Dear Editor,
In 2005, Sweden ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). Article 14 highlights the importance of tobacco cessation. In 2005, a national standard for certification of tobacco cessation practitioners was adopted in Sweden and six years later a similar standard, the Gold Standard Program (GSP) was introduced. In 2018 there were 18 approved education centers in Sweden and one GSP-training program.
Results from Swedish and Danish cessation counselors have shown optimistic results regarding tobacco quit rates1,2. Others have identified barriers for tobacco cessation in various health-care personnel, including a shortage of tobacco cessation experts to refer the patient to3, as well as perceived lack of time for counseling4 and training in tobacco cessation5. To our knowledge, no previous study has explored the characteristics of Swedish tobacco cessation counselors.
An electronic survey was distributed in April 2018 to those who had been certified from 2006 to April 2018 (n=902). The survey involved multiple-choice questions regarding sex, education, current employment, working conditions, and time spent on smoking cessation. The survey was anonymous, and did not involve any patients or sensitive material.
There were 586 (65%) responders. As shown in Table 1, the overwhelming majority (93.9%) were women. The dominating occupation was nurse/midwife and 76% stated being active in tobacco cessation. The majority of respondents (75.5%) reported that they spent 0.5–2 hours per week on tobacco cessation and considered the overall possibilities to conduct tobacco cessation as ‘moderate’. Most responders saw 0–2 new patients per month in predominantly individual sessions.
Table 1.
Characteristics of tobacco cessation counselors (Total N=586)
| Characteristics | n (%) |
|---|---|
| Sex (n=586) | |
| Male | 36 (6.1) |
| Female | 550 (93.9) |
| Education (n=586) | |
| Nurse, midwife | 415 (70.8) |
| Psychologist | 1 (0.2) |
| Dental hygienist | 31 (5.3) |
| Dentist | 0 (0) |
| Public health practicioner | 23 (3.9) |
| Physician | 2 (0.3) |
| Other | 114 (19.5) |
| Current position (n=584) | |
| Nurse, midwife | 386 (66.1) |
| Psychologist | 1 (0.2) |
| Dental hygienist | 31 (5.3) |
| Dentist | 0 (0.0) |
| Mainly cessation counselor | 36 (6.2) |
| Physician | 2 (0.3) |
| Other | 128 (21.9) |
| Work place (n=585) | |
| Primary care public | 285 (48.6) |
| Primary care private | 106 (18.1) |
| Hospital | 85 (14.5) |
| Occupational health care | 19 (3.2) |
| Other health care center | 37 (6.3) |
| Other | 53 (9.0) |
| Type of cessation education (n=586) | |
| Diploma D | 486 (82.9) |
| GSP | 36 (6.1) |
| Diploma D + GSP | 18 (3.1) |
| Other | 46 (7.8) |
| Year of diploma training (n=586) | |
| Before 2005 | 25 (4.3) |
| 2005–2008 | 45 (7.7) |
| 2009–2012 | 92 (15.7) |
| 2013–2016 | 269 (45.9) |
| 2017–2018 | 155 (26.5) |
| Active in cessation (n=571) | |
| Yes, active | 434 (76.0) |
| No demand | 38 (6.7) |
| No, new job | 48 (8.4) |
| No, service stopped | 13 (2.2) |
| No, other reason | 36 (6.3) |
| Retired | 2 (0.3) |
| Doctor’s readiness to prescribea (n=484) | |
| Easy | 354 (73.1) |
| Varies between different physicians | 109 (22.5) |
| Resistance | 21 (4.3) |
| Hours per week spent on cessation (n=458) | |
| 0.5–2 | 346 (75.5) |
| 2.5–5 | 74 (16.1) |
| 5.5–10 | 18 (3.9) |
| >10.5 | 20 (4.4) |
| New patients per month (n=462) | |
| 0–2 | 288 (62.3) |
| 3–4 | 111 (24.0) |
| 5–6 | 35 (7.6) |
| 7–10 | 11 (2.4) |
| >10 | 17 (3.7) |
| Group vs individual cessation (n=467) | |
| Individual | 435 (93.1) |
| Group | 32 (6.9) |
| Follow-up (n=468) | |
| Face-to-face | 208 (44.4) |
| Telephone | 223 (47.6) |
| No system | 14 (3.0) |
| Other | 23 (4.9) |
| Cessation in workplace (n=483) | |
| I work alone | 261 (54.0) |
| I work in a team | 222 (46.0) |
| Management of patient information (n=473) | |
| Registering in the clinic´s own system | 450 (95.1) |
| Registering in own computerized system | 11 (2.3) |
| Registering on paper | 12 (2.5) |
| Referal routines (n=452) | |
| I get written referrals and replies | 195 (43.1) |
| No routines for referrals or replies | 257 (56.9) |
| Support from manager (n=558) | |
| Very good | 234 (41.9) |
| Moderate | 215 (38.5) |
| Small/none | 56 (10.0) |
| Bad | 53 (9.5) |
| Support from administrative personnel (n=554) | |
| Very good | 172 (31.0) |
| Moderate | 227 (40.9) |
| Small/none | 104 (18.8) |
| Bad | 51 (9.2) |
| Possibilities to affect work environment (n=558) | |
| Very good | 132 (23.7) |
| Moderate | 243 (43.5) |
| Small/none | 35 (6.3) |
| Bad | 148 (26.5) |
| Possibilities to spend time on cessation (n=551) | |
| Very good | 82 (14.9) |
| Moderate | 215 (39.0) |
| Small/none | 76 (13.8) |
| Bad | 178 (32.3) |
| Possibilities for continuing cessation education (n=553) | |
