MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study consisted of qualitative, semi-structured Focus Group Discussions (for students, n = 23) and in-depth interviews (for patients, n = 9); to phenomenologically describe the perceptions of participants involved in the VC. Each session was recorded with the participants' permission. The recorded session was transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed using the qualitative data analysis software, NVivo™.
RESULTS: The major themes that emerged were: (1) General opinions and experiences, (2) Content of VCs, (3) Remote access to counselling, (4) Patient-clinician relationships, (5) Technical issues, (6) Changes after VCs, and (7) Future application. Most students and patients were quite comfortable with VC as it is convenient, allowing students to be creative and avoid the hassle of transport and traffic. However, some of the students felt that it lacked the personal touch and guidance from lecturers who would normally be present during physical class.
CONCLUSION: Virtual counselling enables remote access to counselling, but it is also subjected to some limitations, especially regarding lack of clinical assessments, human touch and internet issues. Though participants were optimistic about adapting it in the future, multiple factors must be considered. Ultimately, the behavioural change will depend on the patient's motivation in making a difference.
METHODS: A search for economic evaluation studies was conducted from inception to 30 September 2022, on PubMed, Embase, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (CEA) Registry by Tufts Medical Centre, EconLit and the NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED). Eligible studies were included if they were (1) conducted among adults ages 18 years old and older who were smokers attempting to quit for the first time; (2) compared varenicline to behaviour support with bupropion or NRT, behaviour support alone and unaided cessation; and (3) performed a CEA or cost-utility analysis. The INBs were calculated and pooled across studies stratified by country income level and study perspective using the random-effects model. Statistical heterogeneity between studies was assessed using the I2 statistic and Cochrane Q statistic.
RESULTS: Of the 1433 identified studies, 18 studies were included in our review. Our findings from healthcare system/payer perspective suggested that the use of varenicline is statistically significantly cost-effective compared with bupropion (pooled INB, $830.75 [95% confidence interval, $208.23, $1453.28]), NRTs ($636.16 [$192.48, $1079.84]) and unaided cessation ($4212.35 [$1755.79, $6668.92]) in high-income countries. Similarly, varenicline is also found to be cost-effective compared to bupropion ($2706.27 [$1284.44, $4128.11]), NRTs ($3310.01 [$1781.53, $4838.50]) and behavioural support alone ($5438.22 [$4105.99, $6770.46]) in low- and middle-income countries.
CONCLUSION: Varenicline is cost-effective as a smoking cessation aid when compared with behavioural support with bupropion or nicotine replacement therapies and behavioural support alone in both high-income countries and low- and middle-income countries, from the healthcare system/payer perspective in adult smokers who attempt to quit for the first time.
METHODS: Following a single day capacity building program on smokeless tobacco / areca nut control, two self-administered questionnaires were used to assess the improvement of knowledge and change of attitudes among 663 GDPs.
RESULTS: Majority had a good knowledge on harmful effects of SLT but not on areca nut. Knowledge of the current legislation on SLT control in Sri Lanka and carcinogenicity of areca nut was not satisfactory. Almost all agreed that proper counseling leads to patient quitting the habit, a formal training is necessary to conduct tobacco control activities and it should be a part of the regular treatment modalities. More than 80% of the participants support strict legislation. Most important factors leading to poor involvement in tobacco cessation activities were lack of expertise and inadequate educational material and not breach of patient privacy and lack of financial incentives. 20.1% dental surgeons had consumed smokeless tobacco / areca nut products in the past and only a few were current users of tobacco and/or areca nut.
CONCLUSIONS: Well planned workshops are efficient in improving knowledge, practices and attitudes of dental surgeons towards SLT/AN cessation.
.
METHODS: Country-wise aggregate data from the Global Health Professions Student Survey on 'current cigarette smoking' (smoking cigarettes on 1 or more days during the past 30 days), and 'current use of tobacco products other than cigarettes' (chewing tobacco, snuff, bidis, cigars or pipes, 1 or more days during the past 30 days) were analysed. For each WHO region, we estimated mean prevalence rates of tobacco use weighted by the population of the sampling frame and aggregate proportions for 'health professionals' role' and 'cessation training' indicators using 'metaprop' command on Stata V.11.
RESULTS: A total of 107 527 student health professionals participated in 236 surveys done in four health profession disciplines spanning 70 countries with response rates ranging from 40% to 100%. Overall, prevalence of smoking was highest in European countries (20% medical and 40% dental students) and the Americas (13% pharmacy to 23% dental students). Other tobacco use was higher in eastern Mediterranean (10%-23%) and European countries (7%-13%). In most WHO regions, ≥70% of the students agreed that health professionals are role models, and have a role in advising about smoking cessation to their patients and the public. Only ≤33% of all student health professionals in most WHO regions (except 80% dental students in the Eastern Mediterranean region) had received formal training on smoking cessation approaches and ≥80% of all students agreed that they should receive formal cessation training.
CONCLUSIONS: Tobacco control should take place together with medical educators to discourage tobacco use among student health professionals and implement an integrated smoking cessation training into health professions' curricula.
DESIGN: Use of the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project surveys of smokers, using the 2007 survey wave (or later, where necessary).
SETTINGS: Australia, Canada, China, France, Germany, Ireland, Malaysia, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, South Korea, Thailand, United Kingdom, Uruguay and United States.
PARTICIPANTS: Samples of smokers from 15 countries.
MEASUREMENTS: Self-report on use of cessation aids and on visits to health professionals and provision of cessation advice during the visits.
FINDINGS: Prevalence of quit attempts in the last year varied from less than 20% to more than 50% across countries. Similarly, smokers varied greatly in reporting visiting health professionals in the last year (<20% to over 70%), and among those who did, provision of advice to quit also varied greatly. There was also marked variability in the levels and types of help reported. Use of medication was generally more common than use of behavioural support, except where medications are not readily available.
CONCLUSIONS: There is wide variation across countries in rates of attempts to stop smoking and use of assistance with higher overall use of medication than behavioural support. There is also wide variation in the provision of brief advice to stop by health professionals.
Aims: This study aimed to explore the general public's perception toward electronic cigarette use. Public support toward electronic cigarette regulation was also examined.
Settings and Design: This was a Malaysian population-based survey.
Materials and Methods: Data were obtained from the National E-Cigarette Survey (NECS) 2016, which used a multistage stratified cluster sampling household survey representing all Malaysian adults aged 18 years old. A cross-sectional survey was conducted among a total of 4288 adults.
Statistical Analysis Used: Descriptive and logistic regression analysis.
Results: Majority were aged 25-44 years old (44%), completed at least secondary education (69%), of Malay ethnicity (73%), and married (68%). Majority (88.1%) have never used electronic cigarette. A quarter (25.5%) perceived electronic cigarette helps people quit cigarette smoking, whereas 20.3% perceived electronic cigarette helps people to maintain cigarette abstinence. Approximately 85% believed that electronic cigarette use does not help in improving breathing and coughing. Majority (91.8%) disagreed that electronic cigarettes should be allowed in places where tobacco smoking is banned. Thus, 63.4% agreed that electronic cigarette should be banned completely rather than regulated.
Conclusion: Majority of general public had negative perception about electronic cigarette use.