黄浦区医务人员吸烟状况与戒烟服务情况的调查

目的了解黄浦区医疗卫生单位医务人员的吸烟现况及向病人提供戒烟服务的情况。方法对本区申报参加上海市无烟医疗卫生的单位,以问卷的方式进行调查。结果黄浦区医务人员的吸烟率为13.7%;96.0%的医务人员知晓本单位开展无烟医疗机构,95.5%的医务人员赞同创建无烟医疗机构;10.7%的病人主动寻求医务人员提供戒烟帮助,35.4%的医务人员主动向病人提供戒烟服务;14.1%的医务人员曾经得到过戒烟方法与技巧的培训,43.7%的医务人员打算学习戒烟的方法与技巧。吸烟者与非吸烟者在支持创建无烟医疗机构、提供戒烟服务的态度上存在差别。结论创建无烟医疗卫生机构应做好吸烟医务人员的戒烟工作;医务人员对病人提供戒烟服务的意识和能力均有待提高。     

上海市金山区无烟医院吸烟与戒烟服务现状分析

目的了解上海市金山区无烟医院职工吸烟及提供戒烟服务情况,提出针对性改进建议。方法以问卷调查方式对金山区无烟医院在职职工进行调查,并对结果进行统计分析。结果本次调查的无烟医院职工1494人,总吸烟率为17．5％,吸烟以男性为主,吸烟率为53．1％;行政后勤岗位和外科医生吸烟率较高,分别为36．2％和27．8％。95．0％的职工赞同创建无烟医院,14．3％的职工接受过戒烟方法和技巧的培训,34．9％的医务人员主动向病人提供戒烟服务。结论无烟医院的吸烟率仍较高,接受戒烟服务方法和技能培训及主动向病人提供戒烟服务率较低,需进一步加强。     

上海市医疗卫生机构及医务人员控烟现状调查

目的了解医院的控烟现状和医务人员的吸烟情况及劝阻病人吸烟的态度,探索无烟医疗卫生机构的创建策略。方法对全市399个医疗卫生单位进行《上海市医疗卫生机构控烟状况调查》;在2004年已申报无烟医院的257个单位中进行《医务人员吸烟现状与戒烟服务情况》的调查。结果医疗卫生单位中有129家已开展戒烟服务,占被调查单位的34.67%,其中有89家开展戒烟服务的单位遇到困难,占开展戒烟服务单位的68.99%。共调查医务人员48446人,男性吸烟率42.00%,女性吸烟率0.70%;95.80%的医务人员赞同创建无烟医院;93.81%的医务人员认为有必要劝阻病人吸烟或者向病人提供戒烟服务;14.60%的医务人员曾接受过戒烟方法和技巧的培训。结论创建无烟医院可以为病人创造一个无烟的就诊环境,有效限制医务人员的吸烟行为,可强化医务人员开展劝阻病人戒烟的意识。     

医务人员吸烟状况与戒烟服务调查分析

目的了解开展无烟医疗机构的医务人员自身吸烟状况和对参与控烟的态度、行为及其原因,为有效地促使医务人员这一专业人群积极参与控烟工作提供依据。方法对卢湾区无烟医疗机构的各部门职工共576人进行问卷调查。结果总吸烟率为9.55%,男性吸烟率39.7%。95%左右的医务人员对创建无烟医疗机构和对提供戒烟服务表示积极态度。实际工作中只有49.7%的医务工作者曾向病人主动提供戒烟服务。影响医务人员主动提供戒烟服务的因素主要是职业性质、对提供戒烟服务的主观态度和愿望以及是否接受过戒烟方法和技巧的培训。结论加强对医务人员的控烟责任教育,提高医务人员尤其是医生及护士提供戒烟服务的技巧和能力,才能更有效地控烟。     

