Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 8274

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2024 | Month : July | Volume : 18 | Issue : 7 | Page : LC20 - LC24 Full Version

Awareness of Smoking Tobacco among Dental College Students: A Questionnaire-based Cross-sectional Study


Published: July 1, 2024 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2024/69699.19684
Pallavi Singh Meghna Mehta, Abhishek Awasthi, Ashish Chauhan

1. Reader and Head, Department of Public Health Dentistry, Saraswati Dental College and Hospital, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India. 2. Reader, Department of Public Health Dentistry, Sanjay Kumar Sharma Medical College, Mathura, Uttar Pradesh, India. 3. Reader, Department of Public Health Dentistry, Ram Krishna Dharmath Foundation (RKDF) Dental College, Bhopal, India. 4. Reader, Department of Orthodontics, Saraswati Dental College and Hospital, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Correspondence Address :
Pallavi Singh,
Q-501, Celebrity Meadows, Sushant Golf City, Ansal Api, Lucknow-226001, Uttar Pradesh, India.
E-mail: pallavirolisingh@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Tobacco smoking is one of the 10th leading health indicators proposed by the World Health Organisation (WHO) Healthy People 2020, with major concerns regarding increased mortality rates. Tobacco smoke contains 2.94 mg of nicotine, 802 mg of tar, 145 mg of carbon monoxide, and greater quantities of chrysene. Hookah tobacco poses a serious health threat because of the commonly held belief among college students that this tobacco product is not addictive. Assessing practices represents an important starting point in curbing the spread of tobacco use. It is crucial to understand the use, patterns, and dependence on tobacco to develop appropriate prevention and cessation strategies.

Aim: To assess tobacco smoking-related knowledge, attitudes, and practices among students of dental Institutions in Lucknow city, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Materials and Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted among five dental colleges in Lucknow city from July 2023 to November 2023. A total of 1050 undergraduate dental students were included in the study, and a self-structured, close-ended questionnaire was used to collect information on the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of hookah tobacco. The reliability of the questionnaire was evaluated using Cronbach’s coefficient alpha to measure internal consistency, which was found to be 0.9. Discrete (categorical) data were summarised in numbers (n) and percentages (%). Categorical groups were compared by Chi-square (χ2) test.

Results: Out of the total 1050 students, 392 (37.3%) were aged between 18-21 years, 630 (60.0%) were aged between 22-25 years, and 28 (2.7%) were aged between 26-30 years. Furthermore, among the students, 355 (33.8%) were females and 695 (66.2%) were males. Among the total of 1050 dental students, the prevalence of hookah smoking was 59.1%. The presence or prevalence of hookah smoking was higher in males (29.4%) at 480 (45.7%) than in females 141 (13.4%), and the difference was statistically significant (χ2=83.75, p<0.001).

Conclusion: The study found that the frequency of hookah smoking continues to increase with the increasing age of the participants. The study also revealed the alarming situation of a high prevalence of hookah smoking among dental college students.

Keywords

Addictive, Hookah, Institutions, Prevalence, Professionals, Shisha

In India, there are a variety of forms of tobacco available in the form of gutka, snuff, snus, mawa, mishri, khaini, zarda, and smoking forms like cigarettes, hookah, bidi, and cigars, which are socially acceptable and can be used in public places. By the year 2030, it is projected that the annual death toll resulting from tobacco smoking could soar to as high as 8.3 million individuals (1). India is the third largest tobacco-producing nation and the second largest consumer of tobacco worldwide. The estimated mortality resulting from tobacco use in India exceeds the substantial threshold of 1.3 million (2).

While the majority of research efforts have been directed towards cigarettes, the growing trend of hookah consumption has garnered notably less attention (3). The utilisation of hookah for tobacco smoking traces its origins back to the court of Emperor Akbar during the late 10th century (4). It was introduced in the 16th century by a physician named Hakim Abul-Fath Gilani. The purpose of the device was to pass smoke through water in an attempt to ‘purify’ the smoke, an unproven concept that has been repeatedly questioned by the medical community (5). In the 17th century, hookah had become a part of Persian culture, where a strong, dark leaf tobacco called ‘Ajami’ and ‘Jurak’, usually mixed with fruits or oils, was used (6). The tobacco industry has introduced new flavourings to water pipe tobacco, such as fruit, chocolate, mint, etc., to appeal to young women (7),(8).

