Background: Despite significant advances in cardiovascular care, smoking remains a critical risk factor for recurrent cardiovascular events in myocardial infarction (MI) survivors. Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a lifesaving procedure; however, its long-term success is often compromised by patients’ continued smoking. Objective: This qualitative study aims to explore the experiences, perceptions, and barriers faced by individuals who continue smoking after undergoing primary PCI for MI, providing insights into the psychological, social, and behavioral factors that hinder smoking cessation. Methods: A qualitative research design was adopted, involving semi-structured interviews with post-MI patients who continued smoking. Thematic analysis was employed to identify and interpret key themes related to smoking behaviors, challenges in quitting, and the effectiveness of current cessation interventions. Results: Participants acknowledged the health risks of smoking, linking it to their MI, yet highlighted significant barriers to cessation, including stress management, emotional reliance on smoking, and ingrained habits. Social influences and cultural norms were also contributing factors. While healthcare professionals provided critical advice, participants reported limited success with available cessation methods, emphasizing the need for comprehensive, personalized support. Conclusions: Smoking cessation remains a significant challenge for post-MI patients, driven by a complex interplay of addiction, emotional dependence, and social influences. Effective interventions should incorporate stress management, tailored support systems, and innovative cessation tools to address these barriers. Promoting smoking cessation is essential to enhancing the long-term outcomes of PCI and reducing cardiovascular risks. Further research should focus on scalable, patient-centered approaches to empower MI survivors in overcoming smoking addiction.
Candan Mansuroğlu (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: