Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik, medizinische Psychologie · 2021
[Smoking Behaviour after Partial Resection of the Larynx: The Role of Causal Attribution].
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Münnemann Anika, Meyer Alexandra, Engelmann Dorit, Boehm Andreas, Breitenstein Kerstin, Ulrich Angela, Guntinas-Lichius Orlando, Schock Elke-Juliane, Keszte Judith, Ernst Jochen
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to examine how different causal attributions in patients with laryngeal cancer are associated with smoking behaviours (smoking cessation rates and amount of cigarettes per day) after partial resection of the larynx.
METHODS: Multicentre prospective cohort study including 4 interviews: between diagnosis and partial resection of larynx (t1), one week (t2), 3 months (t3) and 12 months (t4) after surgery. Presented in this study are t1 and t4. A total of 134 patients (mean age 62 years, 93% male) were interviewed at t1 and t4 between 2007 and 2013. Key items were causal attribution as well as previous and current smoking behaviour. Patients were grouped according to the subjectively stated causal attribution. Results were analysed descriptively and group as well as mean value comparisons were conducted.
RESULTS: Smoking was the most commonly stated causal attribution (43.3%). The quantity of cigarettes decreased significantly by about 6 cigarettes from 17 (range 3-40) to 11 (range 2-30) cigarettes per day in this group (p=0.001). 25% of patients did not recognize a reason for their illness. In longitudinal analyses of all groups of different causal attributions, there was a non-significant decrease in the percentage of smokers.
CONCLUSION: We show that causal attribution does not affect smoking cessation rate significantly in a positive way. But active smokers after PRL reduce their quantity of cigarettes per day significantly. This impact is more noticeable in patients who were able to define a causal attribution. Psycho-oncological care, information services and smoking cessation programs could contribute to this effect by making the causal attribution a subject of discussion.
METHODS: Multicentre prospective cohort study including 4 interviews: between diagnosis and partial resection of larynx (t1), one week (t2), 3 months (t3) and 12 months (t4) after surgery. Presented in this study are t1 and t4. A total of 134 patients (mean age 62 years, 93% male) were interviewed at t1 and t4 between 2007 and 2013. Key items were causal attribution as well as previous and current smoking behaviour. Patients were grouped according to the subjectively stated causal attribution. Results were analysed descriptively and group as well as mean value comparisons were conducted.
RESULTS: Smoking was the most commonly stated causal attribution (43.3%). The quantity of cigarettes decreased significantly by about 6 cigarettes from 17 (range 3-40) to 11 (range 2-30) cigarettes per day in this group (p=0.001). 25% of patients did not recognize a reason for their illness. In longitudinal analyses of all groups of different causal attributions, there was a non-significant decrease in the percentage of smokers.
CONCLUSION: We show that causal attribution does not affect smoking cessation rate significantly in a positive way. But active smokers after PRL reduce their quantity of cigarettes per day significantly. This impact is more noticeable in patients who were able to define a causal attribution. Psycho-oncological care, information services and smoking cessation programs could contribute to this effect by making the causal attribution a subject of discussion.