English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Smoking is one of the most important determinants of socioeconomic inequality in mortality. Few studies have tested which interventions are effective in smokers with low socioeconomic status (SES). METHODS All hospitals in the Capital Region of Denmark were included and randomized to intervention or control groups. The target-group was smokers with low SES. Intervention hospitals: smokers in the target-group assisted researchers to tailor a group-based smoking cessation intervention. Further they helped recruiting smoking colleagues and motivating them to stay abstinent. Control hospitals: ‘as usual’. Unforeseen organizational challenges led to a change of study design; the hospital-level assessment was reduced to two cross-sectional surveys. RESULTS Response rates in hospitals’ smoking status survey were very low. Smoking status was reported by 1876 out of 7003 employees at baseline and 2280 out of 7496 employees at 1-year follow-up. Two cross-sectional surveys showed no significant difference in self-reported smoking at 1-year follow-up between intervention and control hospitals (p=0.262). We recruited 100 smokers in the group-based smoking cessation intervention tailored to smokers with low SES (corresponding to approx. 10% of smokers in target-group); 32.4% of these were validated as continuously abstinent at 6 months follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Involving smokers with low SES as partners at an early stage of study design facilitated both recruitment and development of the intervention. Despite high validated long-term abstinence rates in smoking cessation groups in the intervention hospitals we found no apparent effect of the intervention at hospital-level after one year. However, larger involvement of the target-group seems feasible and is recommended.

Ups and downs of a peer-based smoking cessation intervention help tailored to hospital-employees with low socioeconomic status: The RESPEKT Study