A cigarette usually produces 500-600 mL of smoke, while a hookah produces 5000 mL of smoke (9). Several toxicants are found in hookah smoke, including carbon monoxide, nicotine, aldehydes, aromatic amines, phenolic compounds, tar, carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, heavy metals, particulate matter, and ammonia. Hookah smoke contains 2.94 mg nicotine, 802 mg tar, 145 mg carbon monoxide, and greater quantities of chrysene, phenanthrene, and flour-anthrene (10). Hookah tobacco poses a serious health threat because there is a common belief among college students that this tobacco product is innocuous and non addictive (3). Sharing the same mouthpieces of a hookah can help spread infectious diseases, such as hepatitis B, bleeding gums, infectious mononucleosis, tuberculosis, herpes, influenza, pneumonia in immune-compromised patients (11).

Assessing practices and opinions among dental college students represents an important starting point to curb the spread of hookah use. It is also very important to understand its use patterns and dependence to develop appropriate prevention and cessation strategies. Extensive work on cigarette smoking has been published in India (11),(12),(13), but very little research exists on hookah smoking, especially among Dental Health Professionals (14). The results of present study will be useful to practitioners in designing intervention strategies for this vulnerable group of the population. In order to address this emerging health risk, the present study was conducted to determine the knowledge, attitude, and practice of hookah smoking among students of various dental educational Institutions in Lucknow city.

Material and Methods

A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted among five dental college students in Lucknow city from July 2023 to November 2023. The study was approved by the Institutional Ethical Committee of the College (IEC approval no: SDC/IRDC/027). Verbal consent was obtained from each participant before the commencement of the study. The objectives of the study were explained to the participants, and confidentiality was assured.

Inclusion criteria: Undergraduate dental students (1st year, 2nd year, 3rd year, final year, and interns), both male and female, who were present on the day of the study and willing to participate, were enrolled.

Exclusion criteria: Postgraduate students, participants who were unwilling to participate, and those with incomplete questionnaires were excluded from the study.

Sample size calculation: The prevalence of hookah smokers was 10.5%, among medical students in a previous study conducted in Gujarat state (India) (12) and was used to calculate the sample size.

The sample size was estimated as (n)=1+2C (SD/d)2

=1+2*10.51*(1.50/1.15)2 (for α=0.05 and 1-β=0.80, where the constant C=10.51).

Based on the results obtained, the sample size was fixed at 1050. A total of 210 students were examined from each college using cluster random sampling technique.

Study Procedure

Prior to the commencement of the main study, a pilot study was conducted to check the feasibility and validity of the study on 50 subjects. A self-structured, pretested, close-ended questionnaire was used to collect information regarding the knowledge, attitude, and practice of hookah smoking among dental college students in Lucknow city. The questionnaire was written in English to ensure easy understanding by the participants. The reliability of the questionnaire was evaluated by Cronbach’s coefficient alpha to measure internal consistency, and it was found to be 0.9. The Test-retest method was used to examine the questionnaire’s reliability, with the internal consistency found to be good at 0.87.

The proforma used in the study, based on previous studies (14),(15), comprised of four parts:

(i) The first part included demographic details.
(ii) The second part consisted of six questions related to the knowledge of hookah smoking among dental college students.
(iii) The third part included six questions assessing the attitude of dental college students towards hookah smoking.
(iv) The fourth part contained 6 questions that included practice of hookah smoking among participants.

Data collection was conducted through interviews, with each session lasting 10 minutes for each professional. The scoring criteria ranged from 0 to 6 for each variable.

Statistical Analysis

The completed questionnaire was duly collected, compiled and subjected to statistical analysis. Discrete (categorical) data were summarised in numbers (n) and percentages (%). Categorical groups were compared using the Chi-square (χ2) test. A two-tailed (α=2) p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. The analysis was performed using Statistical Packages for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software (Windows version 22.0).

Results

In the present study, out of a total of 1050 dental students, 392 (37.3%) students were aged 18-21 years, 630 (60.0%) students were aged 22-25 years (the maximum), and 28 (2.7%) students were aged 26-30 years (the minimum). Furthermore, 210 (20.0%) students were in the 1st year, 210 (20.0%) in the 2nd year, 210 (20.0%) in the 3rd year, 210 (20.0%) in the final year, and 210 (20.0%) were in internship, respectively. Among the students, 355 (33.8%) were females, and 695 (66.2%) were males. Out of the total 1050 dental students, 429 (40.9%) were non hookah smokers, and 621 (59.1%) were hookah smokers. Thus, the prevalence of hookah smoking among dental college students was 59.1%. Moreover, 485 (46.2%) students were day scholars, 364 (34.7%) were hostel residents, and 201 (19.1%) were residing as paying guests (Table/Fig 1).

Comparing the prevalence of hookah smoking (no/yes) between different age groups, the frequency of hookah smoking among different age groups did not differ significantly. The prevalence of hookah smoking was higher in males 480 (45.7%) compared to females 141 (13.4%), and the difference was statistically significant (p<0.001) (Table/Fig 1).

The knowledge (K1 to K6) about hookah smoking among dental college students has been presented in (Table/Fig 2). In the present study, when asked “Is hookah smoking more harmful than cigarettes (K1)?” 760 (72.3%) responded yes. Similarly, for “Is hookah smoking more addictive than cigarettes (K2)?” 630 (60.0%) responded yes.

In the present study, the attitudes of students were described as follows: most participants who smoke hookah (26.7%) believed it to be a stress reliever, followed by 17.1% and 15.3% who smoke for a pleasurable experience and to feel intimate in social gatherings. The possible reason behind this result was positive social attitudes related to hookah smoking when compared with smoking cigarettes (Table/Fig 3).

The practices (P1 to P6) towards hookah smoking among dental college students are summarised in (Table/Fig 4).

In the current study, when asked about the frequency of hookah usage, most students smoke once a week, followed by occasionally and once a month. Most smokers preferred to smoke hookah with their family and friends at leisure places. In the present study, the average length of a shisha smoking session was found to be more than 45 minutes (Table/Fig 4).

Discussion

The “emerging epidemic” of water pipe smoking is a dangerous trend. As hookah use is spreading among college students, it is important to examine the reasons for and characteristics of hookah use in this age group. The significance of present study lies not only in measuring the prevalence of hookah smoking but also in conducting a comprehensive examination of the knowledge, attitudes, and practices towards hookah use among dental college students who will become healthcare practitioners in the future. In the present study, the prevalence of hookah smoking among dental college students in Lucknow city was found to be 59.1%. This prevalence was higher compared to previous studies conducted by Dar-Odeh NS et al., (2010), where the prevalence of current hookah smoking was reported to be 44.1% (13). Contrasting results were reported by Omotehinwa OJ et al., (2018) (16) and Rami K et al., (2015) (12), with the former reporting a prevalence of hookah smoking among medical students at 20.8% and the latter at 10.5%. The higher prevalence of hookah consumption among the study participants might be due to people’s misconception about the safety of hookah and its greater social acceptance than cigarettes.

In the present study, it was found that the frequency of hookah smoking continues to increase with the age of the participants. This observed relationship might be due to participants’ desire to obtain social acceptance, curiosity, the availability of different flavours, misconceptions about the safety of hookah, and the relatively low cost of hookah. The overall prevalence of hookah smoking is higher in males (69.1%) than in females (39.7%). Similar findings have been reported in other studies by Al-Rawi NH et al., (2018) (1) and Eissenberg T et al., (2008) (17), where males were more likely than females to be water pipe smokers (43.3% and 55.4%, respectively).

