Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Exploring smoking cessation experiences among persons with spinal cord injury: Informing theory-based recommendations for interventions

Spinal Cord volume 61, pages 27–36 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Study design

Qualitative study.

Objective

Use an integrated knowledge translation (IKT) and theory-based approach, to (1) explore factors influencing smoking cessation behaviour among people with SCI, and (2) explore the preferred intervention and implementation options for smoking cessation interventions for persons with SCI.

Setting

Community.

Methods

Aligned with an IKT approach, an SCI organization was meaningfully engaged throughout the research process. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with people with SCI who have quit or tried to quit smoking. Barriers and facilitators to smoking cessation were extracted and deductively coded using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and inductively analysed. To identify intervention options, a behavioural analysis was conducted using the Behaviour Change Wheel. To identify implementation options, modes of delivery and intervention messengers were extracted. Modes of delivery were deductively coded, and themes relating to intervention messengers were constructed.

Results

Among the 12 participants (7 males; 6 with tetraplegia), seven had quit and five had relapsed. Across the 12 interviews, 130 barriers and 218 facilitators were coded to the TDF. The prominent TDF domains were beliefs about consequences, social influences, environmental context and resources, and behavioural regulation, and served as themes in the inductive analysis. Multiple modes of delivery and intervention messengers were considered important for the delivery of smoking cessation interventions.

Conclusion

This study is the first to use IKT and theory-based approaches to explore factors influencing smoking cessation among persons with SCI. Findings from this study resulted in the co-development of practical recommendations for future SCI-specific smoking cessation interventions.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Barriers to smoking cessation by COM-B source and TDF domain (n = 141).
Fig. 2: Facilitators to smoking cessation by COM-B source and TDF domain (n = 233).
Fig. 3

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical reasons.

References

  1. Fast Facts and Fact Sheets. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/index.htm?s_cid=osh-stu-home-spotlight-001.

  2. Davies DS, McColl MA. Lifestyle risks for three disease outcomes in Spinal Cord Injury. Clin Rehabil. 2002;16:96–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Haisma JA, van der Woude LH, Stam HJ, Bergen MP, Sluis TA, Post MW, et al. Complications following spinal cord injury: occurrence and risk factors in a longitudinal study during and after inpatient rehabilitation. J Rehabil Med. 2007;39:393–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lane CA, Selleck C, Chen Y, Tang Y. The impact of smoking and smoking cessation on wound healing in spinal cord–injured patients with pressure injuries. J Wound Ostomy Cont Nurs. 2016;43:483–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Spungen AM, Grimm DR, Lesser M, Bauman WA, Almenoff PL. Self-reported prevalence of pulmonary symptoms in subjects with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 1997;35:652–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Krause JS, Cao Y, Saunders LL. Changes in cigarette smoking after traumatic spinal cord injury. Rehabil Psychol. 2015;60:379–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Saunders LL, Krause JS, Saladin M, Carpenter MJ. Prevalence of cigarette smoking and attempts to quit in a population-based cohort with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2015;53:641–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Brule S, McDonald H. Health fact sheets: smoking, 2019. Government of Canada, Statistics Canada; 2020. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/82-625-x/2020001/article/00003-eng.htm.

  9. Shiffman S, Brockwell SE, Pillitteri JL, Gitchell JG. Individual differences in adoption of treatment for smoking cessation: demographic and smoking history characteristics. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2008;93:121–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Michie S, Prestwich A. Are interventions theory-based? development of a theory coding scheme. Health Psychol. 2010;29:1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Michie S, Atkins L, West R. The behaviour change wheel: a guide to designing interventions. Great Britain: Silverback Publishing; 2014.

  12. Rothman AJ. “ Is there nothing more practical than a good theory?”: why innovations and advances in health behavior change will arise if interventions are used to test and refine theory. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2004;1:11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Michie S, van Stralen MM, West R. The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implement Sci. 2011;6:1–12.

  14. Atkins L, Francis J, Islam R, O’Connor D, Patey A, Ivers N, et al. A guide to using the theoretical domains framework of behaviour change to investigate implementation problems. Implement Sci. 2017;12:1–18.

  15. Cane J, O’Connor D, Michie S. Validation of the theoretical domains framework for use in behaviour change and implementation research. Implement Sci. 2012;7:1–17.

