Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32945772›Full record

ArticleJMIR mHealth and uHealth2020

Implementing Facilitated Access to a Text Messaging, Smoking Cessation Intervention Among Swedish Patients Having Elective Surgery: Qualitative Study of Patients' and Health Care Professionals' Perspectives.

Kristin Thomas, Marcus Bendtsen, Catharina Linderoth, Preben Bendtsen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Kristin ThomasDepartment of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-6434-4855
Marcus BendtsenDepartment of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-8678-1164
Catharina LinderothDepartment of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-5523-4141
Preben BendtsenDepartment of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-5913-2903

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is strong evidence that short-term smoking cessation before surgery can reduce postoperative morbidity. There are, however, several structural problems in health care systems concerning how to implement smoking cessation interventions in routine practice for preoperative patients.

objectiveThis study aimed to analyze the implementation of a text messaging, smoking cessation intervention targeting patients having elective surgery. Implementation of facilitated access (ie, referral from practitioners) and the perceived usefulness among patients were investigated. Elective surgery is defined as scheduled, nonacute surgery.

methodsA qualitative study was carried out at two medium-sized hospitals in the south of Sweden. The implementation of facilitated access was investigated during a 12-month period from April 2018 to April 2019. Facilitated access was conceptualized as specialists recommending the text messaging intervention to patients having elective surgery. Implementation was explored in terms of perceptions about the intervention and behaviors associated with implementation; that is, how patients used the intervention and how specialists behaved in facilitating usage among patients. Two focus groups with smoking cessation specialists and 10 individual interviews with patients were carried out. Qualitative content analysis was used to analyze the data.

resultsTwo main categories were identified from the focus group data with smoking cessation specialists: implementation approach and perceptions about the intervention. The first category, implementation approach, referred to how specialists adapted their efforts to situational factors and to the needs and preferences of patients, and how building of trust with patients was prioritized. The second category, perceptions about the intervention, showed that specialists thought the content and structure of the text messaging intervention felt familiar and worked well as a complement to current practice. Two categories were identified from the patient interview data: incorporating new means of support from health care and determinants of use. The first category referred to how patients adopted and incorporated the intervention into their smoking cessation journey. Patients were receptive, shared the text messages with friends and family, humanized the text messages, and used the messages as a complement to other strategies to quit smoking. The second category, determinants of use, referred to aspects that influenced how and when patients used the intervention and included the following: timing of the intervention and text messages, motivation to change, and perceptions of the mobile phone medium.

conclusionsSmoking cessation specialists adopted an active role in implementing the intervention by adapting their approach and fitting the intervention into existing routines. Patients showed strong motivation to change and openness to incorporate the intervention into their behavior change journey; however, the timing of the intervention and messages were important in optimizing the support. A text messaging, smoking cessation intervention can be a valuable and feasible way to reach smoking patients having elective surgery.

Indexed as

Smoking CessationText MessagingFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMaleMotivationSwedenhealth careimplementationmHealthmobile healthpatients with elective surgerysmoking cessationtext messages

Identifiers

PMID32945772
PMCPMC7532460

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.