Contrasting results were reported by Abu-Helalah MA et al., (2015) (18) and Dar-Odeh NS et al., (2010) (13). This difference may be due to the positive social image of hookah among males. Students residing in on-campus housing were found to smoke water pipe at higher frequencies, likely due to the lack of parental guidance. Students who are staying as paying guests and day scholars have restrictions related to smoking; therefore, they hang out with their friends in lounges, bars, and cafes for hookah smoking. The difference was statistically significant (p<0.05). Prabhu A et al., (2017) (19) found an insignificant relationship between housing situations and smoking status. Similar findings have been supported by studies conducted by Gfroerer JC et al., (1997) (20) and Adlaf EM et al., (2003) (21).

In the present study, the majority of dental college students had good knowledge about the harmfulness (63.9%) and addictiveness (73.4%) of hookah smoking. Similar findings were reported by Hanna R et al., (2014) (22) and Allohidan F et al., (2017) (15), where the majority of students believed that hookah smoking was more harmful than cigarette smoking. Contrasting results have been reported in studies conducted by Maziak W et al., (2004) (23) and Primack BA et al., (2009), where the majority of students believed that shisha smoking was less harmful than cigarettes, and hookah smokers were not susceptible to addiction (24). The majority of the participants (67.3%) had knowledge that hookah smoke contains nicotine, tar, and carbon monoxide. Similar findings were reported by Daher N et al., (2010) (25), Kassem NO et al., (2014), and Blachman-Braun R et al., (2014) [26,27], where they reported that the side stream smoke of hookah contains nicotine, acrolein, and had nearly four times the carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, volatile aldehydes, and 30 times the carbon monoxide of one cigarette smoke. There was a substantial knowledge gap among first, second, and third-year students compared to final year and intern students, as the vast majority of participants were unaware of the toxin load associated with hookah smoking.

In the present study, nearly half of the students (49.8%) believed that water in the shisha filters toxins. Most of the students thought that water pipe smoke contains less tar, nicotine, and other toxins due to the “purification” that occurs when the smoke passes through water before being inhaled by the user. The current study showed inadequate knowledge regarding the health consequences of hookah smoking among students. Singh PN et al., (2012) (28), Amin TT et al., (2017), and Jaam M et al., (2016) were in agreement with the findings of the current study (29),(30). Raad D et al., (2011) and Chaouachi KT et al., (2007) in their study reported that chronic use of hookah, with a frequency of one or more hookah sessions per day, can lead to Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) (31),(32).

In the coeval study, most of the participants involved in hookah smoking (26.7%) believed it to be a stress reliever, followed by 17.1% and 15.3% who smoke for a pleasurable experience and to gain intimacy in social gatherings. In the contemporary study, around 52.2% of the participants thought that females were more comfortable smoking hookah compared to cigarettes. The possible reason behind this result was the positive social attitudes related to hookah smoking when compared with smoking cigarettes. Comparable results were reported by Chaouachi KT et al., (32). The majority of the respondents stressed the need for policy implementation, and one-third believed that awareness programmes should be carried out to make students aware about misconceptions and myths regarding hookah use as a non-tobacco and non-nicotine product.

Without national legislation to regulate these products, the tobacco industry has spearheaded surreptitious promotional campaigns to market these products, exploiting gullible consumers (33). A good proportion of students had restarted smoking hookah after quitting because of addiction, high availability, conducive social setups, easy affordability, and low perceived health risks. Al-Hashel D et al., (2012) reported that one-third of the smokers (33%) stated tobacco craving as the primary reason for their inability to quit hookah smoking (34).

In the current study, when asked about the frequency of hookah usage, most of the students smoke once a week, followed by occasionally and once a month. This was consistent with the findings reported by Aanyu C et al., (2019) and Ahmed B et al., (2011), where smokers used hookah weekly at cafes and bars in the company of their friends (35),(36). Almerie MQ et al., (2008) reported that occasional hookah smoking was the predominant pattern of use, and higher waterpipe tobacco smoking frequency was associated with physiological dependence, psychological craving, and positive reinforcement (37).

