Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Purpose To investigate the attitudes, beliefs and perceptions of people diagnosed with cancer and health practitioners on use of nicotine vaping products. Methods Scopus and OVID Medline were searched for papers published between 2013 and 2023. Two authors independently selected the studies and extracted data, with conflicts resolved through discussion. Nine studies were selected for further synthesis. Reporting follows the PRISMA Scoping Reviews checklist. Results E-cigarettes were commonly perceived as less harmful compared to conventional cigarettes and less detrimental to cancer treatment effectiveness among people with a current or previous cancer diagnosis. This population also cited smoking cessation, smoking in non-smoking areas and less risky alternative as the most common reasons for e-cigarette use. Nevertheless, low levels of clinician support on the effectiveness of e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation tool/alternative were identified. Conclusion Findings show differences in beliefs and attitudes of e-cigarettes between clinicians and people diagnosed with cancer. Additional research into the health impacts of e-cigarettes in people with a current or previous cancer diagnosis will allow for greater congruence between patients and clinicians and assist providers in recommending effective tools for smoking cessation within this population. Implications for Cancer Survivors This study provides an overview of the attitudes, beliefs and perceptions of e-cigarette use among people with a current or previous diagnosis of cancer and health practitioners. Given the increased prevalence of e-cigarette use within this population, these findings highlight a greater need for dialogue between patients and clinicians regarding the safety and efficacy of these devices.
Purpose To investigate the attitudes, beliefs and perceptions of people diagnosed with cancer and health practitioners on use of nicotine vaping products. Methods Scopus and OVID Medline were searched for papers published between 2013 and 2023. Two authors independently selected the studies and extracted data, with conflicts resolved through discussion. Nine studies were selected for further synthesis. Reporting follows the PRISMA Scoping Reviews checklist. Results E-cigarettes were commonly perceived as less harmful compared to conventional cigarettes and less detrimental to cancer treatment effectiveness among people with a current or previous cancer diagnosis. This population also cited smoking cessation, smoking in non-smoking areas and less risky alternative as the most common reasons for e-cigarette use. Nevertheless, low levels of clinician support on the effectiveness of e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation tool/alternative were identified. Conclusion Findings show differences in beliefs and attitudes of e-cigarettes between clinicians and people diagnosed with cancer. Additional research into the health impacts of e-cigarettes in people with a current or previous cancer diagnosis will allow for greater congruence between patients and clinicians and assist providers in recommending effective tools for smoking cessation within this population. Implications for Cancer Survivors This study provides an overview of the attitudes, beliefs and perceptions of e-cigarette use among people with a current or previous diagnosis of cancer and health practitioners. Given the increased prevalence of e-cigarette use within this population, these findings highlight a greater need for dialogue between patients and clinicians regarding the safety and efficacy of these devices.
Background Patients with cancer and an underlying autoimmune disease who are considering immune checkpoint blockers (ICBs) need to know about the benefits and risks of severe immune-related adverse events and flares of the autoimmune condition. Objective This study aims to develop and alpha test an educational website for patients with cancer. Methods Learning topics, images, and website architecture (including flow and requirements) were developed and iteratively reviewed by members of a community scientist program, a patient advisory group, and content experts. Alpha testing was performed, measuring the site’s usability using the Suitability Assessment of Materials and its acceptability using the Ottawa Acceptability Measure. Results The website included a home page; general information about ICBs; comprehensive modules on the benefits and risks of ICBs for patients with cancer and preexisting autoimmune diseases; general wellness information; and features such as a quiz, additional resources, and a glossary. For the alpha testing, 9 users assessed the newly developed website. Patient reviewers (n=5) had rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn disease, Sjogren syndrome, or vasculitis. Health care provider reviewers (n=4) were medical oncologists or rheumatologists. The median Suitability Assessment of Materials rating was 75 (IQR 70-79; range 0-100) for patients versus 66 (IQR 57-72; range 0-100) for providers (scores ≥70 indicate no substantial changes needed). Recommendations for improvement, mostly involving navigation and accessibility, were addressed. All participants expressed that the website was acceptable and balanced in terms of discussion of benefits and harms. Because half (2/4, 50%) of the providers suggested we increase the amount of information, we extended the content on the impact of having an autoimmune disease when considering ICB treatment, the probability of flares, and the management of flares in this context. Conclusions The feedback led to minor revisions to enhance readability, navigation, and accessibility, ensuring the website’s suitability as a decision-making aid. The newly developed website could become a supporting tool to facilitate patient-physician discussion regarding ICBs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.