Ramzi G Salloum1, Jennifer H LeLaurin2, Ji-Hyun Lee3,4, Jennifer Elston Lafata5, Maribeth Williams6, Yu Wang3, James M Smith7, Stephanie A S Staras2, Scott M Strayer8, James F Thrasher9. 1. Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, 2004 Mowry Road, Gainesville, FL, USA. rsalloum@ufl.edu. 2. Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, 2004 Mowry Road, Gainesville, FL, USA. 3. Division of Quantitative Sciences, University of Florida Health Cancer Center, Gainesville, USA. 4. Department of Biostatistics, College of Public Health and Health Professions & College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA. 5. Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy and UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA. 6. Department of Community Health and Family Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Florida , Gainesville, USA. 7. Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA. 8. Department of Family Medicine and Population Health, School of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, USA. 9. Department of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent clinical trials suggest that e-cigarettes may be more effective for smoking cessation than traditional cessation aids, yet primary care physician (PCP) practices regarding e-cigarette recommendations for smokers have not been studied in-depth. OBJECTIVE: To identify factors influencing PCP recommendation of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation. DESIGN: Discrete choice experiment and survey. PARTICIPANTS: Florida PCPs. MEASURES: The survey included a discrete choice experiment in which PCPs indicated whether they would recommend e-cigarettes for each of 8 hypothetical patient profiles with the following contrasting characteristics: e-cigarette use, interest in approved cessation methods, smoking intensity, prior experience with approved cessation medications, quit intention, age, and comorbidity. Responses were summarized using descriptive statistics and standardized scores (SS). KEY RESULTS: The sample (n = 216) was predominately male (76%), white (66%), and non-Hispanic (78%), and most respondents had held their medical degree for 20+ years (77%). The response rate was 28.7%. Most PCPs thought e-cigarettes were at least somewhat effective for smoking cessation (66%) and lowering disease risk (65%); 31% perceived e-cigarettes to be equally/more effective than traditional cessation aids. PCPs were split regarding whether e-cigarettes were less (50%) or equally harmful (38%) as cigarettes. Yet, few were very confident in their ability to counsel patients on e-cigarettes risks (27%) or benefits (15%). PCPs recommended e-cigarettes in 27% of patient profiles they evaluated. The most important factors influencing the decision to recommend or not recommend e-cigarette were patients' prior use of nicotine replacement therapy with (SS = 0.22, 95% CI = 0.17-0.27) and without use of other medications for cessation (SS = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.13-0.23), and being middle age (50 years old) with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (SS = 0.16, 95% CI = 0.10-0.23). CONCLUSIONS: Considering the increased patient use of e-cigarettes and increasing use for cessation, this study highlights the need for guidelines and education to aid PCPs' counseling of patients about e-cigarette use.
BACKGROUND: Recent clinical trials suggest that e-cigarettes may be more effective for smoking cessation than traditional cessation aids, yet primary care physician (PCP) practices regarding e-cigarette recommendations for smokers have not been studied in-depth. OBJECTIVE: To identify factors influencing PCP recommendation of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation. DESIGN: Discrete choice experiment and survey. PARTICIPANTS: Florida PCPs. MEASURES: The survey included a discrete choice experiment in which PCPs indicated whether they would recommend e-cigarettes for each of 8 hypothetical patient profiles with the following contrasting characteristics: e-cigarette use, interest in approved cessation methods, smoking intensity, prior experience with approved cessation medications, quit intention, age, and comorbidity. Responses were summarized using descriptive statistics and standardized scores (SS). KEY RESULTS: The sample (n = 216) was predominately male (76%), white (66%), and non-Hispanic (78%), and most respondents had held their medical degree for 20+ years (77%). The response rate was 28.7%. Most PCPs thought e-cigarettes were at least somewhat effective for smoking cessation (66%) and lowering disease risk (65%); 31% perceived e-cigarettes to be equally/more effective than traditional cessation aids. PCPs were split regarding whether e-cigarettes were less (50%) or equally harmful (38%) as cigarettes. Yet, few were very confident in their ability to counsel patients on e-cigarettes risks (27%) or benefits (15%). PCPs recommended e-cigarettes in 27% of patient profiles they evaluated. The most important factors influencing the decision to recommend or not recommend e-cigarette were patients' prior use of nicotine replacement therapy with (SS = 0.22, 95% CI = 0.17-0.27) and without use of other medications for cessation (SS = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.13-0.23), and being middle age (50 years old) with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (SS = 0.16, 95% CI = 0.10-0.23). CONCLUSIONS: Considering the increased patient use of e-cigarettes and increasing use for cessation, this study highlights the need for guidelines and education to aid PCPs' counseling of patients about e-cigarette use.
Authors: Rajat S Barua; Nancy A Rigotti; Neal L Benowitz; K Michael Cummings; Mohammad-Ali Jazayeri; Pamela B Morris; Elizabeth V Ratchford; Linda Sarna; Eric C Stecker; Barbara S Wiggins Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2018-12-05 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Andrew S Nickels; David O Warner; Sarah Michelle Jenkins; Jon Tilburt; J Taylor Hays Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2016-08-24 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Shannon Gravely; James F Thrasher; K Michael Cummings; Janine Ouimet; Ann McNeill; Gang Meng; Eric N Lindblom; Ruth Loewen; Richard J O'Connor; Mary E Thompson; Sara C Hitchman; David Hammond; Bryan W Heckman; Ron Borland; Hua-Hie Yong; Tara Elton-Marshall; Maansi Bansal-Travers; Coral Gartner; Geoffrey T Fong Journal: Addiction Date: 2019-03-07 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Christine D Czoli; Maciej Goniewicz; Towhidul Islam; Kathy Kotnowski; David Hammond Journal: Tob Control Date: 2015-10-21 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Laura J Damschroder; David C Aron; Rosalind E Keith; Susan R Kirsh; Jeffery A Alexander; Julie C Lowery Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2009-08-07 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Muhammad Aziz Rahman; Nicholas Hann; Andrew Wilson; George Mnatzaganian; Linda Worrall-Carter Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-03-30 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Katia Gallegos-Carrillo; Inti Barrientos-Gutiérrez; Edna Arillo-Santillán; Luis Zavala-Arciniega; Yoo Jin Cho; James F Thrasher Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-01-09 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Jennifer H LeLaurin; James F Thrasher; Scott M Strayer; John Malaty; Christy Kollath-Cattano; Maribeth Williams; Oliver T Nguyen; Allie M Kellner; James M Smith; Ramzi G Salloum Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2022-03-01