In the present study, most of the smokers (38.2%) preferred to smoke hookah with their family and friends at a leisure place. Similar findings were reported by Amin TT et al., (2010) (29), where the primary motive was outing with friends for boredom relief and a way of passing time. In the present study, 30.2% reported that the average length of a hookah smoking session was more than 45 minutes, and 18.7% reported it to be less than 45 minutes. Al-Delaimy AK and Al-Ani WAT (2021), and Shihadeh A (2003) reported similar findings, where three quarters of adolescents reported hookah smoking for 30 minutes or more at each session (38),(39). The majority of the hookah smokers in the present study started hookah smoking at 15-20 years of age, and nearly one-fourth of them (18.3%) started at 20-25 years. The majority of the participants (67.9%) considered the cost of hookah to be more than that of cigarettes, followed by 13% who considered it to be less. For students who do not have adequate allowance, higher prices could help in reducing their consumption. This could become an effective way to reduce hookah smoking among students.

In the present study, most of the hookah smokers used E-cigarettes as a newer alternative to smoking. This might be due to the easy availability of these devices, alluring advertisements, various e-liquid flavours, low risk of addiction, and the belief that they are safer than cigarettes. Owens VL et al., (2019) and Sakuma KK et al., (2020) have reported that E-cigarettes are available in a variety of flavours, which increases sensory appeal and stimulates smoking initiation (40),(41).

Limitation(s)

The present small convenience sample was taken from a particular city and may not be generalisable to all college students across Uttar Pradesh.

Conclusion

The study also revealed the alarming situation of high prevalence of hookah smoking among dental college students. Most of the hookah smokers used E-cigarettes as a newer alternative to smoking due to the easy availability of these devices, alluring advertisements, various e-liquid flavours, low risk of addiction, and the belief that they were safer than cigarettes. Hence, it provides effective information to authorities and health policymakers to better understand the harmful health effects and misconceptions of hookah use. Increased surveillance and additional research are necessary to address this growing public health threat. Evidence-based public health and policy strategies are required to equip the youth and the public about the effects of hookah smoking. Tobacco cessation programmes should be incorporated into various healthcare programmes running in dental colleges.

