Smoking
Conditions
Keywords
tobacco cessation treatment, standardized patients, dental students, tobacco cessation treatment education
Brief summary
This study determines if there is a difference in dental students' attitudes, perceived barriers, subjective norms, perceived skills, self-efficacy, intentions to provide cessation treatment, and cessation knowledge in those students receiving a tobacco cessation lecture along with practice sessions using standardized patients and those students receiving only a tobacco cessation lecture. The study determines if dental students' use of tobacco affects their intent to provide cessation treatment to patients, and if the time between receiving the lecture and participating in the practice sessions using standardized patients makes a difference in dental students' attitudes, perceived barriers, subjective norms. perceived skills, self-efficacy, intentions to provide cessation treatment, and cessation knowledge.
Detailed description
The experimental study has a pretest-posttest design. It evaluates the changes to dental students' attitudes, perceived barriers, subjective norms, perceived skills, self-efficacy, intentions to provide cessation treatment, and tobacco cessation knowledge between those students receiving a lecture along with practice sessions using standardized patients and those students receiving only a lecture. Dental students will be invited to complete two questionnaires. The control group of dental students will complete the first questionnaire before the lecture and the second questionnaire after the lecture. The experimental group of dental students will complete the first questionnaire before the lecture and the second questionnaire after the lecture and the practice and debriefing sessions. Subjects will include 120 first year dental students in an introductory course to clinical dentistry. The cessation training is a required activity in the course. Students are divided into small groups according to their bench or lab numbers. These numbers are assigned to the student based on the alphabetical order of their name. The eligibility criteria is: 1) Must be a first year dental student in Introduction to Clinical Dentistry 1 at the University of Louisville, and 2) Must be willing to volunteer to complete pre- and post-questionnaires about the cessation treatment educational program. The exclusion criteria is: Subject is not willing to give consent to complete the pre- and post- questionnaire.
Interventions
OTHERCounseling practice sessions
Dental students will complete the first questionnaire before a tobacco cessation lecture and the second questionnaire after the lecture, counseling practice sessions using standardized patients and a debriefing session.
Sponsors
University of Louisville
Study design
Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* must be a first year dental student in Introduction to Clinical Dentistry I at the study institution * volunteer to complete pre- and post-questionnaires concerning tobacco cessation treatment educational training.
Exclusion criteria
* subject does not complete pre- and post- questionnaires.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change From Baseline in Attitude Score | Questionnaire 1 (baseline/pre-lecture) to Questionnaire 2 (post-lecture or post-lecture and counseling/debriefing sessions) | The attitude variable was computed by adding the values from two questionnaire items to assess the level agreement with statements: 1.) It is important for members of the profession to discuss tobacco use with patients and 2.) A brief intervention (3 minutes) for tobacco cessation with my patients would be effective. The rating scale was: 0 = strongly disagree, 1 = moderately disagree, 2 = somewhat disagree, 3 = neither disagree or agree, 4 = somewhat agree, 5 = moderately agree, and 6 = strongly agree. A higher value represents participants' more positive attitude toward providing tobacco cessation treatment (Range:0-8). The difference in the attitude from Questionnaire 1 to Questionnaire 2 was computed by subtracting the total value of the variable at Questionnaire 1 from the total value at Questionnaire 2. |
| Change From Baseline in Perceived Barriers Score | Questionnaire 1(baseline/pre-lecture) to Questionnaire 2(post-lecture or post-lecture and counseling /debriefing sessions) | The perceived barriers variable was computed by adding the total number of barriers reported by participants. Participants were asked to select all factors that may limit their ability to counsel tobacco users during every visit. The rating scale for reporting barriers was: 0 = no and 1 = yes. A higher value represents a higher number of barriers to providing tobacco cessation treatment reported by participants(Range: 0-11). The difference in perceived barriers from Questionnaire 1 to Questionnaire 2 was computed by subtracting the total number of perceived barriers at Questionnaire 1 from the total number of perceived barriers at Questionnaire 2. |
