ObjectiveThere is sparse information on electronic cigarette use and health behaviours among college student populations. Our objectives were to identify the patterns of electronic cigarette use in current and ever users among college students in France.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingsA multicentre cross-sectional study was conducted on two major campuses in France. Students filled in an anonymous questionnaire on their use of electronic cigarettes and on targeted behaviours such as smoking, alcohol consumption, binge drinking, use of cannabis, practice of sport and eating disorders. Ever use of electronic cigarettes was defined as use but not during the previous 30 days, and current use of electronic cigarettes as any use in the previous 30 days. The opinions and motivations of electronic cigarette users were also sought and collected.Participants1134 college students between October 2014 and February 2015.ResultsThe 1134 students included had a mean age of 20.8 years. The prevalence of ever use and current use of electronic cigarettes was 23.0% (95% CI (20.5% to 25.3%)) and 5.7% (95% CI (4.4% to 7.1%)), respectively. The prevalence of the combined use of conventional cigarettes and electronic cigarettes was 14.5%. Almost half (45.8%) of the ever users of electronic cigarettes had never smoked conventional cigarettes. Behaviours associated with ever use of electronic cigarettes were current cigarette smoking (adjusted OR (AOR)=3.97, 95% CI 2.71 to 5.83), former smoking (AOR=2.56, 95% CI 1.42 to 4.61), cannabis use (AOR=2.44, 95% CI 1.70 to 3.51) and occasional binge drinking (AOR=1.83, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.64). The only behaviour associated with current use of electronic cigarettes was conventional smoking, either previously (AOR=4.85, 95% CI 1.53 to 15.34) or currently (AOR=14.53, 95% CI 6.81 to 31.02).ConclusionsThe ever users have an experimenter's profile with sensation-seeking while the current users are mostly smokers with intention to quit smoking. Our findings are crucial for the accurate targeting of student populations at risk and to implement appropriate awareness campaigns and health education programmes.
BackgroundInfluenza-associated deaths is an important risk for the elderly in nursing homes (NHs) worldwide. Vaccination coverage among residents is high but poorly effective due to immunosenescence. Hence, vaccination of personnel is an efficient way to protect residents. Our objective was to quantify the seasonal influenza vaccination (IV) coverage among NH for elderly workers and identify its determinants in France.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study in March 2016 in a randomized sample of NHs of the Ille-et-Vilaine department of Brittany, in western France. A standardized questionnaire was administered to a randomized sample of NH workers for face-to-face interviews. General data about the establishment was also collected.ResultsAmong the 33 NHs surveyed, IV coverage for the 2015–2016 season among permanent workers was estimated at 20% (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 15.3%–26.4%) ranging from 0% to 69% depending on the establishments surveyed. Moreover, IV was associated with having previously experienced a “severe” influenza episode in the past (Prevalence Ratio 1.48, 95% CI 1.01–2.17), and varied by professional categories (p < 0.004) with better coverage among administrative staff. Better knowledge about influenza prevention tools was also correlated (p < 0.001) with a higher IV coverage. Individual perceptions of vaccination benefits had a significant influence on the IV coverage (p < 0.001). Although IV coverage did not reach a high rate, our study showed that personnel considered themselves sufficiently informed about IV.ConclusionsIV coverage remains low in the NH worker population in Ille-et-Vilaine and also possibly in France. Strong variations of IV coverage among NHs suggest that management and working environment play an important role. To overcome vaccine “hesitancy”, specific communication tools may be required to be adapted to the various NH professionals to improve influenza prevention.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-017-4556-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Background There are major gaps in the management of pediatric tuberculosis (TB) contact investigation for rapid identification of active tuberculosis and initiation of preventive therapy. This study aims to evaluate the impact of a community-based intervention as compared to facility-based model for the management of children in contact with bacteriologically confirmed pulmonary TB adults in low-resource high-burden settings. Methods/design This multicenter parallel open-label cluster randomized controlled trial is composed of three phases: I, baseline phase in which retrospective data are collected, quality of data recording in facility registers is checked, and expected acceptability and feasibility of the intervention is assessed; II, intervention phase with enrolment of index cases and contact cases in either facility- or community-based models; and III, explanatory phase including endpoint data analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, and post-intervention acceptability assessment by healthcare providers and beneficiaries. The study uses both quantitative and qualitative analysis methods. The community-based intervention includes identification and screening of all household contacts, referral of contacts with TB-suggestive symptoms to the facility for investigation, and household initiation of preventive therapy with follow-up of eligible child contacts by community healthcare workers, i.e., all young (< 5 years) child contacts or older (5–14 years) child contacts living with HIV, and with no evidence of TB disease. Twenty clusters representing TB diagnostic and treatment facilities with their catchment areas are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the community-based intervention arm or the facility-based standard of care arm in Cameroon and Uganda. Randomization was stratified by country and constrained on the number of index cases per cluster. The primary endpoint is the proportion of eligible child contacts who initiate and complete the preventive therapy. The sample size is of 1500 child contacts to identify a 10% difference between the arms with the assumption that 60% of children will complete the preventive therapy in the standard of care arm. Discussion This study will provide evidence of the impact of a community-based intervention on household child contact screening and management of TB preventive therapy in order to improve care and prevention of childhood TB in low-resource high-burden settings. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03832023. Registered on 6 February 2019
The 2021 Global Tuberculosis (TB) report shows slow progress towards closing the pediatric TB detection gap and improving the TB preventive treatment (TPT) coverage among child and adolescent contacts. This review presents the current knowledge around contact case management (CCM) in low-resource settings, with a focus on child contacts, which represents a key priority population for CCM and TPT. Compelling evidence demonstrates that CCM interventions are a key gateway for both TB case finding and identification of those in need of TPT, and their yield and effectiveness should provide a strong rationale for prioritization by national TB programs. A growing body of evidence is now showing that innovative models of care focused on community-based and patient-centered approaches to household contact investigation can help narrow down the CCM implementation gaps that we are currently facing. The availability of shorter and child-friendly TPT regimens for child contacts provide an additional important opportunity to improve TPT acceptability and adherence. Prioritization of TB CCM implementation and adequate resource mobilization by ministries of health, donors and implementing agencies is needed to timely close the gap.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.