References

1.
Al-Rawi NH, Alnuaimi AS, Uthman AT. Shisha smoking habit among dental school students in the United Arab Emirates: Enabling factors and barriers. Int J Dent. 2018;2018:2805103. [crossref][PubMed]
2.
Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), Mumbai and Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India. Global Adult Tobacco Survey GATS 2 India 2016-17.ISBN: 978-81-937917-0-7.
3.
Al-Naggar RA, Bobryshev YV. Shisha smoking and associated factors among medical students in Malaysia. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2012;13(11):5627-32. [crossref][PubMed]
4.
Ray CS. The hookah–the Indian waterpipe. Current Science. 2009;96(10):1319-23.
5.
Kadhum M, Sweidan A, Jaffery AE, Al-Saadi A, Madden B. A review of the health effects of smoking shisha. Clin Med. 2015;15(3):263. [crossref][PubMed]
6.
Mohammed HT. The efficacy of viewing health warnings on shisha smoking among shisha smokers. Int J Adv Med. 2015;2(4):400-20.
7.
Arshad A, Matharoo J, Arshad E, Sadhra SS, Norton-Wangford R, Jawad M, et al. Knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions towards waterpipe tobacco smoking amongst college or university students: A systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):439. [crossref][PubMed]
8.
Perry CL, Eriksen MP, Giovino G. Tobacco use: A pediatric epidemic. Tobacco Control. 1994;3:97-98. [crossref][PubMed]
9.
Momenabadi V, Hashemi SY, Borhaninejad VR. Factors affecting hookah smoking trend in the society: A review article. Addict Health. 2016;8(2):123-35.
10.
Aslam HM, Saleem S, German S, Qureshi WA. Harmful effects of shisha: Literature review. Int Arch Med. 2014;7(1):01-09. [crossref][PubMed]
11.
Gathuru IM, Tarter RE, Klein-Fedyshin M. Review of hookah tobacco smoking among college students: Policy implications and research recommendations. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2015;41(4):272-80. [crossref][PubMed]
12.
Rami K, Makvana BJ, Thakor NC. Knowledge, attitude and practices of hookah smoking among medical students in Gujarat, India: A cross sectional study. Int J Adv Med. 2015;2(4):397-400. [crossref]
13.
Dar-Odeh NS, Bakri FG, Al-Omiri MK. Narghile (water pipe) smoking among university students in Jordan: prevalence, pattern and beliefs. Harm Reduc J. 2010:7:07-10. [crossref][PubMed]
14.
Obeidat SR, Khabour OF, Alzoubi KH, Mahasneh AM, Bibars AR, Khader YS, et al. Prevalence, social acceptance, and awareness of waterpipe smoking among dental university students: A cross sectional survey conducted in Jordan. BMC Research Notes. 2014;7:832. [crossref][PubMed]
15.
Allohidan F, Alanazi AK, Azzahrani MK, Alrashoud MR. Knowledge, practice, and attitudes regarding hookah (water pipe) smoking among college students studying health sciences in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Int J Sci Res. 2017;5(1):54-65.
16.
Omotehinwa OJ, Japheths O, Damascene IJ, Habtu M. Shisha use among students in a private university in Kigali city, Rwanda: Prevalence and associated factors. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(1):713. [crossref][PubMed]
17.
Eissenberg T, Ward KD, Smith-Simone S, Maziak W. Waterpipe tobacco smoking on a U.S. Collegecampus: Prevalence and correlates. J Adolesc Health. 2008;42(5):526-29. [crossref][PubMed]
18.
Abu-Helalah MA, Alshraideh HA, Al-Serhan AA, Nesheiwat AI, Da’na M, Al-Nawafleh A. Epidemiology, attitudes and perceptions toward cigarettes and hookah smoking amongst adults in Jordan. Environ Health Prev Med. 2015;20(6):422-33. [crossref][PubMed]
19.
Prabhu A, Jain JK, Sakeenabhi B, Kumar PGN, Imranulla M, Ragher M, et al. Smoking cessation advice: Knowledge, attitude, and practice among clinical dental students’. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2017;9(Suppl 1):S117-20. [crossref][PubMed]
20.
Gfroerer JC, Greenblatt JC, Wright DA. Substance use in the US college-age population: Differences according to educational status and living arrangement. Am J Public Health. 1997;87(1):62-65. [crossref][PubMed]
21.
Adlaf EM, Gliksman L, Demers A, Newton-Taylor B. Cigarette use among Canadian undergraduates. Can J Public Health. 2003;94(1):22-24. [crossref][PubMed]
22.
Rezk-Hanna M, Macabasco-O’connell A, Woo M. Hookah smoking among young adults in southern California. Nurs Res. 2014;63(4):300-06. [crossref][PubMed]
23.
