Author
Listed:
- Sanne Wärjerstam
(WHO Collaborating Centre, Clinical Health Promotion Centre, Research Unit for Dietary Studies, The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, DK-2400 Copenhagen, Denmark)
- Camilla Dew-Hattens
(WHO Collaborating Centre, Clinical Health Promotion Centre, Research Unit for Dietary Studies, The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, DK-2400 Copenhagen, Denmark)
- Mette Rasmussen
(WHO Collaborating Centre, Clinical Health Promotion Centre, Research Unit for Dietary Studies, The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, DK-2400 Copenhagen, Denmark
National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, DK-1455 Copenhagen, Denmark)
- Berit Lilienthal Heitmann
(WHO Collaborating Centre, Clinical Health Promotion Centre, Research Unit for Dietary Studies, The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, DK-2400 Copenhagen, Denmark
Section for General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, DK-1172 Copenhagen, Denmark)
- Rie Raffing
(WHO Collaborating Centre, Clinical Health Promotion Centre, Research Unit for Dietary Studies, The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, DK-2400 Copenhagen, Denmark
These authors contributed equally to this work.)
- Hanne Tønnesen
(WHO Collaborating Centre, Clinical Health Promotion Centre, Research Unit for Dietary Studies, The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, DK-2400 Copenhagen, Denmark
These authors contributed equally to this work.)
Abstract
Achieving high follow-up rates after smoking cessation interventions (SCIs) is a general challenge. The aim of this study was to identify preferences among patients and therapists for improving follow-up rates and to assess smoking status at 6 months among patients lost to follow-up. From the Danish STOPbase for Tobacco and Nicotine, which collects data on SCI across health care, 20 representative patients lost to follow-up by routine procedures were identified together with 11 therapists. All participated in individual semi-structured phone interviews, which for patients also included 6-month smoking status. Deductive and inductive analyses were performed. Four themes emerged from the analyses with several subthemes, all regarding contacts. Both patients and therapists preferred to intensify the follow-up process by boosting it with additional attempts and using voice messages, e-mail and/or SMS, calling at specified times of the day and avoiding calls from unknown numbers. In addition, some patients mentioned that they were busy or were not carrying their mobile devices at the time of a call as a barrier. Some therapists mentioned that barriers could include an expectation of relapse, but also a poor mental state, the time of day and patient fear of public systems. Among the patients originally lost to follow-up, 35% (95% CI 16%–59%) experienced continuous smoking cessation for 6 months, and the overall national rate was 22% (21.6–23.3%). In conclusion, both patients and therapists preferred intensified follow-up. The 6-month smoking status for patients lost to follow-up seemed to be similar to that of the routinely followed-up patients. These findings will be examined experimentally in a larger study.
Suggested Citation
Sanne Wärjerstam & Camilla Dew-Hattens & Mette Rasmussen & Berit Lilienthal Heitmann & Rie Raffing & Hanne Tønnesen, 2024.
"Preferences for Follow-Up Procedures among Patients Lost to Follow-Up after Smoking Cessation Intervention among Therapists—An Interview Study,"
IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(6), pages 1-14, June.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:21:y:2024:i:6:p:726-:d:1407855
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:21:y:2024:i:6:p:726-:d:1407855. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.