scholarly journals Cigarette Smoking Cessation and Total and Cause-Specific Mortality: A 22-Year Follow-up Study Among US Male Physicians

2011 ◽  
Vol 171 (21) ◽  
pp. 1959 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yin Cao
1998 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
K.-M. Liaw ◽  
C.-J. Chen

Maturitas ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 75 (3) ◽  
pp. 246-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Se Li ◽  
Lynn Rosenberg ◽  
Lauren A. Wise ◽  
Deborah A. Boggs ◽  
Michael LaValley ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (December) ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Ayse Esen ◽  
Yuksel Soylem ◽  
Secil Arica ◽  
Gulten Belgin ◽  
Nadire Gonultas

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (10) ◽  
pp. 1805-1815 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica K Pepper ◽  
Anh Nguyen Zarndt ◽  
Matthew E Eggers ◽  
James M Nonnemaker ◽  
David B Portnoy

Abstract Introduction Pursuant to the Tobacco Control Act (TCA), the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is developing new cigarette health warnings to convey the negative health consequences of cigarette smoking. Aims and Methods This study assessed which of 15 revised warning statements (10 on topics similar to TCA statements and 5 on other topics) promoted greater understanding of cigarette smoking risks relative to TCA statements. In February 2018, adolescent and adult smokers and adolescents susceptible to smoking (n = 2505) completed an online experiment. Control condition participants viewed TCA statements; treatment condition participants viewed combinations of TCA and revised statements. Analyses compared revised statements to TCA statements on the same health topic or to randomly selected TCA statements if there were no statements on the same topic. Results Relative to TCA statements, 12 of 15 revised statements were more likely to be considered new information, and 12 resulted in more self-reported learning. Three revised statements made participants think more about health risks than TCA statements; the reverse was true for one revised statement. Participants rated most TCA and revised statements as moderately believable and informative. Seven revised statements were found to be less believable and factual, and one revised statement more believable and factual. Treatment condition participants correctly selected more smoking-related health conditions than control condition participants (13.79 versus 12.42 of 25). Conclusions Findings suggest that revised statements can promote greater understanding of cigarette smoking risks. Results informed FDA’s selection of warning text that was paired with images for testing in a follow-up study. Implications The US FDA may adjust the text of the cigarette warning statements provided in the TCA if the revised statements promote greater public understanding of the negative health consequences of cigarette smoking. Most of the revised warning statements tested were more likely to be considered new information and resulted in more self-reported learning compared with paired TCA statements, providing support for using revised statements as part of cigarette health warnings. These results informed the development of pictorial cigarette warnings by FDA that were tested in a follow-up study and included in a proposed rule.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
N Ioakeimidis ◽  
C Georgakopoulos ◽  
E Emmanouil ◽  
I Dima ◽  
E Solomou ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose The interaction between smoking and blood pressure (BP) is complex. Despite the strong association between cigarette smoking and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, there is paucity about the effect of pharmacotherapies for treating tobacco dependence on BP in already established arterial hypertension. Varenicline has been shown to be an effective and well-tolerated pharmaceutical intervention for smoking cessation. Aim of the study was to investigate the improvement in BP control in smokers with a diagnosis of hypertension who quit or reduced substantially their tobacco consumption by using varenicline and the association of nicotine dependence with BP changes. Methods A total of 89 (mean age:48±7, 52 males) regular smokers (28±9 pack-years) with a diagnosis of hypertension and on anti-hypertensive drugs were studied. All patients received low-intensity counseling and pharmacotherapy with varenicline (1 mg twice daily) for 12 weeks. Point prevalence smoking abstinence was defined by self-report of complete abstinence in the 7 days before the 12 week clinic visit (end of therapy). Office BP was measured at baseline and each follow-up visit (4 and 12 weeks) office BP. The Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND) was used for assessing nicotine dependence. High nicotine dependence (ND) was defined as a FTND score ≥6. Results At 12 weeks, 60 (67%) patients were abstinent from smoking and 14 (16%) were non-abstainers who reduced daily consumption to 50% of baseline. The mean time interval between the initiation of treatment with varenicline and smoking abstinence was 1.8±0.6 weeks. There were not significant differences in age, baseline BP level, severity of nicotine dependence and total cigarette consumption (pack-years) between the two groups. Systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) decreased significantly in abstainers (by 7.2 and 5.5 mmHg at 12 weeks, P<0.01 and P<0.05, respectively) while the decrease in BP level in non-abstainers was minimal. Among patients with sustained tobacco abstinence, 18 were highly ND and 42 had mild and moderate ND. The two ND groups had similar age and BP levels at baseline. Changes in SBP and DBP from baseline in smokers with arterial hypertension between the two ND groups are illustrated in Figure. The observed reductions in SBP and DBP were significant (P<0.05, both for SBP and DBP) when comparing the high ND group to the mild/moderate ND group at 12 weeks. No severe adverse reactions were reported with varenicline use throughout the entire follow-up duration. Conclusion Varenicline may help smokers with arterial hypertension under antihypertensive therapy to remain abstinent from tobacco cigarette smoking. A novel and important message of this study is also the substantial improvements in office SBP and DBP in highly nicotine dependent sustained tobacco abstainers. ND-BP changes after varenicline therapy Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuji Higuchi ◽  
Masaki Fujiwara ◽  
Naoki Nakaya ◽  
Maiko Fujimori ◽  
Chinatsu Hayashibara ◽  
...  

Abstract Background We performed a follow up study about willingness and behaviors to quit smoking among smokers with schizophrenia in Japan. Methods Participants were outpatients with schizophrenia aged 20–69 years who had been visiting the hospital for ≥1 year as of April 1, 2016, and had visited the hospital more than once in the previous 6 months. A baseline survey on smoking behaviors including current smoking status and smoking cessation stage, was administered in 420 participants that were randomly extracted from a patient pool (n = 680) in 2016, and a follow-up survey was administered in 2017. We calculated the distribution and change in smoking cessation stage, number of smokers and nonsmokers after 1 year, and quitting rate from a naturalistic 1-year smoking-cessation follow up. Results The number of baseline respondents was 350; 113 current smokers and 68 former smokers. Among the 113 current smokers, 104 (92.0%) were followed for 1 year, 79 (70.0%) were interested in smoking cessation, and only 7 had received smoking cessation treatments at baseline. Among the tracked 104 participants, only 6 (5.8%) stopped smoking after 1 year. Among the 25 participants who had intentions to quit smoking within 6 months at baseline, 6 (24.0%) maintained their intention to quit smoking for 1 year, and 16 (64.0%) did not maintain their intention to quit smoking. Conclusions Our findings showed that many smokers with schizophrenia were interested in quitting smoking, but few patients received treatment and actually quit smoking. Timely intervention, including the option to receive smoking cessation treatment, is necessary for those patients with schizophrenia who smoke. Trial registration UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000023874, registered on August 31, 2016).


2001 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 364-372 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dong He ◽  
Jon I. Medbø ◽  
Arne T. Høstmark

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document