Maziak W, Eissenberg T, Rastam S, Hammal F, Asfar T, Bachir ME. Beliefs and attitudes related to narghile (water pipe) smoking among university students in Syria. Ann Epidemiol. 2004;14(9):646-54. [crossref][PubMed]
24.
Primack BA, Walsh M, Bryce C. Water-pipe tobacco smoking among middle and high school students in Arizona. Pediatrics. 2009;123(2):e282-88. [crossref][PubMed]
25.
Daher N, Saleh R, Jaroudi E. Comparison of carcinogen, carbon monoxide, and ultrafine particle emissions from narghile waterpipe and cigarette smoking: Side stream smoke measurements and assessment of second-hand smoke emission factors. Atmos Environ. 2010;44(1):08-14.[crossref][PubMed]
26.
Kassem NO, Daffa RM, Liles S. Children’s exposure to second-hand and thirdhand smoke carcinogens and toxicants in homes of hookah smokers. Nicotine Tob Res. 2014;16(7):961-75. [crossref][PubMed]
27.
Blachman-Braun R, Mazo-Rodríguez RLD, López-Sámano G, Buendía-Roldán I. Hookah, is it really harmless? Respiratory Medicine. 2014;108(5):661-67. [crossref][PubMed]
28.
Singh PN, Neergaard J, Job JS, El Setouhy M, Israel E, Mohammed MK, et al. Differences in health and religious beliefs about tobacco use among waterpipe users in the rural male population of Egypt. J Relig Health. 2012;51(4):1216-25. [crossref][PubMed]
29.
Amin TT, Amr M, Zaza, BO, Suleman W. Harm perception, attitudes and predictors of waterpipe (shisha) smoking among secondary school adolescents in Al-hassa, Saudi Arabia. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2011;11(2):293-301.
30.
Jaam M, Al-Marridi W, Fares H. Perception and intentions to quit among waterpipe smokers in Qatar: A cross-sectional survey. Public Health Action. 2016;6(1):38-43. [crossref][PubMed]
31.
Raad D, Gaddam S, Schunemann HJ, Irani J, Abou Jaoude P, Honeine R, et al. Effects of water-pipe smoking on lung function: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Chest. 2011;139(4):764-74. [crossref][PubMed]
32.
Chaouachi KT. The narghile (hookah, shisha, goza) epidemic and the need for clearing up confusion and solving problems related with model building of social situations. Scientific World Journal. 2007;7:1691-96. [crossref][PubMed]
33.
Shrivastav R, Kathuria P, Arora M, Munish VG, Sinha P, Tullu FT. (Mis)perceptions related to Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) and hookah: Making a case for policy strengthening through a multi-stakeholder qualitative study from New Delhi, India. Tob Induc Dis. 2018;16(Suppl 1):A469. [crossref]
34.
Al-Hashel D, Mohammed F, Jaffar K, Selaiti M, Neama S, Mandeel M. Barriers to quit smoking among adult smokers. Bahrain Med Bull. 2012;34(4):183-86.
35.
Aanyu C, Kadobera D, Apolot RR, Kisakye AN, Nsubuga P, Bazeyo W, et al. Prevalence, knowledge and practices of shisha smoking among youth in Kampala City, Uganda. Pan Afr Med J. 2019;32:61. [crossref][PubMed]
36.
Ahmed B, Jacob Iii P, Allen F, Benowitz N. Attitudes and practices of hookah smokers in the San Francisco Bay Area. J Psychoactive Drugs. 2011;43(2):146-52. [crossref][PubMed]
37.
Almerie MQ, Matar HE, Salam M, Morad A, Abdulaal M, Koudsi A, et al. Cigarettes and waterpipe smoking among medical students in Syria: A cross-sectional study. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis. 2008;12(9):1085-91.
38.
Al-Delaimy AK, Al-Ani WAT. Prevalence of hookah smoking and associated factors among male high school students in Iraq. BMC Public Health. 2021;21:1317. [crossref][PubMed]
39.
Shihadeh A. Investigation of mainstream smoke aerosol of the argileh water pipe. Food Chem Toxicol. 2003;41(1):143-52. [crossref][PubMed]
40.
Owens VL, Ha T, Soulakova JN. Widespread use of flavoured e-cigarettes and hookah tobacco in the United States. Preventive Medicine Reports. 2019;14:100854. [crossref][PubMed]
41.
Sakuma KK, Dolcini MM, Seifert J, Bean MM, Fagan P, Wilson M, et al. Hookah and electronic inhalant device use and perceptions among African American Youth and Young Adults: Are we asking the right questions? Health Educ Behav. 2020;47(2):391-40.[crossref][PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2024/69699.19684

Date of Submission: Jan 19, 2024
Date of Peer Review: Mar 12, 2024
Date of Acceptance: May 29, 2024
Date of Publishing: Jul 01, 2024

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jan 22, 2024
• Manual Googling: Mar 14, 2024
• iThenticate Software: May 28, 2024 (14%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

EMENDATIONS: 10

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com