Search

The article focuses on a study in Scotland, United Kingdom of prioritizing protection of children from secondhand smoke exposure (SHSE) in a private space where smoke-free public places are enforced. It discusses the difficulty of political acceptability in enforcing the issue and the intervention over parental autonomy to smoke in their own home. The article also reports on the findings based on the study used called Reducing Families' Exposure to Secondhand Smoke (REFRESH) project.

Background As quality improvement (QI) programmes have become progressively larger scale, the risks of implementation having unintended consequences are increasingly recognised. More routine use of balancing measures to monitor unintended consequences has been proposed to evaluate overall effectiveness, but in practice published improvement interventions hardly ever report identification or measurement of consequences other than intended goals of improvement. Methods We conducted 15 semistructured interviews and two focus groups with 24 improvement experts to explore the current understanding of balancing measures in QI and inform a more balanced accounting of the overall impact of improvement interventions. Data were analysed iteratively using the framework approach. Results Participants described the consequences of improvement in terms of desirability/undesirability and the extent to which they were expected/ unexpected when planning improvement. Four types of consequences were defined: expected desirable consequences (goals); expected undesirable consequences (trade-offs); unexpected undesirable consequences (unpleasant surprises); and unexpected desirable consequences (pleasant surprises). Unexpected consequences were considered important but rarely measured in existing programmes, and an improvement pause to take stock after implementation would allow these to be more actively identified and managed. A balanced accounting of all consequences of improvement interventions can facilitate staff engagement and reduce resistance to change, but has to be offset against the cost of additional data collection. Conclusion Improvement measurement is usually focused on measuring intended goals, with minimal use of balancing measures which when used, typically monitor trade-offs expected before implementation. This paper proposes that improvers and leaders should seek a balanced accounting of all consequences of improvement across the life of an improvement programme, including deliberately pausing after implementation to identify and quantitatively or qualitatively evaluate any pleasant or unpleasant surprises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To explore among a diverse range of smokers and recent ex-smokers, particularly those from disadvantaged groups, how nicotine-containing products, particularly electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), are understood and experienced. Methods Qualitative study of 64 smokers and exsmokers in Central Scotland. Twelve focus groups and 11 individual interviews were carried out with a range of purposively selected groups. Results Nicotine replacement therapies and e-cigarettes were regarded as being very different products. Nicotine replacement therapies were viewed as medical products for smokers who want to quit, while e-cigarettes emerged as an ambiguous product whose meanings are still being negotiated. Participants' attitudes and intentions about smoking and quitting were especially important in shaping their understanding of these products. Four main interpretations of e-cigarettes were identified: a more satisfying replacement for smoking, an ambiguous but potentially useful device, a less desirable cigarette and a threat to smoking cessation. The acceptability of continued nicotine addiction and the similarity of e-cigarettes to conventional cigarettes were central themes on which participants held conflicting views. There was considerable uncertainty among participants around the constituents and safety of e-cigarettes. Conclusions Different groups of smokers bring diverse expectations, requirements and concerns to their evaluations and therefore to the potential use of nicotine-containing products. The ambiguity around e-cigarettes in public health debates and medical practice is reflected in the positions and concerns of smokers. There is a need for both clear, up-to-date trustworthy information about their benefits and risks, and stronger regulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims To explore the impact, if any, that using plain (non-branded) cigarette packs in real-life settings has on young adult smokers. Methods Naturalistic-type research was employed, where smokers used brown 'plain' packs for 2 weeks and their regular packs for 2 weeks, in real-life settings. Participants were recruited in Glasgow, Scotland. Of the 140 smokers aged 18-35 years who participated in the naturalistic study, 48 correctly completed and returned all questionnaires. Over the 4-week study period, participants completed a questionnaire twice a week assessing pack perceptions and feelings, feelings about smoking, salience of health warnings and smoking-related behaviours. A subsample of 18 participated in a post-study interview, which employed a semistructured topic guide to assess perceptions and experiences of using plain packs. Results Trends in the data show that in comparison with branded packaging, plain packaging increased negative perceptions and feelings about the pack and about smoking. Plain packaging also increased avoidant behaviour (hiding the pack, covering the pack), certain smoking cessation behaviours, such as smoking less around others and forgoing cigarettes, and thinking about quitting. Almost half (n=8) of those in the post-study interview, predominantly women (n=6), reported that the use of plain packs had either increased avoidant behaviour or reduced consumption. Conclusions This pilot naturalistic study suggests that plain packaging could potentially help reduce tobacco consumption among some young adult smokers, and women in particular. Employing an innovative research methodology, the findings of this study are consistent with, and indeed support, past plain packaging research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]