4.3 Article

Views from the Coalface: What Do English Stop Smoking Service Personnel Think about E-Cigarettes?

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph121215048

关键词

e-cigarettes; stop smoking services; cessation; harm reduction

资金

  1. UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies (UKCTAS), a UK Centre for Public Health Excellence
  2. British Heart Foundation
  3. Cancer Research UK
  4. Economic and Social Research Council
  5. Medical Research Council
  6. National Institute of Health Research under UK Clinical Research Collaboration
  7. National Centre for Smoking Cessation and Training (NCSCT)
  8. University College London
  9. Medical Research Council [MR/K023195/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  10. National Institute for Health Research [09/161/01] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The UK Stop Smoking Services (SSS) are a source of information and advice on e-cigarettes for smokers and thus it is important to understand the knowledge of, and attitudes towards, e-cigarettes held by stop smoking practitioners. The datasets were English SSS quarterly monitoring returns (n = 207,883) and an online survey of English SSS practitioners, managers, and commissioners between 26th November and 15th December 2014 (n = 1801). SSS monitoring data suggested 2% of clients were using e-cigarettes to quit with SSS and that clients using e-cigarettes had similar quit rates to clients using Varenicline. Most SSS personnel are waiting for licenced e-cigarettes to become available before they will recommend them to clients. However, less than a quarter view e-cigarettes as a good thing. Managers and commissioners were more positive than practitioners. SSS personnel working for the NHS (hospitals and GP surgeries) were less positive about e-cigarettes than those employed elsewhere. E-cigarettes were cited as the most important reason for the recent decline in service footfall. Thus dissemination of information about e-cigarettes needs to be examined and services should address their stance on e-cigarettes with some urgency.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据