Effects of active non-smoking programmes on smoking behaviour in oral precancer patients
Oral & MaxilloFacial Surgery, School of Dental Sciences, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (Impact Factor: 1.57). 08/2007; 36(8):706-11. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2007.03.001
Smoking is the commonest risk factor for oral cancer and precancer. The objective of this study was to characterize smoking behaviour and attitude in a cohort of oral precancer patients in Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, and to determine changes in behaviour during diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Twenty-seven consecutive, smoking patients with dysplastic oral lesions were recruited to the study and a detailed smoking history obtained, quantifying types and numbers of cigarettes smoked, length of smoking history, and changes in smoking behaviour during treatment episodes and long-term follow-up. All patients underwent an interventional management protocol comprising risk-factor education, histopathological diagnosis by incisional biopsy and laser excision of lesions. Patients were followed up for 5 years. Whilst there was a significant decrease in the number of cigarettes smoked at patients' most recent follow-up compared with initial presentation (p<0.001), 74% continued to smoke. Patients received advice from a smoking cessation adviser on support available to them from the local NHS (National Health Service) Stop Smoking services. Six out of 10 patients who set a 'quit date' and attended a programme had quit at the 4-week follow-up but only 5 remained non-smokers. Smoking remains a considerable problem in oral precancer patients even after interventional treatment, with the risk of further precancerous lesions and malignant transformation.
- Periodontology 2000 02/2008; 48(1):170-8. DOI:10.1111/j.1600-0757.2008.00257.x · 3.63 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Although the benefits of CO(2) laser surgery in oral precancer management have been evaluated, little consideration has been given to the factors which may influence treatment outcome, especially amongst patients developing recurrence or malignant transformation. Seventy eight patients (51 males, 27 females; mean age 57.8 years) undergoing CO(2) laser excision of single, new dysplastic oral precancer lesions (OPLs) were followed up for a minimum of 2 years and the influence of clinico-pathological parameters, socio-demographic factors and the presence or absence of residual dysplasia in excision margins upon clinical outcome were examined. Seventy three percent of patients were smokers and 78% consumed alcohol regularly. The majority of lesions were leukoplakias arising in the floor of mouth and ventro-lateral tongue and moderate or severe dysplasia accounted for 86% of histopathological diagnoses. Patient follow up ranged from 24 to 119 months (mean 58 months). Sixty four percent of patients were disease free at most recent clinical follow up, whilst 32% developed local recurrent dysplasia or new site dysplasia with 4% developing oral squamous cell carcinoma (but at sites distinct from their initial OPL). Excision margins were clear in 55% of cases, but 19% showed mild, 21% moderate and 5% severe dysplasia on histopathological examination. No statistically significant associations were seen between patients' age, gender, lesion appearance, site of origin, histopathological grading, presence of dysplasia in resection margins, or alcohol consumption and clinical outcome. Smokers, however, were at significantly higher risk of dysplasia recurrence compared to ex-smokers or non-smokers (P = 0.04). In the absence of agreed treatment protocols for OPLs, we recommend CO(2) laser surgery as an effective treatment modality offering precise lesion excision, full histopathological assessment, minimal post-operative morbidity and a 64% disease free clinical outcome. Regular patient follow up is encouraged due to the persistence of field cancerisation effects.Lasers in Surgery and Medicine 01/2009; 41(1):17-25. DOI:10.1002/lsm.20733 · 2.62 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: IntroductionKnowledge of the dangers of sun exposure does not always lead to changes in behavior. Failure to make behavioral adjustments is of particular concern in high-risk patients.Objectivesa) To assess the impact of melanoma diagnosis on knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors relating to sun protection, and b) to identify factors that could influence sun protection behaviors.MethodsA coded, anonymous questionnaire was given to 195 patients with a recent diagnosis of melanoma. Data were collected on clinical and demographic variables and on knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors relating to sun protection before and after diagnosis. The questionnaire also addressed patients’ sense of distress and guilt following diagnosis.ResultsSun protection behaviors improved following diagnosis in 66% of patients. Although 98% of patients reported having received advice on sun protection following diagnosis, 15% continued to take inadequate sun protection measures. The probability of behavioral improvement following diagnosis was 4 times greater in women than in men. The subgroup of patients whose behavior improved had worse behaviors prior to diagnosis than did those who showed no improvement. Patients who expressed distress and feelings of guilt following diagnosis were more likely to improve their sun protection behavior. Age, tumor site, intensiveness of treatment, and belief that a suntan is healthy had no significant influence on behavioral change.Conclusions Melanoma diagnosis is associated with increased knowledge of sun protection measures and improvement in behaviors. Nevertheless, patients continue to use inadequate sun protection measures. Identification of barriers to optimal sun protection behavior may be instrumental in designing targeted educational campaigns.Actas Dermo-Sifiliográficas 07/2010; 101(6):506–516. DOI:10.1016/j.ad.2009.12.022
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.