Jeroen W G Derksen1, Graham W Warren2, Karin Jordan3, Stefan Rauh4, Ruth Vera García5, Deirdre O'Mahony6, Samreen Ahmed7, Peter Vuylsteke8, Sinisa Radulovic9, Nikolaos Tsoukalas10, Piotr J Wysocki11, Markus Borner12, Alvydas Cesas13, Anneli Elme14, Heikki Minn15, Gustav J Ullenhag16, Jeanine M L Roodhart17, Miriam Koopman17, Anne M May18. 1. Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. 3. Department of Medicine V, Hematology, Oncology and Rheumatology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. 4. Department of Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Emile Mayrisch, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg. 5. Department of Medical Oncology, Complejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain. 6. Department of Medical Oncology, Cork University Hospital, Cork, Ireland. 7. Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospitals of Leicester, Leicester, UK. 8. Department of Medical Oncology, UCLouvain, CHU Namur, Belgium; Faculty of Medicine, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana. 9. Department of Experimental Oncology, Institute for Oncology and Radiology of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia. 10. Department of Oncology, 401 General Military Hospital of Athens, Athens, Greece. 11. Department of Oncology, Jagiellonian University - Medical College, Cracow, Poland. 12. Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland. 13. Department of Medical Oncology, Klaipeda University Hospital, Klaipeda, Lithuania. 14. Department of Oncology and Hematology, North Estonia Medical Centre Foundation, Tallinn, Estonia. 15. Department of Oncology, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland. 16. Department of Oncology, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden; Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Science of Life Laboratory, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. 17. Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands. 18. Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands. Electronic address: a.m.may@umcutrecht.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Smoking cessation after a cancer diagnosis is associated with improved overall survival. Few studies have reported oncologists' cessation practice patterns, but differences between the curative and palliative settings have not been described. We aimed to study the oncologist's perceptions on patients' tobacco use, current practices and barriers to providing smoking cessation support, while distinguishing between treatment with curative (C) and palliative (P) intent. METHODS: In 2019, an online 34-item survey was sent to approximately 6235 oncologists from 16 European countries. Responses were descriptively reported and compared by treatment setting. RESULTS: Responses from 544 oncologists were included. Oncologists appeared to favour addressing tobacco in the curative setting more than in the palliative setting. Oncologists believe that continued smoking impacts treatment outcomes (C: 94%, P: 74%) and that cessation support should be standard cancer care (C: 95%, P: 63%). Most routinely assess tobacco use (C: 93%, P: 78%) and advise patients to stop using tobacco (C: 88%, P: 54%), but only 24% (P)-39% (C) routinely discuss medication options, and only 18% (P)-31% (C) provide cessation support. Hesitation to remove a pleasurable habit (C: 13%, P: 43%) and disbelieve on smoking affecting outcomes (C: 3%, P: 14%) were disparate barriers between the curative and palliative settings (p < 0.001), but dominant barriers of time, resources, education and patient resistance were similar between settings. CONCLUSION: Oncologists appear to favour addressing tobacco use more in the curative setting; however, they discuss medication options and/or provide cessation support in a minority of cases. All patients who report current smoking should have access to evidence-based smoking cessation support, also patients treated with palliative intent given their increasing survival.
BACKGROUND: Smoking cessation after a cancer diagnosis is associated with improved overall survival. Few studies have reported oncologists' cessation practice patterns, but differences between the curative and palliative settings have not been described. We aimed to study the oncologist's perceptions on patients' tobacco use, current practices and barriers to providing smoking cessation support, while distinguishing between treatment with curative (C) and palliative (P) intent. METHODS: In 2019, an online 34-item survey was sent to approximately 6235 oncologists from 16 European countries. Responses were descriptively reported and compared by treatment setting. RESULTS: Responses from 544 oncologists were included. Oncologists appeared to favour addressing tobacco in the curative setting more than in the palliative setting. Oncologists believe that continued smoking impacts treatment outcomes (C: 94%, P: 74%) and that cessation support should be standard cancer care (C: 95%, P: 63%). Most routinely assess tobacco use (C: 93%, P: 78%) and advise patients to stop using tobacco (C: 88%, P: 54%), but only 24% (P)-39% (C) routinely discuss medication options, and only 18% (P)-31% (C) provide cessation support. Hesitation to remove a pleasurable habit (C: 13%, P: 43%) and disbelieve on smoking affecting outcomes (C: 3%, P: 14%) were disparate barriers between the curative and palliative settings (p < 0.001), but dominant barriers of time, resources, education and patient resistance were similar between settings. CONCLUSION: Oncologists appear to favour addressing tobacco use more in the curative setting; however, they discuss medication options and/or provide cessation support in a minority of cases. All patients who report current smoking should have access to evidence-based smoking cessation support, also patients treated with palliative intent given their increasing survival.
Authors: Ajla Mujcic; Matthijs Blankers; Brigitte Boon; Irma M Verdonck-de Leeuw; Filip Smit; Margriet van Laar; Rutger Engels Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2022-03-17 Impact factor: 7.076
Authors: Annika Ryan; Alison Luk Young; Jordan Tait; Kristen McCarter; Melissa McEnallay; Fiona Day; James McLennan; Catherine Segan; Gillian Blanchard; Laura Healey; Sandra Avery; Sarah White; Shalini Vinod; Linda Bradford; Christine L Paul Journal: Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol Date: 2022-09-28