Dataset Information

The right to smoke and the right to smoke-free surroundings: international comparison of smoke-free psychiatric clinic implementation experiences.

ABSTRACT:

Background

In Scandinavia, people with a severe mental disorder have a reduced life expectancy of 15-20 years compared with the general public. Smoking is a major contributor, and smoke-free policies are increasingly adopted in psychiatric clinics around the world. We compared potential facilitators and barriers among staff and management, for the implementation of smoke-free psychiatric clinics.

Aims

To investigate the attitudes and experiences regarding smoke-free policies among managers and staff involved in the implementation processes of smoke-free psychiatric clinics at hospitals in Malmö (Sweden) and Barcelona (Spain).

Method

We used a qualitative methodology, with 15 semi-structured interviews. The interviews were conducted with each participant individually, and were subsequently transcribed. The data were analysed with systematic text condensation.

Results

There were notable differences in how the smoke-free policies were carried out and experienced, and attitudes regarding the policy changes differed in the two settings. Key differences were the views on the right to smoke in compulsory care and to stay in smoke-free surroundings supported by smoking cessation intervention; the prioritisation of staff facilitation of smoking breaks; and views on smoking and smoke-free psychiatry. In contrast, participants agreed on the importance of staff education and management support. A smoking ban by law and belonging to a network of smoke-free hospitals were also relevant.

Conclusions

Staff education, and support from staff and management for the patients' right to stay in smoke-free surroundings, facilitated successful implementation of smoke-free policies in the psychiatric clinics, whereas supporting the right to smoke was a barrier.

SUBMITTER: Freiburghaus T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8086391 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceSecondhand smoke (SHS) exposure is associated with many health conditions in children and adults. Millions of individuals in the US are currently exposed to SHS in their homes.ObjectiveTo investigate whether a federal ban on smoking in public housing settings was associated with a decrease in indoor SHS levels in New York City public housing developments 12 months after the policy's implementation.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study tracked indoor air quality longitudinally from April 2018 to September 2019 and used difference-in-differences analysis to examine SHS exposure before vs after implementation of the 2018 federal smoke-free housing (SFH) policy in 10 New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) buildings vs 11 matched low-income buildings not subject to the SFH policy (ie, Section 8 buildings).ExposuresFederal SFH policy implementation, beginning July 30, 2018.Main outcomes and measuresComparison of nicotine concentration levels from passive, bisulfate-coated filters before vs 12 months after implementation of the federal SFH policy. Secondary outcomes included changes in particulate matter less than 2.5 μm in diameter, measured with low-cost particle monitors, and counts of cigarette butts in common areas.ResultsAir quality was measured repeatedly in a total of 153 NYCHA and 110 Section 8 nonsmoking households as well as in 91 stairwells and hallways. Before the SFH policy implementation, air nicotine was detectable in 19 of 20 stairwells (95.0%) in NYCHA buildings and 15 of 19 stairwells (78.9%) in Section 8 buildings (P = .19) and in 17 of 19 hallways (89.5%) in NYCHA buildings and 14 of 23 hallways (60.9%) in Section 8 buildings (P = .004). Nicotine was detected less frequently inside nonsmoking apartments overall (26 of 263 [9.9%]) but more frequently in NYCHA apartments (20 of 153 [13.1%]) than in Section 8 apartments (6 of 110 [5.5%]) (P = .04). One year after policy implementation, there was no differential change over time in nicotine concentrations measured in stairwells (DID, 0.03 μg/m3; 95% CI, -0.99 to 1.06 μg/m3) or inside nonsmoking households (DID, -0.04 μg/m3; 95% CI, -0.24 to 0.15 μg/m3). Larger decreases in nicotine concentration were found in NYCHA hallways than in Section 8 hallways (DID, -0.43 μg/m3; 95% CI, -1.26 to 0.40 μg/m3).Conclusions and relevanceThe findings suggest that there was no differential change in SHS in NYCHA buildings 12 months after SFH policy implementation. Additional support may be needed to ensure adherence to SFH policies.

Project description:ObjectivesEvidence-based clinical guidelines play an important role in healthcare and can be a valuable source for quality indicators (QIs). However, the link between guidelines and QI is often neglected and methodological standards for the development of guideline-based QI are still lacking. The aim of this qualitative study was to get insights into experiences of international authors with developing and implementing guideline-based QI.SettingWe conducted semistructured interviews via phone or skype (September 2017-February 2018) with guideline authors developing guideline-based QI.Participants15 interview participants from eight organisations in six European and North American countries.MethodsOrganisations were selected using purposive sampling with a maximum variation of healthcare settings. From each organisation a clinician and a methodologist were asked to participate. An interview guide was developed based on the QI development steps according to the 'Reporting standards for guideline-based performance measures' by the Guidelines International Network. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis with deductive and inductive categories.ResultsInterviewees deemed a programmatic approach, involvement of representative stakeholders with clinical and methodological knowledge and the connection to existing quality improvement strategies important factors for developing QI parallel to or after guideline development. Methodological training of the developing team and a shared understanding of the QI purpose were further seen conducive. Patient participation and direct patient relevance were inconsistently considered important, whereas a strong evidence base was seen essential. To assess measurement characteristics interviewees favoured piloting, but often missed implementation. Lack of measurability is still experienced a serious limitation, especially for qualitative aspects and individualised care.ConclusionOur results suggest that developing guideline-based QI can succeed either parallel to or following the guideline process with careful planning and instruction. Strategic partnerships seem key for implementation. Patient participation and relevance, measurement of qualitative aspects and piloting are areas for further development.Trial registration numberGerman Clinical Trials Registry (DRKS00013006).