Volume 19, Issue 8 (November 2021)                   Nursing and Midwifery Journal 2021, 19(8): 633-642 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Bayrami R, Ebrahimi S, Feizipour H, Rasouli J. THE EFFECT OF COUPLES’ MOTIVATIONAL INTERVIEW IN PREGNANCY ON MEN’S SMOKING AT HOME. Nursing and Midwifery Journal 2021; 19 (8) :633-642
URL: http://unmf.umsu.ac.ir/article-1-4389-en.html
1- Department of Midwifery, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Patient Safety Research Center, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran
2- Midwifery Consultation Masters’ Degree Student, Student Research Center Affiliated to Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran (Corresponding author) , ebrahimisamira440@gmail.com
3- PhD in psychology, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran
4- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatics, School of Medicine, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran
Abstract:   (1451 Views)
Background & Aims: Complications of exposure to second-hand smoke (SHS) are known to affect the health of pregnant women and fetus and it requires designing interventions to reduce the exposure of pregnant women to smoke. This study, therefore, aimed to examine the effect of couples' motivational interview in pregnancy on men's smoking at home. Materials & Methods: The present study is a clinical trial study. 112 couples (56 non-smoking pregnant women with smoking spouses) enrolled in the study. Sampling was performed in several steps. First, according to the social, economic, and cultural conditions of the city, Urmia was divided into three sections, and two comprehensive health centers were randomly selected from each section. Blocked randomization method was used for random allocation in control and intervention groups. The motivational interview was conducted in 5 sessions of 60 minutes twice a week for intervention group. Individuals in both groups completed a demographic and smoking behavior questionnaire. The control group received routine prenatal care. Post-test was performed in the control and intervention groups 7 days and 30 days after the intervention. Data were analyzed by parametric and non-parametric tests and repeated measures in SPSS software version 20. Results: One hundred two couples completed the study. Mean smoking in the last week by the spouse, before, one week, and one month after the intervention were (70-172/5) 110, (40-135/5) 70, and (46-122/5)69.50 cigarettes, respectively. The results showed that these changes were statistically significant (p
Full-Text [PDF 762 kb]   (571 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: مامایی

References
1. Aurrekoetxea JJ, Murcia M, Rebagliato M, López MJ, Castilla AM, Santa-Marina L, et al. Determinants of self-reported smoking and misclassification during pregnancy, and analysis of optimal cut-off points for urinary cotinine: a cross-sectional study. BMJ open 2013;3(1): e002034. [DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002034] [PMID] [PMCID]
2. Organization WH. Tobacco free initiative (TFI) second-hand tobacco smoke. Secondary tobacco free initiative (TFI) second-hand tobacco smoke.Available from: http: //www.emro.who.int/tfi/quit-now/secondhand-smoke-impacts-health.html.Accessed in 2019. [URL]
3. Eftekhar M, Pourmasumi S, Sabeti P, Mirhosseini F. Relation of second hand smoker and effect on pregnancy outcome and newborns parameters. Womens Health Gynecol 2016;6: 2. [Google Scholar]
4. Amasha HA, Jaradeh MS. Effect of active and passive smoking during pregnancy on its outcomes. Health Science Journal 2012;6(2): 335. [Google Scholar]
5. Mojibyan M, Karimi M, Bidaki R, Rafiee P, Zare A. Exposure to second-hand smoke during pregnancy and preterm delivery. Int J High Risk Behav Addict 2013;1(4): 149. [DOI:10.5812/ijhrba.7630] [PMID] [PMCID]
6. Alghamdi AS, Jokhadar HF, Alghamdi IM, Alsohibani SA, Alqahtani OJ, Wahabi HA. Socioeconomic determinants of exposure to secondhand smoke among pregnant women. interernational Journal of Women's Health and Reproduction Sciences 2016; 4(2): 59-63. [DOI:10.15296/ijwhr.2016.14]
7. Organization WH. Gender, women, and the tobacco epidemic. available from: file: ///C: /Users/User/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/Content.IE5/5AEXLZJD/9789241599511_eng.pdf. Accessed in 2019 (July 18). [URL]
8. Alemán A, Morello P, Colomar M, Llambi L, Berrueta M, Gibbons L, et al. Brief counseling on secondhand smoke exposure in pregnant women in Argentina and Uruguay. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2016;14(1): 28. [DOI:10.3390/ijerph14010028] [PMID] [PMCID]
9. Chi Y-C, Sha F, Yip PS, Chen J-L, Chen Y-Y. Randomized comparison of group versus individual educational interventions for pregnant women to reduce their secondhand smoke exposure. Medicine 2016;95(40): e5072. [DOI:10.1097/MD.0000000000005072] [PMID] [PMCID]