| Very good | 82 (14.8) |
| Moderate | 254 (45.9) |
| Small/none | 50 (9.0) |
| Bad | 167 (30.2) |
| Overall possibilities to conduct cessation (n=549) | |
| Very good | 117 (21.3) |
| Moderate | 301 (54.8) |
| Small/none | 36 (6.6) |
| Bad | 95 (17.3) |
| Knowledge about guidelines (n=518) | |
| Yes, we adhere to guidelines | 279 (53.9) |
| Known, but not always practiced | 157 (30.3) |
| Known only by the cessationers | 38 (7.3) |
| Mostly unknown | 44 (8.5) |
| Where do your patients come from? (n=471) | |
| Many different caregivers (hospital, primary care, other) | 137 (29.1) |
| Only or almost only from own caregiver | 334 (70.9) |
| Is it important for you that the survey is anonymous? (n=586) | |
| No | 230 (39.2) |
| Yes | 166 (28.3) |
| No opinion | 190 (32.4) |
Prescription of replacement therapy, varenicline and bupropion.
The replies to questions dealing with various aspects of support in the work place ranged from moderate to very good for different variables. Although little time was spent on tobacco cessation, the possibilities to spend time on tobacco cessation was stated as moderate by 39% of the respondents; thus, there seems to be no major hindering factor for conducting tobacco cessation, as opposed to what has been reported4.
In contrast to what has been reported from the tobacco cessation database in Denmark, where most tobacco cessation was conducted in a group setting2 according to the GSP program, our respondents reported mostly individual cessation sessions. When stratifying by type of cessation education, all those with solely GSP education (n=36) reported individual cessation sessions, even though group-based interventions are more cost-effective than individual consultations6. A reason for the dominance of individual cessation sessions could be a low inflow of patients from primary care, possibly due to the deprioritizing of smoking-related diseases such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder7.
Our results show that most consultations with Swedish cessation counselors are on an individual basis. We also found that little time is spent on tobacco cessation, despite that more than 50% consider their ‘overall possibilities to conduct tobacco cessation’ as moderate. Further studies are warranted to examine the reasons behind the short time spent on tobacco cessation and how more patients in need could benefit from this treatment.
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest and none was reported.
FUNDING
This project was supported by the National Board of Health and Welfare.
PROVENANCE AND PEER REVIEW
Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed
REFERENCES
- 1.Helgason AR, Tomson T, Lund KE, Galanti R, Ahnve S, Gilljam H. Factors related to abstinence in a telephone helpline for smoking cessation. European journal of public health. 2004;14(3):306–310. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/14.3.306. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Rasmussen M, Fernandez E, Tonnesen H. Effectiveness of the Gold Standard Programme compared with other smoking cessation interventions in Denmark: a cohort study. BMJ open. 2017;7(2):e013553. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013553. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Helgason AR, Lund KE. General practitioners’ perceived barriers to smoking cessation-results from four Nordic countries. Scandinavian journal of public health. 2002;30(2):141–147. doi: 10.1080/14034940210133799. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Naughton F, Hopewell S, Sinclair L, McCaughan D, McKell J, Bauld L. Barriers and facilitators to smoking cessation in pregnancy and in the post-partum period: The health care professionals’ perspective. British journal of health psychology. 2018;23(3):741–757. doi: 10.1111/bjhp.12314. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Abatemarco DJ, Steinberg MB, Delnevo CD. Midwives’ knowledge, perceptions, beliefs, and practice supports regarding tobacco dependence treatment. Journal of midwifery & women’s health. 2007;52(5):451–457. doi: 10.1016/j.jmwh.2007.03.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Bauld L, Chesterman J, Ferguson J, Judge K. A comparison of the effectiveness of group-based and pharmacy-led smoking cessation treatment in Glasgow. Addiction. 2009;104(2):308–316. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02446.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Sandelowsky H, Hylander I, Krakau I, Modin S, Stallberg B, Nager A. Time pressured deprioritization of COPD in primary care: a qualitative study. Scandinavian journal of primary health care. 2016;34(1):55–65. doi: 10.3109/02813432.2015.1132892. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]