| Change From Baseline in Subjective Norms Score | Questionnaire 1 ( baseline/pre-lecture) to Questionnaire 2 (post-lecture or post-lecture and counseling/debriefing sessions) | Subjective norms are beliefs that people who influence your actions approve or disapprove of the behavior. The subjective norms variable was computed by adding the values of six questions to assess the participants' level of perceived social pressures to counsel patients in quitting tobacco use. Questions wer rated on a seven-point Likert scale; higher point values indicate a perceived social norm more supportive of counseling patients in quitting tobacco use(Range: 0-36). The difference in the subjective norms score from Questionnaire 1 to Questionnaire 2 was computed by subtracting the total number of participants' subjective norms at Questionnaire 1 from the total number of participants' subjective norms at Questionnaire 2. |
| Change From Baseline in Perceived Skills Score | Questionnaire 1(baseline/pre-lecture) to Questionnaire 2 (post-lecture or post-lecture and counseling/debriefing sessions) | The perceived skills variable was computed by adding the values of seven questions that assessed the participants' perceived level of tobacco cessation treatment skills from poor to excellent. The rating scale was: 0 = poor, 1 = fair, 2 = good, 3 = very good, and 4 = excellent. A higher value represents a higher level of tobacco cessation treatment skills perceived by participants (Range: 0-28). The difference in the participants' perceived skills from Questionnaire 1 to Questionnaire 2 was computed by subtracting the total value of perceived skills at Questionnaire 1 from the total value of perceived skills at Questionnaire 2. |
| Change From Baseline in Self-efficacy Score | Questionaire 1 (baseline/pre-lecture) to Questionnaire 2 (post-lecture or post-lecture and counseling/debriefing sessions) | Self-efficacy represents an individual's confidence in his/her ability to perform a behavior. The self-efficacy variable was computed by adding the values of ten questions to assess the participants' self-efficacy to counsel patients to quit tobacco use. The rating scale was: 0 = not at all confident, 1 = not very confident, 2 = moderately confident, 3 = very confident, and 4 = extremely confident. A higher value represents participants' higher level of confidence in providing tobacco cessation treatment (Range: 0-40). The difference in participants' self-efficacy from Questionnaire 1 to Questionnaire 2 was computed by subtracting the total value of self-efficacy at Questionnaire 1 from the total value at Questionnaire 2. |
| Change From Baseline in Intentions Score | Questionnaire 1 (baseline/pre-lecture) to Questionnaire 2 (post-lecture or post-lecture and counseling/debriefing sessions) | Participants' intentions to provide tobacco cessation treatment were computed by adding values from thirteen questions to assess dental students' intent to counsel patients to quit tobacco use. The rating scale was: 0 = never, 1 = rarely, 2 = sometimes, 3 = almost always, 4 = always (every visit). A higher value represents participants' stronger intentions to provide tobacco cessation treatment (Range: 0-52). The difference in participants' intentions to provide tobacco cessation treatment from Questionnaire 1 to Questionnaire 2 was computed by subtracting the total value of participants' intentions at Questionnaire 1 from the total value of participants' intentions at Questionnaire 2. |
| Change From Baseline in Tobacco Cessation Knowledge Score | Questionnaire 1 (pre-lecture) to Questionnaire 2 (post-lecture or post-lecture and counseling/debriefing sessions) | The tobacco cessation knowledge variable was computed by adding the participants' total number of correct answers of the ten knowledge questions. The rating scale was: 0 = incorrect and 1 = correct. A higher value represents participants' higher level of tobacco cessation treatment knowledge (Range: 0-10). The difference in the tobacco cessation knowledge from Questionnaire 1 to Questionnaire 2 was computed by subtracting the total number of participants' correct answers at Questionnaire 1 from the total number of participants' correct answers at Questionnaire 2. |
Countries
United States
Participant flow
Recruitment details
The recruitment period began on February 23 and ended on April 19. The location of the study was at a dental school and the standardized patient clinic in the medical school.
Pre-assignment details
Students were excluded from the study if they did not meet study requirements.
