Search

Introduction: Smokers are frequent users of healthcare services. Admissions to hospital can serve as a "teachable moment" for quitting smoking. Clinical guidelines recommend initiating smoking cessation services during hospitalization; however, in Southern European countries less than 5% of inpatients receive a brief intervention for smoking cessation. Objectives: The aims of this study were (i) to examine rates of smoking abstinence during and after hospitalization; (ii) to measure changes in smoking patterns among persons who continued smoking after discharge; and (iii) to identify predictors of abstinence during hospitalization and after discharge. Methods: A cohort study of a representative sample of current adult smokers hospitalized in two Spanish and two Portuguese hospitals. We surveyed smokers during hospitalization and recontacted them one month after discharge. We used a 25‐item ad hoc questionnaire regarding their smoking pattern, the smoking cessation intervention they have received during hospitalization, and hospital and sociodemographic characteristics. We performed a descriptive analysis using the chi‐square test and a multivariate logistic regression to characterize the participant, hospital, and smoking cessation intervention (5As model) characteristics associated with smoking abstinence. Results: Smoking patients from both countries presented high abstinence rates during hospitalization (Spain: 76.4%; Portugal: 70.2%); however, after discharge, their abstinence rates decreased to 55.3% and 46.8%, respectively. In Spain, smokers who tried to quit before hospital admission showed higher abstinence rates, and those who continued smoking reduced a mean of five cigarettes the number of cigarettes per day (p ≤ 0.001). In Portugal, abstinence rates were higher among women (p = 0.030), those not living with a smoker (p = 0.008), those admitted to medical‐surgical wards (p = 0.035), who consumed their first cigarette within 60 min after waking (p = 0.006), and those who were trying to quit before hospitalization (p = 0.043). Conclusions: Half of the smokers admitted into the Spanish hospitals are abstinent one month after discharge or have reduced their cigarettes per day. Nevertheless, success rates could be increased by implementing evidence‐based tobacco cessation programs at the organizational‐level, including post‐discharge active quitting smoking support. Clinical relevance: Three‐quarters of the inpatients who smoke remain abstinent during hospitalization and over half achieve to maintain their abstinence or at least reduce their consumption one month after discharge, proving that admission to hospitals is an excellent teachable moment to quit smoking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Health systems worldwide are implementing lung cancer screening programmes to identify early-stage lung cancer and maximise patient survival. Volumetry is recommended for follow-up of pulmonary nodules and outperforms other measurement methods. However, volumetry is known to be influenced by multiple factors. The objectives of this systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42022370233) are to summarise the current knowledge regarding factors that influence volumetry tools used in the analysis of pulmonary nodules, assess for significant clinical impact, identify gaps in current knowledge and suggest future research. Five databases (Medline, Scopus, Journals@Ovid, Embase and Emcare) were searched on the 21st of September, 2022, and 137 original research studies were included, explicitly testing the potential impact of influencing factors on the outcome of volumetry tools. The summary of these studies is tabulated, and a narrative review is provided. A subset of studies (n = 16) reporting clinical significance were selected, and their results were combined, if appropriate, using meta-analysis. Factors with clinical significance include the segmentation algorithm, quality of the segmentation, slice thickness, the level of inspiration for solid nodules, and the reconstruction algorithm and kernel in subsolid nodules. Although there is a large body of evidence in this field, it is unclear how to apply the results from these studies in clinical practice as most studies do not test for clinical relevance. The meta-analysis did not improve our understanding due to the small number and heterogeneity of studies testing for clinical significance. Critical relevance statement: Many studies have investigated the influencing factors of pulmonary nodule volumetry, but only 11% of these questioned their clinical relevance in their management. The heterogeneity among these studies presents a challenge in consolidating results and clinical application of the evidence. Key points: • Factors influencing the volumetry of pulmonary nodules have been extensively investigated. • Just 11% of studies test clinical significance (wrongly diagnosing growth). • Nodule size interacts with most other influencing factors (especially for smaller nodules). • Heterogeneity among studies makes comparison and consolidation of results challenging. • Future research should focus on clinical applicability, screening, and updated technology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Europe, lung cancer ranks third among the most common cancers, remaining the biggest killer. Since the publication of the first European Society of Radiology and European Respiratory Society joint white paper on lung cancer screening (LCS) in 2015, many new findings have been published and discussions have increased