Search

Background Hospitalisation of a child is a unique opportunity for health staff to offer smoking cessation support; that is screening for carer smoking status, discussing cessation and providing interventions to carers who smoke. This has the potential to reduce the child’s exposure to second-hand smoke, and in turn tobacco related illnesses in children. However, these interventions are not always offered in paediatric wards. The aim of this study was to explore the provision and prioritisation of smoking cessation support to patient carers in a paediatric ward with a high proportion of Aboriginal patients and carers in a regional area of Australia’s Northern Territory. Methods This is a qualitative descriptive study of data collected through semi-structured interviews with 19 health staff. The interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was performed on the transcripts. Results We found low prioritisation of addressing carer smoking due to, a lack of systems and procedures to screen for smoking and provide quitting advice and unclear systems for providing more detailed cessation support to carers. Staff were demotivated by the lack of clear referral pathways. There were gaps in skills and knowledge, and health staff expressed a need for training opportunities in smoking cessation. Conclusion Health staff perceived they would provide more cessation support if there was a systematic approach with evidence-based resources for smoking cessation. These resources would include guidelines and clinical record systems with screening tools, clear action plans and referral pathways to guide clinical practice. Health staff requested support to identify existing training opportunities on smoking cessation.

Background Currently, there is a lack of guidelines for the use of short-acting bronchodilators (SABD) in people admitted to hospital for acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD), despite routine use in practice and risk of cardiac adverse events. Aim To review the evidence that underpins use and optimal dose, in terms of risk versus benefit, of SABD for inpatient management of AECOPD and collate the results for future guidelines. Methods Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, clinicaltrials.gov and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched (inception to November 2017) for published and ongoing studies. Included studies were randomised controlled trials or controlled clinical trials investigating the effect of SABD (β2-agonist and/or ipratropium) on inpatients with a diagnosis of AECOPD. This review was undertaken in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and a pre-defined protocol. Due to heterogeneous methodologies, meta-analysis was not possible so the results were synthesised qualitatively. Results Of 1378 studies identified, 10 met inclusion criteria. Narrative synthesis of 10 studies revealed no significant differences in most outcomes of interest relative to dose, delivery via inhaler or nebuliser, and type of β2-agonist used. However, some evidence demonstrated significantly increased cardiac side effects with increased dosage of β2-agonist (45% versus 24%), P