Prevalence of Underreported Nicotine Exposure Among US Nonsmoking Adults: A Comparison of Self-Reported Exposure and Serum Cotinine Levels From NHANES 2013-2020.

INTRODUCTION: Secondhand smoke (SHS) poses a significant health risk. However, individuals who do not smoke may be unaware of their exposure, thereby failing to take protective actions promptly. AIMS AND METHODS: We assessed the prevalence of underreported nicotine exposure in a nationally representative sample of US nonsmoking adults using data from the US National Health and Examination Survey. Individuals with underreported nicotine exposure were defined as those who reported no exposure to all tobacco products (traditional tobacco, nicotine replacements, and e-cigarettes) or SHS, yet had detectable levels of serum cotinine (>0.015 ng/mL). We fitted logistic regression models to determine sociodemographic and chronic condition factors associated with underreported nicotine exposure. RESULTS: Our analysis included 13 503 adults aged 18 years and older. Between 2013 and 2020, the prevalence of self-reported SHS exposure, serum cotinine-assessed nicotine exposure, and underreported nicotine exposure among US nonsmokers were 22.0%, 51.2%, and 34.6%, respectively. Remarkably, 67.6% with detectable serum cotinine reported no SHS exposure. Males, non-Hispanic blacks, individuals of other races (including Asian Americans, Native Americans, and Pacific Islanders), and those without cardiovascular diseases were more likely to underreport nicotine exposure than their counterparts. The median serum cotinine value was higher in respondents who reported SHS exposure (0.107 ng/mL) than in those who reported no exposure (0.035 ng/mL). We estimate that approximately 56 million US residents had underreported nicotine exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Over a third of US nonsmokers underreport their nicotine exposure, underlining the urgent need for comprehensive public awareness campaigns and interventions. Further research into sociodemographic determinants influencing this underreporting is needed. IMPLICATIONS: Understanding the extent of underreported nicotine exposure is crucial for developing effective public health strategies and interventions. It is imperative to bolster public consciousness about the risks associated with SHS. Additionally, surveillance tools should also incorporate measures of exposure to outdoor SHS and e-cigarette vapor to enhance the quality of data monitoring. Findings from this study can guide tobacco control initiatives and inform smoke-free air legislation.

Exploring an Innovative Approach to Enhance Discussion Board Engagement.

Online discussion boards are a standard learning management system (LMS) instructional tool used in the emerging online learning pedagogy. This pilot study examined an innovative approach that differs from how discussion boards have been commonly used. Using a retrospective, cross-sectional design, we evaluated the effect of shifting from traditional teacher and student-generated prompts to using student-generated videos with higher-order discussion questions to gauge student perceptions of peer feedback and engagement. Participants were graduate students in a health care administration course at a large university. Overall students' perceptions of creating and responding to student-generated prompts were positive. Students responded that they were more engaged and thought more critically about the content with this shift from the traditional way of using discussion boards. As digital technology reshapes higher education, it is essential to reflect and evaluate the effectiveness of current LMS applications and standard procedures to improve educational delivery.

A Comparison of Web-Based Cancer Risk Calculators That Inform Shared Decision-making for Lung Cancer Screening.

INTRODUCTION: To align patient preferences and understanding with harm-benefit perception, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) mandates that providers engage patients in a collaborative shared decision-making (SDM) visit before LDCT. Nonetheless, patients and providers often turn instead to the web for help making decisions. Several web-based lung cancer risk calculators (LCRCs) provide risk predictions and screening recommendations; however, the accuracy, consistency, and subsequent user interpretation of these predictions between LCRCs is ambiguous. We conducted a systematic review to assess this variability. DESIGN: Through a systematic Internet search, we identified 10 publicly available LCRCs and categorized their input variables: demographic factors, cancer history, smoking status, and personal/environmental factors. To assess variance in LCRC risk prediction outputs, we developed 16 hypothetical patients along a risk continuum, illustrated by randomly assigned input variables, and individually compared them to each LCRC against the empirically validated "gold-standard" PLCO risk model in order to evaluate the accuracy of the LCRCs within identical time-windows. RESULTS: From the inclusion criteria, 11 calculators were initially identified. The analyzed calculators also vary in output characteristics and risk depiction for hypothetical patients. There were 13 total instances across ten hypothetical patients in which the sample standard error exceeded the mean risk percentage across all general samples and set standard calculations. The largest measured difference is 16.49% for patient 8, and the smallest difference is 0.01% for patient 2. The largest measured difference is 16.49% for patient 8, and the smallest difference is 0.01% for patient 2. CONCLUSION: Substantial variability in the depiction of lung cancer risk for hypothetical patients exists across the web-based LCRCs due to their respective inputs and risk prediction models. To foster informed decision-making in the SDM-LDCT context, the input variables, risk prediction models, risk depiction, and screening recommendations must be standardized to best practice.

