Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco
-
Smoking is a risk factor for various eye conditions. Brief smoking cessation interventions have demonstrated effectiveness when delivered by a range of health care professionals. Optometrists are well placed in the community to advise otherwise healthy smokers to quit, yet remain relatively neglected in smoking cessation research and policy. In a national survey, this study investigated self-reported practices of UK optometrists for delivering brief tobacco smoking cessation interventions to patients. ⋯ Optometrists are well placed in the community to deliver brief advice interventions to a large population of smokers. This survey provides a comprehensive description of current UK optometry practice related to the provision of evidence-based brief tobacco smoking cessation interventions to patients. Although optometrists perceive advising on smoking cessation as part of their role, numerous substantial gaps in current practice and training remain, which need to be addressed through targeted interventions to increase implementation.
-
Adults with mental health conditions (MHCs) smoke at higher rates, are more nicotine dependent, and have more trouble quitting smoking than those without MHCs. About half of smokers who call state-funded quitlines report MHCs, and those with such conditions have cessation rates 8%-10% lower than those without MHCs. This article describes a clinical pilot of a tailored protocol for quitline callers with MHCs. ⋯ Nearly half of all quitline callers report a MHC. This clinical quality improvement pilot shows that delivering a tailored tobacco cessation program for smokers with MHCs is feasible and acceptable to quitline callers. Participants in the pilot group had higher engagement in treatment, doubling the number of coaching calls received and using more nicotine replacement than comparison groups. Further investigation is needed to determine the effect of this program on cessation rates, although preliminary outcomes are promising.
-
Harm perceptions of menthol cigarettes may contribute to their appeal and use. African-Americans, women, and younger smokers disproportionately use menthol cigarettes, and may misperceive harm of menthol cigarettes. ⋯ Menthol cigarettes have been historically marketed with messages conveying lower harm than other cigarettes. Little is known about how contemporary adult menthol smokers perceive the harm of their usual brand, and potential differences by race, gender, and young adult versus older adult age group. After adjusting for other factors, menthol smokers were more likely than nonmenthol smokers to perceive their cigarette brand as more harmful than other brands. Further, the association between menthol smoking and harm perceptions differed by race and gender, but not by age group (young adult vs. older adult). This type of large-scale study identifies critical links between menthol smoking and harm perceptions among vulnerable smokers that will inform regulatory actions designed to decrease smoking-related harm.
-
We report on second-hand smoke (SHS) exposure based on saliva cotinine levels among children in Bangladesh-a country with laws against smoking in public places. ⋯ Children bear the biggest burden of disease due to SHS exposure than any other age group. However, children living in many high-income countries have had a sharp decline in their exposure to SHS in recent years. What remains unknown is if children living in low-income countries are still exposed to SHS. Our study suggests that despite having a ban on smoking in public places, most primary school children in Dhaka, Bangladesh are still likely to be exposed to SHS.
-
Secondhand smoke exposure is responsible for an estimated 50000 deaths per year among nonsmokers in the United States. Smoke-free air laws reduce secondhand smoke exposure but often encounter opposition over concerns about their economic impact. Expansion of these laws has stagnated and efforts to weaken existing laws may exacerbate existing disparities in exposure. Studies at the state and local levels have found that smoke-free air laws do not generally have an adverse effect, but there are no recent estimates of the impact of these laws nationally. ⋯ Smoke-free air laws are associated with reductions in negative health outcomes and decreased smoking prevalence. Despite this clear public health argument and strong public support, passage of new laws has stagnated and exemptions are being used to weaken existing laws. The ability to make both a health and business case in support of existing laws may also bolster the case for expansion. This study provides an updated look at the economic impact of smoke-free air laws nationally through 2015. The lack of adverse findings provides additional support for these laws as public health win-win.