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Counseling Practice Sessions Dental students will be administered the first questionnaire before receiving a tobacco cessation lecture and the second questionnaire after the lecture, counseling practice sessions using standardized patients, and debriefing session. | 42 |
| Lecture Only Students will receive the first questionnaire before the lecture and the second questionnaire after the lecture | 52 |
| Total | 94 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Lecture Only | Counseling Practice Sessions | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Categorical <=18 years | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Age, Categorical >=65 years | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Age, Categorical Between 18 and 65 years | 52 Participants | 42 Participants | 94 Participants |
| Age, Continuous | 25.00 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.74 | 25.66 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.31 | 25.29 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.99 |
| Region of Enrollment United States | 52 participants | 42 participants | 94 participants |
| Sex/Gender, Customized Female | 23 participants | 12 participants | 35 participants |
| Sex/Gender, Customized Male | 29 participants | 29 participants | 58 participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | — / — | — / — |
| other Total, other adverse events | 0 / 0 | 0 / 0 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 0 | 0 / 0 |
Outcome results
Primary
Change From Baseline in Attitude Score
The attitude variable was computed by adding the values from two questionnaire items to assess the level agreement with statements: 1.) It is important for members of the profession to discuss tobacco use with patients and 2.) A brief intervention (3 minutes) for tobacco cessation with my patients would be effective. The rating scale was: 0 = strongly disagree, 1 = moderately disagree, 2 = somewhat disagree, 3 = neither disagree or agree, 4 = somewhat agree, 5 = moderately agree, and 6 = strongly agree. A higher value represents participants' more positive attitude toward providing tobacco cessation treatment (Range:0-8). The difference in the attitude from Questionnaire 1 to Questionnaire 2 was computed by subtracting the total value of the variable at Questionnaire 1 from the total value at Questionnaire 2.
Time frame: Questionnaire 1 (baseline/pre-lecture) to Questionnaire 2 (post-lecture or post-lecture and counseling/debriefing sessions)
Population: The control group (lecture only) completed the second questionnaire after the lecture and the intervention group (counseling practice sessions) completed the second questionnaire after the counseling practice sessions and the debriefing session.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Counseling Practice Sessions | Change From Baseline in Attitude Score | .64 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.61 |
| Lecture Only | Change From Baseline in Attitude Score | -.25 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.27 |
Primary
Change From Baseline in Intentions Score
Participants' intentions to provide tobacco cessation treatment were computed by adding values from thirteen questions to assess dental students' intent to counsel patients to quit tobacco use. The rating scale was: 0 = never, 1 = rarely, 2 = sometimes, 3 = almost always, 4 = always (every visit). A higher value represents participants' stronger intentions to provide tobacco cessation treatment (Range: 0-52). The difference in participants' intentions to provide tobacco cessation treatment from Questionnaire 1 to Questionnaire 2 was computed by subtracting the total value of participants' intentions at Questionnaire 1 from the total value of participants' intentions at Questionnaire 2.
Time frame: Questionnaire 1 (baseline/pre-lecture) to Questionnaire 2 (post-lecture or post-lecture and counseling/debriefing sessions)
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Counseling Practice Sessions | Change From Baseline in Intentions Score | 7.88 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 9.05 |
| Lecture Only | Change From Baseline in Intentions Score | 1.90 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.96 |
Primary
Change From Baseline in Perceived Barriers Score
The perceived barriers variable was computed by adding the total number of barriers reported by participants. Participants were asked to select all factors that may limit their ability to counsel tobacco users during every visit. The rating scale for reporting barriers was: 0 = no and 1 = yes. A higher value represents a higher number of barriers to providing tobacco cessation treatment reported by participants(Range: 0-11). The difference in perceived barriers from Questionnaire 1 to Questionnaire 2 was computed by subtracting the total number of perceived barriers at Questionnaire 1 from the total number of perceived barriers at Questionnaire 2.