Lessons Learned from a Pilot Study Implementing a Team-Based Messaging Application (Slack) to Improve Communication and Teamwork in Veterinary Medical Education.

Communication skills are paramount for a successful veterinary curriculum. Technological advances have improved communication processes, and the way instruction is delivered. Yet, with these advances come challenges such as email overload, increased interruptions, and miscommunications. Time is a valuable commodity at any high caseload veterinary teaching hospital. When increasingly more time is spent sending and receiving emails, text messages, pages, and calls in lieu of more focused clinical teaching, then the modes of communication and traditional learning theories need to be evaluated. An effective mode of communication is needed to reduce information overload and miscommunication. This article describes lessons learned from a pilot study to determine if a team-based messaging application could improve a surgical team's communication by having all forms of transmitted media directly related to their scope of work accessible to everyone on the team in one real-time digital platform (Slack). Fifteen members of a university-based surgical team were enrolled into the study and provided with surveys at specific time points to evaluate the efficacy of an internet-based team communication tool during a 3-month period. Results of our study showed an overall perception of improved communication among team members when using a team-based communication platform. Recommendations are provided to address team member's underutilization of the platform, which resulted in duplicate messages and miscommunication. We conclude an initial adoption by staff members is essential when implementing significant shifts in communication platforms.

Quality of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Mobile Apps: Evaluation Using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) With Additional Criteria From a Content Expert.

BACKGROUND: The spread of technology and dissemination of knowledge across the World Wide Web has prompted the development of apps for American Sign Language (ASL) translation, interpretation, and syntax recognition. There is limited literature regarding the quality, effectiveness, and appropriateness of mobile health (mHealth) apps for the deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHOH) that pose to aid the DHOH in their everyday communication and activities. Other than the star-rating system with minimal comments regarding quality, the evaluation metrics used to rate mobile apps are commonly subjective. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the quality and effectiveness of DHOH apps using a standardized scale. In addition, it also aimed to identify content-specific criteria to improve the evaluation process by using a content expert, and to use the content expert to more accurately evaluate apps and features supporting the DHOH. METHODS: A list of potential apps for evaluation was generated after a preliminary screening for apps related to the DHOH. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed to refine the master list of apps. The study modified a standardized rating scale with additional content-specific criteria applicable to the DHOH population for app evaluation. This was accomplished by including a DHOH content expert in the design of content-specific criteria. RESULTS: The results indicate a clear distinction in Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS) scores among apps within the study's three app categories: ASL translators (highest score=3.72), speech-to-text (highest score=3.6), and hard-of-hearing assistants (highest score=3.90). Of the 217 apps obtained from the search criteria, 21 apps met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Furthermore, the limited consideration for measures specific to the target population along with a high app turnover rate suggests opportunities for improved app effectiveness and evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: As more mHealth apps enter the market for the DHOH population, more criteria-based evaluation is needed to ensure the safety and appropriateness of the apps for the intended users. Evaluation of population-specific mHealth apps can benefit from content-specific measurement criteria developed by a content expert in the field.

Benchmarking Implications: Analysis of Medicare Accountable Care Organizations Spending Level and Quality of Care.

Early evidence has shown that Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) have achieved some success in improving the quality of care and reducing Medicare costs. However, it has been argued that the ACO rewarding model may disproportionately affect relatively low-spending (LS; considered as efficient) organizations that have fewer options to cut unnecessary services compared with high-spending (HS; inefficient) organizations. We conducted a cross-sectional retrospective study to compare ACO financial and quality of care performance between HS-ACO and LS-ACO. After adjusting for ACO organizational factors and beneficiary characteristics, we found that HS-ACOs generated greater savings per beneficiary than LS-ACOs ($501 vs. -$108, p < .001); however, HS-ACOs had a lower quality of care performance (48.79 vs. 53.29, p = .002). Specifically, LS-ACOs had better quality performance than HS-ACOs in patient experience/satisfaction (p = .02), preventive care services (p = .004), and hospitalization management (p = .001), whereas HS-ACOs better performed in routine checkup/follow-up (p < .001) and risk population management (p = .048). Our findings indicated that Medicare ACO rewarding model seems to be advantageous for HS-ACOs regardless of the overall quality of care performance.

