treatment-related complications, higher risk of secondary cancers, and greater mortality. Despite research to improve smoking cessation care within clinical oncology, implementation of proposed interventions within routine care remains challenging.ObjectiveTo identify and recommend implementation strategies for smoking cessation interventions associated with improved screening, advice-giving, and referral for tobacco users recently diagnosed with cancer, as well as shifting smoking behaviors and attitudes in this patient population.Evidence ReviewMEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and PsycINFO databases, as well as Google Scholar, were searched for articles published before September 7, 2020, using terms related to cancer, smoking cessation, and implementation science. Outcomes of interest were study characteristics, implementation strategies, and outcome measures (screening, advice, referral, abstinence rates, and attitudes). The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized and nonrandomized studies was used to assess bias. The review was conducted and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline and Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) guideline. Implementation strategies were categorized according to Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) study taxonomy. A systematic analysis was conducted focusing on studies with low or moderate risk of bias due to high heterogeneity in outcome measurement.FindingsIn total, 6047 records were screened, yielding 43 articles (10 randomized clinical trials and 33 nonrandomized studies). Four strategies were associated with improved screening, advice-giving, and referral: (1) supporting clinicians, (2) training implementation stakeholders (including clinicians), (3) changing the infrastructure, and (4) developing stakeholder interrelationships.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this systematic review, supporting clinicians by providing cessation care through a trained tobacco specialist was identified as important for achieving short-term abstinence and changing attitudes among patients with cancer. Combined with a theoretical framework and stakeholder involvement, these strategies provide the basis for successful implementation of cessation support; this systematic review serves as an illustration of the methodological application and synthesis of implementation studies and other medical conditions more generally.

Publisher

American Medical Association (AMA)

Subject

Oncology,Cancer Research

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3