4.3 Article

National assessment of recommendations from healthcare providers for smoking cessation among adults with cancer

Journal

CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 78, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2021.102088

Keywords

Smoking cessation; Cancer diagnosis; Counseling

Funding

  1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH)
  2. Food & Drug Administration's (FDA) Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) [P50HL120163, U54HL120163]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cancer survivors benefit from evidence-based smoking cessation treatment, but it is unclear how often cancer patients receive advice to quit smoking. The study found that cancer survivors were more likely to receive advice to quit smoking compared to adults without any cancer history.
Cancer survivors benefit from evidence-based smoking cessation treatment. A crucial first step in this process is a clinician recommending that the patient quit smoking. However, contemporary delivery of advice to quit among patients with cancer is not well known. In a cross-sectional analysis of all adult smokers included in a prospective population-representative study of US adults, we analyzed the frequency that patients reported receiving advice to quit smoking from a healthcare professional according to reported cancer history (no cancer, tobacco-related cancer, non-tobacco related cancer history). Among an estimated 28.3 million smokers, 9.3% reported a history of cancer, 48.8% of which were tobacco-related cancers. In general, advice to quit was reported by more (67.8%) cancer survivors than those adults without any cancer (56.0%). After adjustment for sociodemographic factors, smokers with a non tobacco-related cancer (0.51, 95% CI 0.32-0.83) and those without any cancer history (0.43, 95% CI 0.30-0.63) were both less likely to report being advised to quit smoking than patients with a tobacco related cancer history.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available