Physicians' Knowledge Level, Sources of Information, and Clinical Smoking Cessation Practices Regarding Electronic Cigarettes: A Cross-sectional Study in Adana, Türkiye.

IF 0.8 0 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Çiğdem Erhan, Ayşe Turan
{"title":"Physicians' Knowledge Level, Sources of Information, and Clinical Smoking Cessation Practices Regarding Electronic Cigarettes: A Cross-sectional Study in Adana, Türkiye.","authors":"Çiğdem Erhan, Ayşe Turan","doi":"10.4274/ThoracResPract.2026.2026-7-16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Data on physicians' knowledge and clinical practices regarding electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) remain limited, particularly among physicians from diverse specialties within the same setting. This study assessed the knowledge level, information sources, and smoking cessation counseling practices regarding e-cigarettes of physicians in Adana province and examined associations with sociodemographic and occupational characteristics.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 525 physicians in Adana between January 26 and February 16, 2026, using a 12-item e-cigarette knowledge scale (0-12) and a 5-item smoking cessation counseling practice scale (5-25). Between-group comparisons were performed using the Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests; associations were assessed using Spearman's correlation; independent predictors of practice score were identified using multivariate linear regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean knowledge score was 9.40±2.75 [95% confidence interval (CI): 9.17-9.64] and mean practice score was 20.71±4.07 (95% CI: 20.36-21.06). Knowledge and practice scores were not correlated (ρ = 0.063; 95% CI: -0.022-0.148; <i>P</i> = 0.148). Practice score was associated with specialty, professional title, institution, age, and chronic disease (all <i>P</i> < 0.05). In multivariate regression, age, specialty, and physicians' own tobacco/nicotine use remained independent predictors (B = -0.739; <i>P</i> = 0.041 for tobacco/nicotine users). Social media were the most frequently reported information sources (40.2%; 95% CI: 36.1-44.4%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Physicians' e-cigarette knowledge was moderate to high, but was not associated with general smoking cessation counseling practices, which were not assessed as e-cigarette-specific. Educational interventions should incorporate structured clinical protocols in addition to knowledge transfer.</p>","PeriodicalId":75221,"journal":{"name":"Thoracic research and practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thoracic research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/ThoracResPract.2026.2026-7-16","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Data on physicians' knowledge and clinical practices regarding electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) remain limited, particularly among physicians from diverse specialties within the same setting. This study assessed the knowledge level, information sources, and smoking cessation counseling practices regarding e-cigarettes of physicians in Adana province and examined associations with sociodemographic and occupational characteristics.

Material and methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 525 physicians in Adana between January 26 and February 16, 2026, using a 12-item e-cigarette knowledge scale (0-12) and a 5-item smoking cessation counseling practice scale (5-25). Between-group comparisons were performed using the Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests; associations were assessed using Spearman's correlation; independent predictors of practice score were identified using multivariate linear regression.

Results: Mean knowledge score was 9.40±2.75 [95% confidence interval (CI): 9.17-9.64] and mean practice score was 20.71±4.07 (95% CI: 20.36-21.06). Knowledge and practice scores were not correlated (ρ = 0.063; 95% CI: -0.022-0.148; P = 0.148). Practice score was associated with specialty, professional title, institution, age, and chronic disease (all P < 0.05). In multivariate regression, age, specialty, and physicians' own tobacco/nicotine use remained independent predictors (B = -0.739; P = 0.041 for tobacco/nicotine users). Social media were the most frequently reported information sources (40.2%; 95% CI: 36.1-44.4%).

Conclusion: Physicians' e-cigarette knowledge was moderate to high, but was not associated with general smoking cessation counseling practices, which were not assessed as e-cigarette-specific. Educational interventions should incorporate structured clinical protocols in addition to knowledge transfer.

医生的知识水平、信息来源和关于电子烟的临床戒烟实践:阿达纳的一项横断面研究。
目的:关于医生对电子烟(电子烟)的知识和临床实践的数据仍然有限,特别是在同一环境中来自不同专业的医生。本研究评估了阿达纳省医生关于电子烟的知识水平、信息来源和戒烟咨询实践,并研究了与社会人口统计学和职业特征的关系。材料与方法:采用12项电子烟知识量表(0-12)和5项戒烟咨询实践量表(5-25),于2026年1月26日至2月16日对阿达纳市525名医生进行横断面调查。采用Mann-Whitney U检验和Kruskal-Wallis检验进行组间比较;采用Spearman相关法评估相关关系;运用多元线性回归方法确定练习分数的独立预测因子。结果:平均知识分为9.40±2.75分[95%可信区间(CI): 9.17 ~ 9.64],平均实践分为20.71±4.07分(95% CI: 20.36 ~ 21.06)。知识与实践得分不相关(ρ = 0.063; 95% CI: -0.022-0.148; P = 0.148)。实践得分与专业、职称、单位、年龄、慢性病相关(均P < 0.05)。在多元回归中,年龄、专业和医生自己的烟草/尼古丁使用情况仍然是独立的预测因素(对于烟草/尼古丁使用者,B = -0.739; P = 0.041)。社交媒体是最常见的信息来源(40.2%;95% CI: 36.1-44.4%)。结论:医生的电子烟知识为中高,但与一般的戒烟咨询实践无关,没有被评估为电子烟特异性。除了知识转移外,教育干预还应纳入结构化的临床方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书