Purpose
The purpose of the research is to analyze and evaluate the results of the Pharmacists’ Action on Smoking program and to consider whether its impact on society in the relation to smoking cessation is higher than in comparison with casual pieces of advice from pharmacists.
Rationale
Cigarette smoking is one of the major causes of deaths which may be prevented. The Community Intervention Trial for Smoking Cessation was committed in 1995 and the results showed that the quit rates increased with the increase of the information distribution (Fisher, 1995). However, the rate of community intervention trials becomes higher, the “specifically evaluating smoking cessation interventions delivered in community pharmacies” (Maguire, McElnay, & Drummond, 2001, p. 326) remain on the lower level. The research in the sphere should be conducted at the results may show the importance and necessity for implementing such programs or their uselessness and ineffectiveness.
Methods
One hundred Northern Ireland and 24 London based pharmacists took part in the research. Each of these pharmacists was asked to register 12 smokers. 44% of pharmacists were specifically trained in accordance with the Pharmacists’ Action on Smoking (PAS) program and were to behave in accordance with the program. 484 smokers were enrolled in the research. Two groups were randomly created, PAS group numerated 265 subjects and control group consisted of 219 participants. The research lasted for one year during which the control group was just monitored, while the PAS group was impacted by structured counseling courses with information leaflets ones a week during the first 4 weeks of the experiment and once a month further. The research results were measured by means of the number of those who gave up smoking during the year of the experiment with further confirmation of this fact in two groups.
Findings
The research results are as follows. 38 subjects (14.3%) in PAS group gave up smoking. The results in the control group are lower as only 6 participants of the experiment (2.7%) self-reported smoking cessation. However, many aspects could have influenced the results. On the one hand, pharmacists reported about the experiments participants who avoided the classes for several times, if they reported about smoking cessation, but failed to confirm the results. Lack of appropriate communication skill might also affect the results. Lack of time was also considered as one of the barriers on the way to the better outcome of the experiment.
Conclusions
Thus, the research results have shown that the Pharmacists’ Action on Smoking program is effective and after minor corrections and change may be used as the community intervention initiative. The pharmacy-based intervention is effective as a program for smoking cessation as being aware of the problem and the death rates and being constantly reminded about it. The research results may be a good push for policy development where pharmacies may be pointed as the central suppliers of the services connected with smoking cessation.
Reference List
Fisher, E. (1995). The results of the COMMIT trial. Community Intervention Trial for Smoking Cessation. American Journal Of Public Health, 85(2), 159-160.
Maguire, T., McElnay, J., & Drummond, A. (2001). A randomized controlled trial of a smoking cessation intervention based in community pharmacies. Addiction (Abingdon, England), 96(2), 325-331.