Effects of an Anti-Smoking Program to Prevent Lung Cancer among Urban Aboriginals in Taiwan

Abstract

Background and Purpose: Indigenous people who leave their hometowns and move to the city to earn a living became urban aboriginals. During the process of adapting to urban living situations, they may use various coping strategies such as smoking to overcome their stress. Therefore, it is crucial to provide health education including smoking prevention, increasing knowledge regarding of tobacco hazard, self-efficacy of anti-smoking, and adjusting smoking behavior so as to empower their anti-smoking motivation to prevent lung cancer. The purpose of this study was to explore the effectiveness of an anti-smoking program on urban aboriginals in Taiwan. Methods: A quasi-experimental study design with purposeful sampling was employed. A total of 125 aboriginal subjects were recruited from two local churches at Shu Lin area in northern Taiwan. Subjects were divided into an experimental group (n =64 ) and a control group (n = 61). Both took pre-tests in order to set baseline values, and only the experimental group participated for 3-weeks in the anti-smoking program classes. Both groups took post-tests immediately after the intervention in order to evaluate the immediate effects of the teaching program, and a follow-up test was conducted four weeks after the intervention. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, one-way ANCOVA, and repeat measure ANCOVA. Results: After controlling for confounding variables, the results showed that there were statistically significant differences in the self-efficacy of anti-smoking and smoking behavior between experimental and control groups in the immediately post-test and the follow-up test (p < 0.05). However, there was no significant differences in the recognition of hazards of smoking at eiter time point. Conclusions and Implications for Practice: The findings of this study revealed that the anti-smoking program effectively improved self-efficacy of anti-smoking, and decreased the smoking behavior in urban aboriginals. They provide useful information as a reference regarding of aboriginal health promotion to health providers. It is imperative that anti-smoking be reinforced for those regular smokers to prevent induction of lung cancer.

Effective strategies to reduce commercial tobacco use in Indigenous communities globally: A systematic review

“…In eight communities in North Queensland, Australia where the Northern Queensland Indigenous Tobacco Project was implemented a significant difference of 16.8 % in the mean number of cigarettes smoked weekly among 449 people was revealed [ 53 ]. Two interventions [ 51 , 54 ] used brief intervention and school based education to reduce cigarette consumption, while two other interventions used community based programs such as school and community education and the sponsorship of cultural or sporting events to reduce consumption rates [ 33 , 54 , 55 ]. For example, a six-hour preventative education seminar presented to urban dwelling Aborigines in Taiwan reduced their smoking behaviour at both immediate and four week follow-up with a significant mean difference in smoking behaviours between intervention participants ( n = 64) and control group participants ( n = 61) of 5.19 [ 55 ].…”

Role of Tobacco Warning Labels in Informing Smokers about Risks of Smoking among Bus Drivers in Mangalore, India

“…Most of these deaths occur in the low-and middle-income countries and thissmoking cessation programs becomes necessary to protect people from contracting tobacco-related diseases and premature deaths (Jayakrishnan et al, 2013;Lin et al, 2013).…”

The Contribution of MMP-7 Promoter Polymorphisms to Taiwan Lung Cancer Susceptibility

“…Since cigarette smoking behavior is one of the well-known risk factors for lung cancer in Taiwan (47), the possible interaction between the MMP-7 A-181G genotype and personal smoking behavior was investigated, and the results are shown in Table IV. Among the non-smokers, there was no significant increased risk of lung cancer for AG and GG genotype carriers (OR=1.16, 95% CI=0.47-2.84, p=0.7472 and OR=2.46, 95% CI=0.48-12.59, p=0.2642, respectively, p trend =0.5210) (Table IV, left part).…”