医务人员吸烟状况与提供戒烟服务态度、行为调查

目的了解某医院医务人员的吸烟现况及向病人提供戒烟服务的情况,为医院持续控烟工作的改进提供科学依据。方法采用分层随机抽样法,对某院在岗医务人员进行吸烟现状与戒烟服务情况问卷调查,包括个人基本情况、医务人员吸烟情况、帮助吸烟者戒烟情况、控烟态度等四部分。结果 327名医务人员中吸烟率为10.40%,男、女吸烟率分别为19.28%（32/166）、1.24%（2/161）;初中及以下、高中/中专、大专/本科、硕士及以上学历者吸烟率分别为18.75%（12/64）、4.85%（5/103）、12.31%（16/130）、3.33%（1/30）;医生、护士、医技、行政后勤人员吸烟率分别为12.82%（15/117）、0（0/77）、12.28%（7/57）、15.79%（12/76）,不同学历、不同岗位医务人员吸烟率差异均有统计学意义（均P〈0.05）。117名医生中仅有9.40%会主动询间病人吸烟情况;32.48%会劝告病人戒烟。327名医务人员中87.77%赞同创建无烟医院;45.26%认为有必要向病人提供戒烟服务。吸烟者与非吸烟者打算向吸烟的病人提供戒烟服务的比例分别为32.35%（11/34）、80.89%（237/293）,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.01）。结论必须提高医务人员对病人提供戒烟服务的意识和能力,做好医务人员的戒烟控烟工作。     

社区医院控烟策略可行性探讨

[目的 ]　了解徐汇区社区医院医务人员和门诊病人对医院控烟态度 ,为医院控烟活动的开展提供依据。　[方法 ]　对上海市徐汇区 2所社区医院的医务人员和门诊病人进行问卷调查。　 [结果 ]　绝大多数医务人员 (98.8% )支持无烟医院的创建 ,门诊病人 97.8%支持无烟医院的创建 ,只有 41.8%的医务人员能经常劝说吸烟的病人戒烟 ,仅有2 1.4%的医务人员接受过帮助病人戒烟的培训。　 [结论 ]　必须强化社会支持环境和加强吸烟有害健康的健康教育 ,促进医务人员戒烟活动的开展 ;加强对他们进行帮助吸烟者戒烟的培训 ,引导医务人员控烟活动的开展。     

广州市医生吸烟及控烟知识、态度、行为现况调查分析

目的了解广州市医生吸烟和控烟知识、态度和行为现状，为开展医生戒烟活动、医生帮助吸烟者戒烟服务提供科学依据。方法采用分层整群随机抽样方法，询问调查抽中的广州市1级、2级和3级医院的一线临床医生。结果医生的总吸烟率17．3％，现吸烟率为15．2％，其中40～岁年龄段现吸烟率明显高于其他年龄组，男性现吸烟率25．9％，女性无人吸烟，影响现吸烟率的主要是男性吸烟者；1、2级医院现吸烟率明显高于3级医院。80．4％的医生赞成医生应该为病人树立不吸烟榜样，52．7％的医生赞成或不反对医生应主动向病人提供戒烟服务，并希望了解更多吸烟和控烟有关知识。结论有必要在医生中开展吸烟和被动吸烟的危害、戒烟知识和方法培训，令医生自己减少吸烟，并使医生更主动地、为病人提供更专业的戒烟服务。     

徐汇区4家医院医务人员的吸烟和戒烟服务提供现状调查

目的了解上海市徐汇区参与创建全国无烟医院项目的4家医院中医务人员吸烟情况和戒烟服务提供情况,为上海市无烟医院建设及推进工作提供经验和依据。方法采用问卷调查与定性访谈相结合的方法对4家医院的医务人员进行调查,了解他们的吸烟、戒烟情况、对吸烟相关危害知识的认识及戒烟服务提供情况。结果 4家项目医院的医务人员吸烟率为12.5%,21.6%的吸烟医生每日吸烟量在10支以上,58.4%的吸烟医生吸烟年数超过10年。绝大多数的医务人员对吸烟危害的相关知识、吸烟相关疾病有正确认识,并对控烟持积极态度。51.1%的医务人员在诊疗时经常询问病人的吸烟情况,但只有0.4%的医生给病人使用过戒烟药物。结论有必要在医务人员中加强控烟健康教育,使其能积极主动地为病人提供更专业的戒烟服务。     