  16. Gainforth HL, Hoekstra F, McKay R, McBride CB, Sweet SN, Martin Ginis KA, et al. Integrated knowledge translation guiding principles for conducting and disseminating spinal cord injury research in partnership. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2021;102:656–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Martin Ginis KA, Latimer-Cheung A, Corkum S, Ginis S, Anathasopoulos P, Arbour-Nicitopoulos K, et al. A case study of a community-university multidisciplinary partnership approach to increasing physical activity participation among people with spinal cord injury. Transl Behav Med. 2012;2:516–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ma JK, Cheifetz O, Todd KR, Chebaro C, Phang SH, Shaw RB, et al. Co-development of a physiotherapist-delivered physical activity intervention for adults with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2020;58:778–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Giroux EE, Casemore S, Clarke TY, McBride CB, Wuerstl KR, Gainforth HL. Enhancing participation while aging with spinal cord injury: applying behaviour change frameworks to develop intervention recommendations. Spinal Cord. 2020;59:665–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Yvonne Feilzer M. Doing mixed methods research pragmatically: Implications for the rediscovery of pragmatism as a research paradigm. J Mixed Methods Res. 2009;4:6–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Onwuegbuzie AJ, Leech NL. On becoming a pragmatic researcher: the importance of combining quantitative and qualitative research methodologies. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8:375–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ellingson LL. Engaging crystallization in qualitative research: an introduction. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2009.

  23. Tracy SJ. Qualitative quality: eight “big tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qual Inq. 2010;16:837–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Terry G, Hayfield N, Clarke V, Braun V. Thematic analysis. In: Willig C, Rogers WS, editors. The Sage handbook of qualitative research in psychology. London: SAGE; 2017.

  26. Carey R, Evans F, Horan M, Johnston M, West R, Michie S. Mode of delivery of behaviour change interventions taxonomy version 0 (MoDTv0). 2016.

  27. Saunders L, Newman S, Aust R, Krause JS. Qualitative study of barriers and facilitators to cigarette smoking after spinal cord injury. Rehabil Psychol. 2018;63:400–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Anderson D, Dumont S, Azzaria L, Bourdais ML, Noreau L. Determinants of return to work among spinal cord injury patients: a literature review. J Vocat Rehabil. 2007;27:57–68.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Nilsen P. Making sense of implementation theories, models and Frameworks. Implement Sci. 2015;10:53–79.

  30. Michie SF, West R, Campbell R, Brown J, Gainforth HL. ABC of behaviour change theories. Sutton: Silverback; 2014.

  31. Schwarzer R, Lippke S, Luszczynska A. Mechanisms of health behavior change in persons with chronic illness or disability: the Health Action Process Approach (HAPA). Rehabil Psychol. 2011;56:161–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge Emily Stone, Jiawin Lim, Lexington Kinnear, and Kylie Lundberg-Dorr for their help with interview transcription. We would also like to acknowledge Spinal Cord Injury British Columbia for their efforts with recruitment. The research team also acknowledges all participants for their time participating in the interviews.

Funding

HLG is supported by a Michael Smith Health Research BC Scholar Award (Formerly MSFHR, Canada, no. 16910). KRW is supported by a CIHR Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarship—Doctoral Award (no. 175909).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Health and Exercise Sciences, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, BC, Canada

    Kelsey R. Wuerstl, Femke Hoekstra & Heather L. Gainforth

  2. International Collaboration on Repair Discoveries (ICORD), University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

    Kelsey R. Wuerstl, Femke Hoekstra & Heather L. Gainforth

  3. Spinal Cord Injury British Columbia (SCI BC), Vancouver, BC, Canada

    Christopher B. McBride

  4. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada

    Joëlle Deschênes-Bilodeau

Authors
  1. Kelsey R. Wuerstl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christopher B. McBride
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joëlle Deschênes-Bilodeau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Femke Hoekstra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Heather L. Gainforth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

KRW, CBM, and HLG were responsible for co-developing the research question, selecting the methodology, co-developing all recruitment materials, and co-developing the interview guide. KRW conducted all interviews. KRW and JDB extracted and deductively coded all transcripts. HLG provided coding oversight. KRW inductively coded all transcripts. FH and HLG acted as critical friends and provided feedback on the thematic analysis. CBM provided partner oversight. HLG supervised the research. KRW wrote the manuscript. All authors contributed to the critical revision of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kelsey R. Wuerstl.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

We certify that all applicable institutional and governmental regulations concerning the ethical use of human volunteers were followed during the course of this research. Ethics approval for this study was obtained from the University of British Columbia Okanagan Behavioural Research Ethics Board (#H19–01020).

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wuerstl, K.R., McBride, C.B., Deschênes-Bilodeau, J. et al. Exploring smoking cessation experiences among persons with spinal cord injury: Informing theory-based recommendations for interventions. Spinal Cord 61, 27–36 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-022-00856-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-022-00856-0

Search

Advanced search

Quick links