Suppr超能文献

聚焦于五个“A”:无家可归患者与有家可归患者获得药剂师提供的戒烟治疗及使用情况的比较。

Focusing on the five A's: a comparison of homeless and housed patients' access to and use of pharmacist-provided smoking cessation treatment.

作者信息

Connor Sharon E, Scharf Deborah M, Jonkman Lauren J, Herbert Mary I

机构信息

Department of Pharmacy and Therapeutics, University of Pittsburgh, USA.

Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, USA; RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.

出版信息

Res Social Adm Pharm. 2014 Mar-Apr;10(2):369-77. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2013.05.011.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence of smoking remains high among the medically underserved and could be related to disparities in access to and use of smoking cessation treatments.

METHODS

This study implemented and tracked providers' use of the 5 A's intervention for tobacco use (Ask, Assess, Advise, Assist, Arrange) with homeless (n = 260) and housed (n = 226) adults attending a free medical clinic, including referrals to and use of an on-site pharmacist-led smoking cessation service.

RESULTS

Among patients whose tobacco use was Asked about and Assessed (97%), homeless (vs. housed) patients were more likely to smoke (59% vs. 39%; P = 0.008). Among current smokers, there were no homeless-housed disparities in receipt of Advice to quit smoking (84% vs. 78%; P = 0.22) or Arrangement of treatment (36% vs. 31%; P = 0.46). Overall, among patients for whom treatment was Arranged, homeless patients were less likely than housed patients to attend the smoking cessation program (25% vs. 48%; P = 0.04). However, among those that attended any treatment (i.e., were Assisted to quit), homeless and housed patients attended similar numbers of sessions and used pharmacotherapy at similar rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Providers may reduce homeless-housed disparities in smoking by offering special Assist(ance) to homeless smokers that reduces barriers to initially accessing treatment services.

摘要

引言

在医疗服务不足人群中,吸烟率仍然很高,这可能与戒烟治疗的可及性和使用方面的差异有关。

方法

本研究实施并跟踪了为在免费医疗诊所就诊的无家可归成年人(n = 260)和有家可归成年人(n = 226)提供的针对烟草使用的5A干预措施(询问、评估、建议、协助、安排),包括转介至现场由药剂师主导的戒烟服务并跟踪其使用情况。

结果

在被询问和评估过烟草使用情况的患者中(97%),无家可归患者(与有家可归患者相比)吸烟的可能性更高(59%对39%;P = 0.008)。在当前吸烟者中,在接受戒烟建议(84%对78%;P = 0.22)或安排治疗(36%对31%;P = 0.46)方面,无家可归者与有家可归者之间没有差异。总体而言,在已安排治疗的患者中,无家可归患者参加戒烟项目的可能性低于有家可归患者(25%对48%;P = 0.04)。然而,在那些参加了任何治疗(即被协助戒烟)的患者中,无家可归者和有家可归者参加的疗程数量相似,使用药物治疗的比例也相似。

结论

医疗服务提供者可以通过为无家可归吸烟者提供特殊协助,减少其最初获取治疗服务的障碍,从而缩小无家可归者与有家可归者在吸烟方面的差异。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验