Implementation of a proactive referral tool for child healthcare professionals to encourage and facilitate parental smoking cessation in the Netherlands: a mixed-methods study.
Child healthcare settings
Healthcare professionals
Implementation study
Mixed-methods
Parents
Proactive referral tool
Second-hand smoke
Smoking cessation
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 Sep 2021
16 Sep 2021
Historique:
received:
11
12
2020
accepted:
28
08
2021
entrez:
17
9
2021
pubmed:
18
9
2021
medline:
21
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Recently, the parent-tailored telephone based smoking cessation counseling program 'Smoke-free Parents' was shown to be effective in helping parents to quit smoking. To implement this program in child healthcare settings in the Netherlands, the research team developed a proactive referral tool to refer parents to Smoke-free Parents. The aim of the present implementation study was to explore the facilitators, barriers, and suggestions for improvement in the implementation of this referral tool. Child healthcare professionals (N = 68) were recruited via multiple strategies (e.g., social media, mailings, and word of mouth among healthcare professionals) and invited to complete two online (quantitative and qualitative) questionnaires and to participate in a telephone semi-structured qualitative interview between April 2017 and February 2019. In total, 65 child healthcare professionals were included in the analyses. After inductive coding, thematic analyses were performed on the qualitative data. Descriptive analyses were performed on the quantitative data. The data from both questionnaires and the telephone interview revealed that the majority of the child healthcare professionals (92.3 % female; average years of working as a healthcare professional: 23.0) found the Smoke-free Parents referral tool accessible and convenient to use. Yet there were several barriers that limited their use of the tool. The data revealed that one of the main barriers that healthcare professionals experienced was parental resistance to smoking cessation assistance. In addition, healthcare professionals noted that they experienced tension when motivating parents to quit smoking, as they were not the parent's, but the child's healthcare provider. Additionally, healthcare professionals reported being concerned about the lack of information about the costs of Smoke-free Parents, which limited professionals referring parents to the service. Although healthcare professionals reported rather positive experiences with the Smoke-free Parents referral tool, the use of the tool was limited due to barriers. To increase the impact of the Smoke-free Parents telephone-based smoking cessation counseling program via child healthcare settings, it is important to overcome these barriers. Suggestions for improvement in the implementation of the referral tool in child healthcare settings are discussed.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Recently, the parent-tailored telephone based smoking cessation counseling program 'Smoke-free Parents' was shown to be effective in helping parents to quit smoking. To implement this program in child healthcare settings in the Netherlands, the research team developed a proactive referral tool to refer parents to Smoke-free Parents. The aim of the present implementation study was to explore the facilitators, barriers, and suggestions for improvement in the implementation of this referral tool.
METHODS
METHODS
Child healthcare professionals (N = 68) were recruited via multiple strategies (e.g., social media, mailings, and word of mouth among healthcare professionals) and invited to complete two online (quantitative and qualitative) questionnaires and to participate in a telephone semi-structured qualitative interview between April 2017 and February 2019. In total, 65 child healthcare professionals were included in the analyses. After inductive coding, thematic analyses were performed on the qualitative data. Descriptive analyses were performed on the quantitative data.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The data from both questionnaires and the telephone interview revealed that the majority of the child healthcare professionals (92.3 % female; average years of working as a healthcare professional: 23.0) found the Smoke-free Parents referral tool accessible and convenient to use. Yet there were several barriers that limited their use of the tool. The data revealed that one of the main barriers that healthcare professionals experienced was parental resistance to smoking cessation assistance. In addition, healthcare professionals noted that they experienced tension when motivating parents to quit smoking, as they were not the parent's, but the child's healthcare provider. Additionally, healthcare professionals reported being concerned about the lack of information about the costs of Smoke-free Parents, which limited professionals referring parents to the service.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Although healthcare professionals reported rather positive experiences with the Smoke-free Parents referral tool, the use of the tool was limited due to barriers. To increase the impact of the Smoke-free Parents telephone-based smoking cessation counseling program via child healthcare settings, it is important to overcome these barriers. Suggestions for improvement in the implementation of the referral tool in child healthcare settings are discussed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34530809
doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06969-1
pii: 10.1186/s12913-021-06969-1
pmc: PMC8444610
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
973Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Evid Based Nurs. 2013 Oct;16(4):98
pubmed: 23943076
Int J Qual Health Care. 2014 Oct;26(5):501-10
pubmed: 24951511
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2003 Mar;157(3):295-302
pubmed: 12622686
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Dec 12;12:CD009187
pubmed: 23235672
PLoS One. 2014 May 08;9(5):e93220
pubmed: 24809443
Addiction. 2005 Oct;100(10):1423-31
pubmed: 16185204
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2014 Oct;134(4):962-965.e4
pubmed: 25174871
Pediatrics. 1993 Feb;91(2):296-300
pubmed: 8424003
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Jul 31;16(15):
pubmed: 31370191
Ambul Pediatr. 2002 Nov-Dec;2(6):485-8
pubmed: 12437396
J Am Board Fam Med. 2007 May-Jun;20(3):272-9
pubmed: 17478660
Tob Prev Cessat. 2021 Apr 26;7:30
pubmed: 33907722
Pediatrics. 2006 Apr;117(4):e695-700
pubmed: 16585283
Am J Prev Med. 2006 Jan;30(1):31-7
pubmed: 16414421
Arch Dis Child. 2003 Dec;88(12):1086-90
pubmed: 14670776
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Sep 12;9:CD004305
pubmed: 28898403
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2008 Apr;24(4):214-6
pubmed: 18431218
BMC Public Health. 2016 Jun 24;16:520
pubmed: 27342141
JAMA. 2005 Jul 27;294(4):482-7
pubmed: 16046655
Psychiatry Res. 2019 Oct;280:112513
pubmed: 31434011
Am J Health Promot. 1997 Sep-Oct;12(1):38-48
pubmed: 10170434
Am J Dis Child. 1989 Sep;143(9):1091-4
pubmed: 2773887
Med Care. 2012 Mar;50(3):217-26
pubmed: 22310560
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2004 Jan;158(1):83-90
pubmed: 14706964
BMC Public Health. 2011 Sep 26;11:732
pubmed: 21943207
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Jan 09;15(1):
pubmed: 30720774
Ann Emerg Med. 2006 Oct;48(4):e417-26
pubmed: 16997678
JAMA Intern Med. 2013 Mar 25;173(6):458-64
pubmed: 23440173
Pediatrics. 2003 Jan;111(1):140-5
pubmed: 12509567
Tob Control. 2016 Dec;25(e2):e95-e100
pubmed: 26869598
Nicotine Tob Res. 2008 Dec;10(12):1745-51
pubmed: 19023825
J Behav Med. 2007 Apr;30(2):143-54
pubmed: 17221319
Nicotine Tob Res. 2006 Feb;8(1):67-75
pubmed: 16497601
Addiction. 2014 May;109(5):830-41
pubmed: 24428461
Psychol Bull. 2008 May;134(3):383-403
pubmed: 18444702