Geographic Proximity of Waterpipe Smoking Establishments to Colleges in the U.S.

INTRODUCTION: Waterpipe tobacco smoking is prevalent among college students in the U.S. and increasing in popularity. Waterpipe smoking establishments are almost completely unregulated, and limited information exists documenting the expansion of this industry. The objective of this study was to identify U.S.-based waterpipe establishments and measure their proximity to colleges/universities. METHODS: Waterpipe establishments and their addresses were compiled using five Internet-based directories during 2014 and analyzed in 2015. Addresses were geocoded and overlaid on a U.S. map of accredited colleges/universities. Proximity of colleges/universities to the nearest waterpipe establishment was measured in 3-mile increments. Multinomial logistic regression was used to model the factors associated with proximity of waterpipe establishments to colleges/universities. RESULTS: A total of 1,690 waterpipe establishments and 1,454 colleges/universities were included in the study. Overall, 554 colleges/universities (38.1%) were within 3 miles of a waterpipe establishment. Proximity of waterpipe establishments to colleges/universities was associated with higher full-time student enrollment. Public colleges/universities and those with a smoke-free campus policy were at lower odds of having waterpipe establishments within 3 miles of their campuses. CONCLUSIONS: Waterpipe smoking establishments are more likely to be located near large colleges/universities. This study should inform initiatives aimed at reducing retail tobacco establishment exemptions.

Factors associated with smoking frequency among current waterpipe smokers in the United States: Findings from the National College Health Assessment II.

BACKGROUND: Some waterpipe smokers exhibit nicotine dependent behaviors such as increased use over time and inability to quit, placing them at high risk of adverse health outcomes. This study examines the determinants of dependence by measuring frequency of use among current waterpipe smokers using a large national U.S. METHODS: Data were drawn from four waves (Spring/Fall 2009 and Spring/Fall 2010) of the American College Health Association-National College Health Assessment datasets. The sample was restricted to students who smoked a waterpipe at least once in the past 30 days (N=19,323). Ordered logistic regression modeled the factors associated with higher frequency of waterpipe smoking. RESULTS: Among current waterpipe smokers, 6% used a waterpipe daily or almost daily (20-29 days). Daily cigarette smokers were at higher odds of smoking a waterpipe at higher frequencies compared with non-smokers of cigarettes (OR=1.81; 95% CI=1.61-2.04). There was a strong association between daily cigar smoking and higher frequency of waterpipe smoking (OR=7.77; 95% CI=5.49-11.02). Similarly, students who used marijuana had higher odds of smoking a waterpipe at higher frequencies (OR=1.57; 95% CI=1.37-1.81). CONCLUSIONS: Daily consumers of other addictive substances are at a higher risk of intensive waterpipe smoking and thus higher risk of waterpipe dependence. Intervention programs must incorporate methods to reduce waterpipe dependence and subsequently prevent its deleterious health effects.

Water pipe tobacco smoking in the United States: findings from the National Adult Tobacco Survey.

OBJECTIVE: To report prevalence and correlates of water pipe tobacco smoking (WTS) use among U.S. adults. METHODS: Data were from the 2009-2010 National Adult Tobacco Survey, a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults. Estimates of WTS ever and current use were reported overall, and by sex, age, race/ethnicity, educational attainment, annual household income, sexual orientation, and cigarette smoking status. State-level prevalence rates of WTS ever were reported using choropleth thematic maps for the overall population and by sex. RESULTS: The national prevalence of WTS ever was 9.8% and 1.5% for current use. WTS ever was more prevalent among those who are male (13.4%), 18-24 years old (28.4%) compared to older adults, non-Hispanic White (9.8%) compared to non-Hispanic Black, with some college education (12.4%) compared to no high school diploma, and reporting sexual minority status (21.1%) compared to heterosexuals. States with highest prevalence included DC (17.3%), NV (15.8%), and CA (15.5%). CONCLUSION: WTS is now common among young adults in the US and high in regions where cigarette smoking prevalence is the lowest and smoke-free policies have a longer history. To reduce its use, WTS should be included in smoke-free regulations and state and federal regulators should consider policy development in other areas, including taxes, labeling, and distribution.