Kadimpati, Sandeep

AbstractAbstract In a randomized trial of 130 surgical patients, use of a decision aid consisting of laminated cards with pros and cons of continuing smoking, attempting temporary abstinence, or attempting to quit smoking improved measures of decisional quality but did not change perioperative tobacco use behavior. Background: Decision aids can increase patient involvement in decision-making about health care. The study goal was to develop and test a decision aid for use by clinicians in discussion options for changing smoking behavior before and after elective surgery. Methods: In formative work, a decision aid was designed to facilitate patient–clinician discussion regarding three options: continue smoking, attempt a period of temporary abstinence, and attempt to quit smoking for good. A randomized, two-group pilot study was then conducted in smokers evaluated in preparation for elective surgery in a preoperative clinic to test the hypothesis that the decision aid would improve measures of decisional quality compared with usual care. Results: The final decision aid consisted of three laminated cards. The front of each card included a colorful graphic describing each choice; the reverse including two to three pros and cons for each decision, a simple graphic illustrating the effects of smoking on the body, and a motivational phrase. In the randomized trial of 130 patients, the decision aid significantly ( P < 0.05) improved measures of decisional quality and patient involvement in decision making (Cohen’s d effect sizes of 0.76 and 1.20 for the Decisional Conflict Scale and Observing PatienT involvement In decisiON-making scale, respectively). However, the decision aid did not affect any aspect of perioperative smoking behavior, including the distribution of or adherence to choices. Conclusions: Although the use of a decision aid to facilitate clinician–patient discussions regarding tobacco use around the time of surgery substantially improved measures of decisional quality, it alone did not change perioperative tobacco use behavior.

AbstractBackground and ObjectivesPrevious studies have established the relationship between tobacco use and pain severity among patients suffering from chronic pain. Unfortunately, many physicians feel underprepared to counsel patients on smoking cessation. The purpose of this study was to identify the attitudes, beliefs, and practices of pain medicine fellowship directors in regard to tobacco control interventions and trainee education.MethodsProgram directors of ACGME‐accredited pain medicine fellowships were surveyed via a web‐based form to assess current practices in tobacco intervention and to gauge interest in incorporating tobacco control into their current fellowship training curriculum.ResultsOf the respondents, the majority indicated that they frequently asking their patients about tobacco use and advise them to quit. In addition, most agreed that presenting tobacco control is a responsibility of pain physicians. However, few consistently provided any assistance with quitting. Finally, the majority of program directors felt that pain medicine fellowships should include tobacco control training and were interested in incorporating an educational module about smoking and pain into their training program.ConclusionsThis survey of pain medicine fellowship program directors indicates that although smoking cessation interventions are not being consistently applied in academic pain practices, there is a strong interest in doing so. Furthermore, the majority of program directors recognized the importance of incorporating tobacco control training into pain medicine fellowships. This recognition may provide an opportunity to develop a web‐based training module that could be easily incorporated into the upcoming milestones in pain medicine training.