沈阳市某医院职工吸烟状况及控烟行为调查

目的 了解沈阳市创建无烟医院职工吸烟现状、控烟知识、态度和行为,为更好地开展控烟工作提供依据。 方法 使用统一问卷,采用询问和自我填表的形式对沈阳市某无烟医院的在职职工进行调查。 结果 本次调查的无烟医院职工2722人,总吸烟率为13.2%,吸烟以男性为主,吸烟率为36.2%;93.4%的职工表示支持在医院实施100%无烟政策;96.2%的医务人员表示会主动建议吸烟患者戒烟。 结论 医院的吸烟率仍较高,必须进一步在医院职工中开展吸烟危害、戒烟知识和戒烟方法的培训,深化无烟医院创建工作。     

慈溪市医务人员吸烟状况及控烟对策

目的：通过对医务人员吸烟状况调查，探索控制医务人员吸烟的有效途径，方法：用整群抽样方法，抽查慈溪市7所医院的539名医务人员，进行无记名问卷调查，结果：医务人员中94．99％的人认为吸烟与肺癌有关，85．34％的人认为被动吸烟受害比主动吸烟深，但吸烟率仍在20．41％，其中男性46．22％，女性1．91％，67．35％的医务人员认为他们在病人面前吸烟有许导病人吸烟作用，57．51％的医务人员认为他们在病人面前吸烟是一种不明的行为，80％吸烟曾在病人面前吸过烟，88．13％的医务人员认为创建无烟医院科室是控制医务人员吸烟的有效措施之一，结论：男性医务人员吸烟状况较严重，特别是在病人面前吸烟对周围人群有很大的负面影响，应控制医务人员吸烟，推动社会人群的控烟工作。     

上海市居民吸烟、戒烟及被动吸烟现状

目的 了解上海市15岁及以上居民的吸烟、戒烟和被动吸烟的流行水平,为有针对性的制定控烟措施提供基础资料.方法 利用2007年上海市慢性病及其危险因素监测调查数据,对17174名(男性8072人,女性9102人)15岁及以上居民的吸烟、戒烟和被动吸烟状况进行描述性分析,指标包括吸烟率、现在吸烟率、常吸烟率、重型吸烟率、戒烟率、成功戒烟率、被动吸烟率.结果 男性居民的吸烟率、现在吸烟率、常吸烟率、重型吸烟率分别为61.8%,54.8%,48.5%,28.3%,女性分别为1.2%,1.0%,0.7%和0.2%.人群的戒烟率、成功戒烟率分别为11.3%和8.6%.非吸烟者的被动吸烟率为43.1%,暴露场所主要是工作场所和家中.结论 上海市居民吸烟率、被动吸烟率处于较高水平,戒烟率较低,烟草控制面临巨大挑战.     

Smoking Cessation

Smoking accounts for significant morbidity and mortality and has major economic consequences for healthcare delivery throughout the world. Government policy such as increasing taxes and restricting advertising go some way to reduce smoking, but the social and economic factors that affect target populations will impact on the success of any strategy.Public health interventions can also contribute to increasing cessation rates. The most successful interventions appear to be those characterised by personalised advice and assistance, repeated in different forms over the longest feasible period of time. Pharmacological aids, which are important components of a cessation programme, include nicotine replacement therapy in the form of chewing gum, patches, nasal spray, oral inhaler or sublingual tablets; bupropion (amfebutamone) has been approved for use in some countries. As the community pharmacy is the major point of supply of such products, the pharmacist is in a key position to encourage and support clients who wish to stop smoking.A number of studies have examined the role of the community pharmacist in assisting smokers through the so-called ‘cycle of change’. These studies have utilised a model that offers individualised advice through a motivational technique to encourage a change in behaviour; nicotine replacement therapy is optional. Follow-up is an essential part of these programmes to monitor progress and to provide additional support. Evaluations of these pharmacy-based initiatives have confirmed the importance of a multifaceted approach in achieving success in smoking cessation, i.e. behaviour modification, nicotine replacement therapy and client support.     