Time frame: Questionnaire 1(baseline/pre-lecture) to Questionnaire 2(post-lecture or post-lecture and counseling /debriefing sessions)
Population: The number of participants for analysis was determined by completing the second questionnaire after the lecture or after the counseling practice sessions using standardized patients.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Counseling Practice Sessions | Change From Baseline in Perceived Barriers Score | 1.83 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.53 |
| Lecture Only | Change From Baseline in Perceived Barriers Score | .87 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.78 |
Primary
Change From Baseline in Perceived Skills Score
The perceived skills variable was computed by adding the values of seven questions that assessed the participants' perceived level of tobacco cessation treatment skills from poor to excellent. The rating scale was: 0 = poor, 1 = fair, 2 = good, 3 = very good, and 4 = excellent. A higher value represents a higher level of tobacco cessation treatment skills perceived by participants (Range: 0-28). The difference in the participants' perceived skills from Questionnaire 1 to Questionnaire 2 was computed by subtracting the total value of perceived skills at Questionnaire 1 from the total value of perceived skills at Questionnaire 2.
Time frame: Questionnaire 1(baseline/pre-lecture) to Questionnaire 2 (post-lecture or post-lecture and counseling/debriefing sessions)
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Counseling Practice Sessions | Change From Baseline in Perceived Skills Score | 8.52 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.62 |
| Lecture Only | Change From Baseline in Perceived Skills Score | 3.38 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.84 |
Primary
Change From Baseline in Self-efficacy Score
Self-efficacy represents an individual's confidence in his/her ability to perform a behavior. The self-efficacy variable was computed by adding the values of ten questions to assess the participants' self-efficacy to counsel patients to quit tobacco use. The rating scale was: 0 = not at all confident, 1 = not very confident, 2 = moderately confident, 3 = very confident, and 4 = extremely confident. A higher value represents participants' higher level of confidence in providing tobacco cessation treatment (Range: 0-40). The difference in participants' self-efficacy from Questionnaire 1 to Questionnaire 2 was computed by subtracting the total value of self-efficacy at Questionnaire 1 from the total value at Questionnaire 2.
Time frame: Questionaire 1 (baseline/pre-lecture) to Questionnaire 2 (post-lecture or post-lecture and counseling/debriefing sessions)
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Counseling Practice Sessions | Change From Baseline in Self-efficacy Score | 14.34 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 8.61 |
| Lecture Only | Change From Baseline in Self-efficacy Score | 7.66 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 6.9 |
Primary
Change From Baseline in Subjective Norms Score
Subjective norms are beliefs that people who influence your actions approve or disapprove of the behavior. The subjective norms variable was computed by adding the values of six questions to assess the participants' level of perceived social pressures to counsel patients in quitting tobacco use. Questions wer rated on a seven-point Likert scale; higher point values indicate a perceived social norm more supportive of counseling patients in quitting tobacco use(Range: 0-36). The difference in the subjective norms score from Questionnaire 1 to Questionnaire 2 was computed by subtracting the total number of participants' subjective norms at Questionnaire 1 from the total number of participants' subjective norms at Questionnaire 2.
Time frame: Questionnaire 1 ( baseline/pre-lecture) to Questionnaire 2 (post-lecture or post-lecture and counseling/debriefing sessions)
Population: The number of participants for analysis was determined by the completing the questionnaire after the lecture or after the counseling practice sessions using standardized patients.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Counseling Practice Sessions | Change From Baseline in Subjective Norms Score | 2.55 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.73 |
| Lecture Only | Change From Baseline in Subjective Norms Score | .67 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 3.42 |
Primary
Change From Baseline in Tobacco Cessation Knowledge Score
The tobacco cessation knowledge variable was computed by adding the participants' total number of correct answers of the ten knowledge questions. The rating scale was: 0 = incorrect and 1 = correct. A higher value represents participants' higher level of tobacco cessation treatment knowledge (Range: 0-10). The difference in the tobacco cessation knowledge from Questionnaire 1 to Questionnaire 2 was computed by subtracting the total number of participants' correct answers at Questionnaire 1 from the total number of participants' correct answers at Questionnaire 2.
Time frame: Questionnaire 1 (pre-lecture) to Questionnaire 2 (post-lecture or post-lecture and counseling/debriefing sessions)
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Counseling Practice Sessions | Change From Baseline in Tobacco Cessation Knowledge Score | 2.55 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.98 |
| Lecture Only | Change From Baseline in Tobacco Cessation Knowledge Score | 2.60 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.77 |