considerably. Thus, this updated expert opinion represents a narrative, non-systematic review of the evidence from LCS trials and description of the current practice of LCS as well as aspects that have not received adequate attention until now. Reaching out to the potential participants (persons at high risk), optimal communication and shared decision-making will be key starting points. Furthermore, standards for infrastructure, pathways and quality assurance are pivotal, including promoting tobacco cessation, benefits and harms, overdiagnosis, quality, minimum radiation exposure, definition of management of positive screen results and incidental findings linked to respective actions as well as cost-effectiveness. This requires a multidisciplinary team with experts from pulmonology and radiology as well as thoracic oncologists, thoracic surgeons, pathologists, family doctors, patient representatives and others. The ESR and ERS agree that Europe's health systems need to adapt to allow citizens to benefit from organised pathways, rather than unsupervised initiatives, to allow early diagnosis of lung cancer and reduce the mortality rate. Now is the time to set up and conduct demonstration programmes focusing, among other points, on methodology, standardisation, tobacco cessation, education on healthy lifestyle, cost-effectiveness and a central registry.Key Points• Pulmonologists and radiologists both have key roles in the set up of multidisciplinary LCS teams with experts from many other fields.• Pulmonologists identify people eligible for LCS, reach out to family doctors, share the decision-making process and promote tobacco cessation.• Radiologists ensure appropriate image quality, minimum dose and a standardised reading/reporting algorithm, together with a clear definition of a "positive screen".• Strict algorithms define the exact management of screen-detected nodules and incidental findings.• For LCS to be (cost-)effective, it has to target a population defined by risk prediction models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION Having a chronic disease either caused or worsened by tobacco smoking does not always translate into quitting smoking. Although smoking cessation is one of the most cost-effective medical interventions, it remains poorly implemented in healthcare settings. The aim was to examine whether smokers with chronic and respiratory diseases were more likely to receive support to quit smoking by a healthcare provider or make a quit attempt than smokers without these diseases. METHODS This population-based study included a sample of 6011 adult smokers in six European countries. The participants were interviewed face-to-face and asked questions on sociodemographic characteristics, current diagnoses for chronic diseases, healthcare visits in the last 12 months and, if so, whether they had received any support to quit smoking. Questions on smoking behavior included nicotine dependence, motivation to quit smoking and quit attempts in the last 12 months. The results are presented as weighted percentages with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and as adjusted odds ratios with 95% CI based on logistic regression analyses. RESULTS Smokers with chronic respiratory disease, those aged 55 years and older, as well as those with one or more chronic diseases were more likely to receive smoking cessation advice from a healthcare professional. Making a quit attempt in the last year was related to younger age, high educational level, higher motivation to quit, lower nicotine dependence and having received advice to quit from a healthcare professional but not with having chronic diseases. There were significant differences between countries with smokers in Romania consistently reporting more support to quit as well as quit attempts. CONCLUSIONS Although smokers with respiratory disease did indeed receive smoking cessation support more often than smokers without disease, many smokers did not receive any advice or support to quit during a healthcare visit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Smoking tobacco increases the risk of respiratory disease in adults and children, but communicating the magnitude of these effects in a scientific manner that is accessible and usable by the public and policymakers presents a challenge. We have therefore summarized scientific data on the impact of smoking on respiratory diseases to provide the content for a unique resource, SmokeHaz.Methods: We conducted systematic reviews and meta-analyses of longitudinal studies (published to 2013) identified from electronic databases, gray literature, and experts. Random effect meta-analyses were used to pool the findings.Results: We included 216 articles. Among adult smokers, we confirmed substantially increased risks of lung cancer (risk ratio (RR), 10.92; 95% CI, 8.28-14.40; 34 studies), COPD (RR, 4.01; 95% CI, 3.18-5.05; 22 studies), and asthma (RR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.07-2.42; eight studies). Exposure to passive smoke significantly increased the risk of lung cancer in adult nonsmokers and increased the risks of asthma, wheeze, lower respiratory infections, and reduced lung function in children. Smoking significantly increased the risk of sleep apnea and asthma exacerbations in adult and pregnant populations, and active and passive smoking increased the risk of tuberculosis.Conclusions: These findings have been translated into easily digestible content and published on the SmokeHaz website. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]