Differential uptake of a smoking cessation programme disseminated to doctors and midwives in antenatal clinics
M Cooke1, R P Mattick, R A Walsh
1Midwifery Practice and Research Unit, St George Hospital, James Laws House, Kogarah, New South Wales 2217, Australia. cookem@sesahs.nsw.gov.au
Aims:
Two methods of dissemination (simple and intensive) were used to disseminate a smoking cessation programme to doctors and midwives working in antenatal clinics. This paper describes the differential uptake of the smoking cessation programme by doctors and midwives. It investigates whether the number of smoking cessation interventions used differ due to the type of dissemination. It also examines the frequency with which doctors and midwives provide smoking cessation interventions after dissemination.
Design:
Clinics were randomized to the method of dissemination (simple or intensive). Pre-post test design was used to examine the relationship between dissemination method and professional status at baseline and follow-up. A baseline survey collected data on the use of smoking cessation intervention in the clinics prior to dissemination. A follow-up survey was conducted 18 months after the dissemination.
Setting:
Twenty-three public hospital antenatal clinics in NSW.
Participants:
All clinical staff (midwives and doctors) working in the clinic during the 1-2-week survey period prior to dissemination and 18 months after the dissemination were asked to participate. The response rate was 63% (223) at baseline and 64% (182) at follow-up. Only 48% of midwives and doctors at follow-up were working in the original clinic.
Measures:
The proportion of clinicians who initially adopted the programme; the proportion of clinicians who had used one or more programme components in the last week); the number of types of smoking cessation intervention provided (maximum = 13), and the estimated proportion of clients offered smoking cessation intervention.
Findings:
More midwives than doctors "ever used" the programme (76% vs. 25%) and continued to implement (58% vs. 22%) the programme 18 months after dissemination. Both midwives and doctors increased the number of types of smoking cessation intervention offered at follow-up compared to baseline (mean difference 2.8). Midwives provided more smoking cessation interventions than doctors at baseline (mean difference 0.9) and at follow-up (1.6), regardless of method used to disseminate the programme. Midwives' mean estimates of the proportion of clients offered interventions were greater than doctors' (midwives' 59% vs. doctors' 35%) at follow-up.
Conclusion:
The dissemination of a smoking cessation programme increased the level of smoking cessation interventions used by doctors and midwives. Doctors and midwives differ in their uptake of smoking cessation programmes. This information can be used to plan programme dissemination strategies in the future.