10. Moosazadeh M, Salami F, Movahednia M, Amiri MM, Afshari M. Prevalence of smoking in northwest Iran: a meta-analysis. Electronic physician 2014;6(1): 734. [PMID] [PMCID]
11. Soltani F, Majidi M, Shobeiri F, Parsa P, Roshanaei G. Knowledge and Attitude of Men Towards Participation in Their Wives' Perinatal Care. International Journal of Women's Health and Reproduction Sciences 2018;6(3): 356-62. [DOI:10.15296/ijwhr.2018.58]
12. Bahiraii A, Rad SF, Mirmohammadali M, Nezhad AK. Predictors of home smoking ban in households in pregnant women. Payesh (Health Monitor) 2012;11(4): 511-7. [Google Scholar]
13. Taylor AE, Smith GD, Bares CB, Edwards AC, Munafò MR. Partner smoking and maternal cotinine during pregnancy: implications for negative control methods. J Alcohol Drug Depend 2014;139: 159-63. [DOI:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.03.012] [PMID] [PMCID]
14. Loke AY, Lam TH. A randomized controlled trial of the simple advice given by obstetricians in Guangzhou, China, to non-smoking pregnant women to help their husbands quit smoking. Patient Educ Couns 2005;59(1): 31-7. [DOI:10.1016/j.pec.2004.08.018] [PMID]
15. Stanton WR, Lowe JB, Moffatt J, Del Mar CB. Randomised control trial of a smoking cessation intervention directed at men whose partners are pregnant. Prev Med (Baltim) 2004;38(1): 6-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.ypmed.2003.09.021] [PMID]
16. Bilderback A, Borrelli B, Hovell M, Welkom J, Hilliard M, Rand C, et al. Effectiveness of motivational interviewing to reduce Head Start children's secondhand smoke exposure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2013;187: A2333. [PMID] [PMCID]
17. Louwagie G, Okuyemi KS, Ayo‐Yusuf OA. Efficacy of brief motivational interviewing on smoking cessation at tuberculosis clinics in Tshwane, South Africa: a randomized controlled trial. Addiction 2014;109(11): 1942-52. [DOI:10.1111/add.12671] [PMID]
18. Chen SM, Creedy D, Lin H-S, Wollin J. Effects of motivational interviewing intervention on self-management, psychological and glycemic outcomes in type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Nurs Stud 2012;49(6): 637-44. [DOI:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2011.11.011] [PMID]
19. Ren Y, Browning C, Yang H, Thomas S. Motivational interviewing and its application in the management of coronary heart disease. Fam Med Community Health 2013;1(3): 48-54. [DOI:10.15212/FMCH.2013.0309]
20. Bayley A, de Zoysa N, Cook DG, Whincup PH, Stahl D, Twist K, et al. Comparing the effectiveness of an enhanced MOtiVational intErviewing InTervention (MOVE IT) with usual care for reducing cardiovascular risk in high risk subjects: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials 2015;16(1): 112. [DOI:10.1186/s13063-015-0593-5] [PMID] [PMCID]
21. Brodie DA, Inoue A. Motivational interviewing to promote physical activity for people with chronic heart failure. J Adv Nurs 2005;50(5): 518-27. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03422.x] [PMID]
22. O'Donohue WT, Fisher JE. Cognitive behavior therapy: Core principles for practice. John Wiley & Sons; 2012. [DOI:10.1002/9781118470886]
23. Zhang L, Hsia J, Tu X, Xia Y, Zhang L, Bi Z, et al. Peer reviewed: exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke and interventions among pregnant women in China: a systematic review. Prev Chronic Dis 2015;12. [DOI:10.5888/pcd12.140377] [PMID] [PMCID]
24. Kazemi A, Ehsanpour S, Nekoei-Zahraei NS. A randomized trial to promote health belief and to reduce environmental tobacco smoke exposure in pregnant women. Health Educ Res 2012;27(1): 151-9. [DOI:10.1093/her/cyr102] [PMID]
25. Yu S, Duan Z, Redmon PB, Eriksen MP, Koplan JP, Huang C. mHealth intervention is effective in creating smoke-free homes for newborns: A randomized controlled trial study in China. J Scientific Reports 2017;7(1): 1-9. [DOI:10.1038/s41598-017-08922-x] [PMID] [PMCID]
26. Tungtrongvisolkit N, Seaharattanapatum B. Experiences of Smoking Cessation Focused on Barriers and Facilitators by Husbands with Smoking Tobaccos during Wives Getting Pregnant with Anemia in Urban Community: A Qualitative Research. Open Access Library Journal 2021;8(5): 1-13. [DOI:10.4236/oalib.1107460]
27. Karimiankakolaki Z, Mahmoodabad SSM, Kazemi A, Fallahzadeh H. Designing an educational intervention on second-hand smoke in smoker men on the exposure of pregnant wives: a protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Reprod Health 2019;16(1): 1-5. [DOI:10.1186/s12978-019-0673-1] [PMID] [PMCID]
28. Mohlman MK, Boulos DN, El Setouhy M, Radwan G, Makambi K, Jillson I, et al. A randomized, controlled community-wide intervention to reduce environmental tobacco smoke exposure. J Nicotine Tobacco Research 2013;15(8): 1372-81. [DOI:10.1093/ntr/nts333] [PMID] [PMCID]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Nursing And Midwifery Journal

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb