RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Despite knowledge about major health effects of secondhand tobacco smoke (SHS) exposure, systematic incorporation of SHS screening and counseling in clinical settings has not occurred. METHODS: A three-round modified Delphi Panel of tobacco control experts was convened to build consensus on the screening questions that should be asked and identify opportunities and barriers to SHS exposure screening and counseling. The panel considered four questions: (1) what questions should be asked about SHS exposure; (2) what are the top priorities to advance the goal of ensuring that these questions are asked; (3) what are the barriers to achieving these goals; and (4) how might these barriers be overcome. Each panel member submitted answers to the questions. Responses were summarized and successive rounds were reviewed by panel members for consolidation and prioritization. RESULTS: Panelists agreed that both adults and children should be screened during clinical encounters by asking if they are exposed or have ever been exposed to smoke from any tobacco products in their usual environment. The panel found that consistent clinician training, quality measurement or other accountability, and policy and electronic health records interventions were needed to successfully implement consistent screening. CONCLUSIONS: The panel successfully generated screening questions and identified priorities to improve SHS exposure screening. Policy interventions and stakeholder engagement are needed to overcome barriers to implementing effective SHS screening. IMPLICATIONS: In a modified Delphi panel, tobacco control and clinical prevention experts agreed that all adults and children should be screened during clinical encounters by asking if they are exposed or have ever been exposed to smoke from tobacco products. Consistent training, accountability, and policy and electronic health records interventions are needed to implement consistent screening. Increasing SHS screening will have a significant impact on public health and costs.
Asunto(s)
Consejo/métodos , Exposición a Riesgos Ambientales/análisis , Política para Fumadores/legislación & jurisprudencia , Contaminación por Humo de Tabaco/prevención & control , Adulto , Niño , HumanosRESUMEN
PROBLEM: Despite increasing awareness of the social determinants of health, health care disparities among sociocultural groups persist. Health care providers' unconscious bias resulting from unrecognized social privilege is one contributor to these disparities. APPROACH: In 2009, Henry Ford Health System initiated the Healthcare Equity Campaign both to raise employees' awareness of inequalities related to the social determinants of health and to increase their motivation to reduce them. After conducting awareness-raising activities to increase employees' understanding of the social determinants of health, a curriculum team developed the interactive Privilege and Responsibility Curricular Exercise (PRCE) and incorporated it into a series of trainings. The team designed the exercise to enhance participants' awareness of privilege in their lives and work, to improve their understanding of the impact of privilege on their own and others' lived experiences as a step beyond cultural competence toward cultural humility, and to encourage them to leverage their advantages to reduce health care inequities. OUTCOMES: About 300 participants of diverse professional and personal backgrounds from across the health system completed the training between the spring of 2009 and the spring of 2012, and many provided qualitative feedback about the exercise. Evaluations showed the exercise's potential as a powerful learning experience that might enhance a variety of equity- or diversity-related trainings, and also showed that participants considered the PRCE a highlight of the training. NEXT STEPS: The PRCE is worthy of additional study and could prove valuable to other organizations.
Asunto(s)
Competencia Cultural/educación , Competencia Cultural/psicología , Curriculum , Educación Médica/organización & administración , Personal de Salud/educación , Personal de Salud/psicología , Prejuicio/prevención & control , Adulto , Actitud del Personal de Salud , Femenino , Disparidades en Atención de Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Grupos Minoritarios , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To assess the role of secondhand smoke (SHS) in the etiology of chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). DESIGN: Matched case-control study. Associations between SHS and CRS were evaluated by conditional logistic regression odds ratios. SETTING: Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 306 nonsmoking patients diagnosed as having an incident case of CRS and 306 age-matched, sex-matched, and race/ethnicity-matched nonsmoking control patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Exposure to SHS for the 5 years before diagnosis of CRS (case patients) and before study entry (controls) for 4 primary sources: home, work, public places, and private social functions outside the home, such as parties, dinners, and weddings. RESULTS: Of controls and case patients, respectively, 28 (9.1%) and 41 (13.4%) had SHS exposure at home, 21 (6.9%) and 57 (18.6%) at work, 258 (84.3%) and 276 (90.2%) in public places, and 85 (27.8%) and 157 (51.3%) at private social functions. Adjusted for potential confounders (socioeconomic status and exposures to air pollution and chemicals or respiratory irritants from hobbies, work, or elsewhere), the odds ratios for CRS were 1.69 (95% confidence interval, 0.92-3.10) for SHS exposure at home, 2.81 (1.42-5.57) for exposure at work, 1.48 (0.88-2.49) for exposure in public places, and 2.60 (1.74-3.89) for exposure at private functions. A strong, independent dose-response relationship existed between CRS and the number of venues where SHS exposure occurred (odds ratio per 1 of 4 levels, 2.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.55-2.66). Approximately 40.0% of CRS appeared to be attributable to SHS. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to SHS is common and significantly independently associated with CRS. These findings have important clinical and public health implications.