Smoking cessation is better than drugs for mild COPD

BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. l2152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Head
Keyword(s):  
Smoking Cessation ◽  
Better Than

scholarly journals A Smoking Cessation Program in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit

2008 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 73-76 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen K. Ling ◽  
Susanne Wooderson ◽  
Karen Rees ◽  
Rose Neild ◽  
Ian M.R. Wright
Keyword(s):  
Smoking Cessation ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Neonatal Intensive Care ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Perinatal Period ◽  
High Risk Population ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Predictor Of Success ◽  
One Year ◽  
Better Than

AbstractBackground: Parental smoking remains a significant risk to the preterm infant both pre and post delivery. Pharmacologically supported interventions have been previously contraindicated in this group during the perinatal period and during breastfeeding. We designed an evidence-based intervention for use in our high-risk population. This report assesses our outcomes after one year. Method: Questionnaire administered a median of 6 months after intervention. Results: There was no significant difference between those participants who returned the survey (n = 42) versus the group as a whole (n = 70). A total of 33% ceased smoking, p < .0001. If no nonresponders ceased smoking then this gives an overall success rate of 20%, p < .0001. Successful quitters had been smoking for a mean of 11 (SD = 7) years. Self-reported light smokers (< 10 cigarettes per day) were significantly more likely to quit (p < .01). Purchase of follow-on nicotine patches was a significant predictor of success in quitting (p = .02). If relapse occurred, it appeared to happen early and was mainly associated with current stressors. Conclusions: We have designed and applied a multidisciplinary intervention for parents and carers to be used in the perinatal period to decrease the postnatal risk for neonatal intensive care graduates. Our rates of successful smoking cessation are as good as, or better than, many published rates for opportunistic intervention. We suggest that randomised trials be focused on ways to further improve interventions at this time of opportunity for these infants and their families.

scholarly journals Can Smoking for Positive or Negative Reinforcement Together With Dependence Help Us Better Diagnose Smokers?

2007 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karl Fagerström ◽  
Carlos A. Jimenez-Ruiz ◽  
Jenaro Astray Mochales ◽  
Hans Gilljam
Keyword(s):  
Smoking Cessation ◽  
Positive Reinforcement ◽  
Negative Reinforcement ◽  
Related Concept ◽  
Nicotine Replacement ◽  
Smoking Cessation Treatment ◽  
Quit Rate ◽  
Cessation Treatment ◽  
Better Than ◽  
As If

AbstractWith more medications available for smoking cessation treatment the need to diagnose the tobacco dependence for better tailoring of treatment is growing. It has been suggested that smokers can be peak seekers or trough maintainers vis-à-vis blood nicotine concentrations (Russell, 1990), or smoking predominantly for coping with withdrawal or smoking for pleasure (Juniper et al., 2005). In this article a related concept, smoking for negative reinforcement (NR) or positive reinforcement (PR), is investigated. A simple 1-question assessment of type of reinforcement is suggested. From data from smokers attending smoker's clinics — 2 from Sweden using varenicline and 1 from Spain using nicotine patches — it looks as if smokers smoking predominantly for PR do better than NR smokers when treated with varenicline, while there is no difference when they are treated with nicotine replacement. When degree of nicotine dependence is crossed with type of reinforcement it looks as if NR/low nicotine dependent smokers have the best outcome (64%) compared with 47% (p < .01) for the whole sample treated with nicotine replacement. When varenicline is used, the PR/low dependent group had the best quit rate with 85% compared with 67% (p < .05) for the whole sample. This brief report proposes that smoking for PR or NR, possibly combined with degree of dependence, should be further studied as a tool for tailoring smoking cessation treatments.

scholarly journals Why two smoking cessation agents work better than one: Role of craving suppression.

2012 ◽  
Vol 80 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel M. Bolt ◽  
Megan E. Piper ◽  
Wendy E. Theobald ◽  
Timothy B. Baker
Keyword(s):  
Smoking Cessation ◽  
Better Than

scholarly journals The Benefits of Smoking Cessation

2003 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. 422-423
Author(s):  
Nick R Anthonisen
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Smoking Cessation ◽  
Medical School ◽  
Cancer Outcomes ◽  
Cancer Rates ◽  
State Of Affairs ◽  
Better Than

In this issue of theCanadian Respiratory Journal, Demeter et al (pages 435-441) describe lung cancer outcomes in a recent Alberta cohort. Not much is new; outcomes are bad, not much better than they were when I was in medical school more than 40 years ago. This is a particularly sad state of affairs in view of the fact that lung cancer is a self-inflicted phenomenon related to smoking. Further, this has been known for 40 years, and only recently have lung cancer rates levelled off in men, though they have continued to increase in women.

scholarly journals Is vaping better than smoking for cardiorespiratory and muscle function?

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Z. Darabseh ◽  
James Selfe ◽  
Christopher I. Morse ◽  
Hans Degens
Keyword(s):  
Smoking Cessation ◽  
Risk Factor ◽  
Cigarette Smoking ◽  
Muscle Function ◽  
Respiratory Function ◽  
Cigarette Use ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Future Studies ◽  
Better Than

Cigarette smoking is a risk factor for respiratory disorders, cardiovascular diseases and even decrements in muscle function. Electronic cigarette use (vaping) is considered a healthier alternative to cigarette smoking and may help in smoking cessation. However, the effects of vaping are not clear yet and particularly the long-term effects of vaping are largely unknown. Some reports suggest that vaping maybe as harmful for e.g. respiratory function, as cigarette smoking. In this narrative review the effects of vaping and cigarette smoking on respiratory, cardiovascular and muscle function are compared. Overall, vaping has been found to cause similar effects as smoking on lung function and cardiovascular function. Future studies are needed to clarify the severity of smoking- and vaping-induced decrements on muscle function.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document