BACKGROUND: Thirty percent of all cancers are directly attributable to smoking, yet tobacco cessation treatment is not commonly provided at cancer clinics. OBJECTIVES: To assess current tobacco cessation practices among Wisconsin cancer clinics and to measure their receptivity to onsite training and technical assistance to increase their delivery of evidence-based tobacco cessation treatment. PROCESS: An online survey to assess current tobacco use identification and treatment clinical practice at 16 Wisconsin cancer clinics affiliated with the Wisconsin Oncology Network. OUTCOMES: Fifteen clinics responded to the survey and 11 agreed to onsite academic detailing. Most clinics reported that they identify tobacco users, but fewer advised smokers to quit or provided evidence-based tobacco cessation treatments. IMPLICATIONS: Less than half of Wisconsin cancer clinics consistently seize the oncology visit to address tobacco use, and the majority of cancer clinics are receptive to onsite academic detailing to increase the frequency and effectiveness of their tobacco cessation interventions.
BACKGROUND: Thirty percent of all cancers are directly attributable to smoking, yet tobacco cessation treatment is not commonly provided at cancer clinics. OBJECTIVES: To assess current tobacco cessation practices among Wisconsin cancer clinics and to measure their receptivity to onsite training and technical assistance to increase their delivery of evidence-based tobacco cessation treatment. PROCESS: An online survey to assess current tobacco use identification and treatment clinical practice at 16 Wisconsin cancer clinics affiliated with the Wisconsin Oncology Network. OUTCOMES: Fifteen clinics responded to the survey and 11 agreed to onsite academic detailing. Most clinics reported that they identify tobacco users, but fewer advised smokers to quit or provided evidence-based tobacco cessation treatments. IMPLICATIONS: Less than half of Wisconsin cancer clinics consistently seize the oncology visit to address tobacco use, and the majority of cancer clinics are receptive to onsite academic detailing to increase the frequency and effectiveness of their tobacco cessation interventions.
Authors: Glen Morgan; Robert A Schnoll; Catherine M Alfano; Sarah E Evans; Adam Goldstein; Jamie Ostroff; Elyse Richelle Park; Linda Sarna; Lisa Sanderson Cox Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: J Lee Westmaas; Christina C Newton; Victoria L Stevens; W Dana Flanders; Susan M Gapstur; Eric J Jacobs Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2015-04-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Megan A Sheffer; Timothy B Baker; David L Fraser; Robert T Adsit; Timothy A McAfee; Michael C Fiore Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2012-01 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Graham W Warren; James R Marshall; K Michael Cummings; Benjamin Toll; Ellen R Gritz; Alan Hutson; Seyedeh Dibaj; Roy Herbst; Carolyn Dresler Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Benjamin A Toll; Thomas H Brandon; Ellen R Gritz; Graham W Warren; Roy S Herbst Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2013-04-09 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: James L Klosky; Vida L Tyc; Danette M Garces-Webb; Joanna Buscemi; Robert C Klesges; Melissa M Hudson Journal: Cancer Date: 2007-12-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Kathleen Gali; Brittany Pike; Matthew S Kendra; Cindy Tran; Priya Fielding-Singh; Kayla Jimenez; Rachelle Mirkin; Judith J Prochaska Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-03-22 Impact factor: 3.390