控烟法规在控烟工作中的可行性分析

吸烟有害健康 ,这已被科学证明 ,也被世界公认 ,但要使几亿烟民和准烟民真正认识到这个问题并改变吸烟的不良习惯 ,却不是一件容易的事情。目前 ,上海、北京等不少城市出台了禁止在公共场所吸烟的规定 ,山东也有济南、青岛等几个城市颁布了在市区内公共场所禁止吸烟的规定 ,起到很好的控烟效果。那么在全省范围内全面实行公共场所禁烟如何 ?人们对控烟法规的态度到底怎样 ?为了解这些问题 ,为全省控烟法规的出台找出更有力、更可靠的依据 ,我们进行了控烟法规可行性调查。现报告如下 :作者单位 :山东省健康教育所 (济南市 ,2 5 0 0 14)对象…     

深圳市常住居民吸烟、戒烟与被动吸烟现状分析

目的 了解深圳市15岁以上常住居民吸烟、戒烟与被动吸烟的分布和流行情况,为控制烟草使用、创建无烟环境提供依据.方法 采用多阶段整群随机抽样的方法,对深圳市8 782名15岁以上常住居民进行问卷调查.结果 调查人群吸烟率为16.47％,现在吸烟率为16.34％,常吸烟率为14.30％,重型吸烟率为7.74％,被动吸烟率为...     

Smoking cessation

We estimate that more than 80% of tobacco-smokers hope that they will stop smoking one day. The major obstacle is the psychologic and pharmacologic dependence generated by the cigarette. Different weaning methods have been tried, but their rate of success remains low. The nicotinic sustitution by transdermic track (patch) will give good results providing it is prescribed within the framework of a medical help to wean away from smoking tobacco.     

The Effect of Household Smoking Bans on Household Smoking

Objectives. Because household smoking levels and adoption of domestic smoking rules may be endogenously related, we estimated a nonrecursive regression model to determine the simultaneous relationship between home smoking restrictions and household smoking.Methods. We used data from a May–June 2012 survey of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, households with smokers (n = 456) to determine the simultaneous association between smoking levels in the home and the presence of home restrictions on smoking.Results. We found that home smoking rules predicted smoking in the home but smoking in the home had no effect on home smoking restrictions.Conclusions. Absent in-home randomized experiments, a quasi-experimental causal inference suggesting that home smoking rules result in lower home smoking levels may be plausible.Secondhand smoke (also known as “passive smoking” or “environmental tobacco smoke”) is a health hazard for children and adults.1–5 Institutional, city, or national smoking restrictions reduce smoking prevalence and the average consumption of smokers while naturally limiting exposure to secondhand smoke.6–11 At the household level, the research focus has been on the efficacy of household bans on indoor smoking to reduce nonsmokers’ and children’s exposure.12–18 Many studies have found that smokers in households with smoking bans or restrictive smoking rules smoke fewer cigarettes than smokers in households with no bans or rules.19–23 This relationship appears to suggest that household smoking restrictions are effective in reducing household smoking. But do household bans really reduce household smoking? Unfortunately, this situation is not the same as when smoking bans are implemented in bars,24,25 hospitals,26 prisons,27 schools,28 or countries.29,30 In all of these examples, the bans are introduced independently of the prevalent smoking levels of the institution, city, or country because passive smoking exposure is seen as an important health hazard that requires an administrative or legislative response.In households, this analogy does not necessarily hold. Household smoking could be negatively related to household smoking bans because smokers who smoke fewer cigarettes or households with little smoking may implement a household smoking ban whereas heavier smokers or households with multiple smokers could not do so.23,31 In this situation, household smoking bans are endogenous32 relative to household smoking, which implies that household smoking levels cause the smoking ban, not the reverse. To determine which explanation is correct, an experiment that implemented a household ban randomly in regard to household smoking levels would be appropriate.14,33,34 Under experimental conditions, the ban would be independent of household smoking levels and the effect of implementing a household smoking ban on smoking could be unambiguously estimated.