Martin Raw1, Ann McNeill, Rachael Murray. 1. UK Centre for Tobacco Control Studies, Division of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Nottingham, Nottingham City Hospital, Nottingham, UK. martin@martinraw.com
Abstract
AIMS: The aims of this study are to describe the tobacco dependence treatment systems in five countries at different stages of development of their systems, and from different income levels and regions of the world, and to draw some lessons from their experiences that might be useful to other countries. METHODS AND DATA SOURSES: Data were drawn from an earlier survey of treatment services led by M.R. and A.M., from Party reports to the Secretariat of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, and from correspondents in the five countries. These data were entered onto a standard template by the authors, discussed with the correspondents to ensure they were accurate and to help us interpret them, and then the templates were used as a basis to write prose descriptions of the countries' treatment systems, with additional summary data presented in tables. RESULTS: Two of the middle-income countries have based their treatment on specialist support and both consequently have very low population coverage for treatment. Two countries have integrated broad-reach approaches, such as brief advice with intensive specialist support; these countries are focusing currently upon monitoring performance and guaranteeing quality. Cost is a significant barrier to improving treatment coverage and highlights the importance of using existing infrastucture as much as possible. CONCLUSIONS: Perhaps not surprisingly the greatest challenges appear to be faced by large, lower-income countries that have prioritized more intensive but low-reach approaches to treatment, rather than developing basic infrastructure, including brief advice in primary care and quitlines.
AIMS: The aims of this study are to describe the tobacco dependence treatment systems in five countries at different stages of development of their systems, and from different income levels and regions of the world, and to draw some lessons from their experiences that might be useful to other countries. METHODS AND DATA SOURSES: Data were drawn from an earlier survey of treatment services led by M.R. and A.M., from Party reports to the Secretariat of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, and from correspondents in the five countries. These data were entered onto a standard template by the authors, discussed with the correspondents to ensure they were accurate and to help us interpret them, and then the templates were used as a basis to write prose descriptions of the countries' treatment systems, with additional summary data presented in tables. RESULTS: Two of the middle-income countries have based their treatment on specialist support and both consequently have very low population coverage for treatment. Two countries have integrated broad-reach approaches, such as brief advice with intensive specialist support; these countries are focusing currently upon monitoring performance and guaranteeing quality. Cost is a significant barrier to improving treatment coverage and highlights the importance of using existing infrastucture as much as possible. CONCLUSIONS: Perhaps not surprisingly the greatest challenges appear to be faced by large, lower-income countries that have prioritized more intensive but low-reach approaches to treatment, rather than developing basic infrastructure, including brief advice in primary care and quitlines.
Authors: Jair de Jesus Mari; Luís Fernando Tófoli; Cristiano Noto; Li M Li; Alessandra Diehl; Angélica M Claudino; Mario F Juruena Journal: Drugs Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 9.546
Authors: Ron Borland; Lin Li; Pete Driezen; Nick Wilson; David Hammond; Mary E Thompson; Geoffrey T Fong; Ute Mons; Marc C Willemsen; Ann McNeill; James F Thrasher; K Michael Cummings Journal: Addiction Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Emma Beard; Jamie Brown; Susan Michie; Eileen Kaner; Petra Meier; Robert West Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2016-12-08 Impact factor: 3.295