Dataset Information

Helping low-income smokers quit: findings from a randomized controlled trial comparing specialized quitline services with and without social needs navigation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Quitting smoking is especially challenging for low-income smokers due to high stress, high smoking prevalence around them, and limited support for quitting. This study aimed to determine whether any of three interventions designed specifically for low-income smokers would be more effective than standard tobacco quitline services: a specialized quitline, the specialized quitline with social needs navigation, or the standard quitline with social needs navigation.

Methods

Using a randomized 2 × 2 factorial design, low-income daily cigarette smokers (n = 1944) in Missouri, USA who called a helpline seeking assistance with food, rent or other social needs were assigned to receive Standard Quitline alone (n = 485), Standard Quitline + Social Needs Navigation (n = 484), Specialized Quitline alone (n = 485), or Specialized Quitline + Social Needs Navigation (n = 490). The target sample size was 2000, 500 per group. The main outcome was 7-day self-reported point prevalence abstinence at 6-month follow-up. Multiple imputation was used to impute outcomes for those missing data at 6-month follow-up. Binary logistic regression analyses were used to assess differences between study groups.

Findings

Participants were recruited from June 2017 to November 2020; most were African American (1111 [58%]) or White (666 [35%]), female (1396 [72%]), and reported <$10,000 (957 [51%]) or <$20,000 (1529 [82%]) annual pre-tax household income. At 6-month follow-up (58% retention), 101 participants in the Standard Quitline group reported 7-day point prevalence abstinence (20.8% of those assigned at baseline, 38.1% after imputation). Quit rates in the Specialized Quitline (90 quitters, 18.6%, 38.1%) and Specialized Quitline + Social Needs Navigation (103 quitters, 21.0%, 39.8%) were not different from the Standard Quitline. Quit rates for Standard Quitline + Social Needs Navigation (74 quitters, 15.3%, 30.1%) were significantly lower than Standard Quitline (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.50-0.98).

Interpretation

A specialized version of a state tobacco quitline was no more effective than standard quitline services in helping low-income smokers quit. Adding social needs navigation to a standard quitline decreased its effectiveness.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03194958.

Funding

National Cancer Institute: R01CA201429.

SUBMITTER: Kreuter MW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10319314 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Helping low-income smokers quit: findings from a randomized controlled trial comparing specialized quitline services with and without social needs navigation.

Kreuter Matthew W MW Garg Rachel R Fu Qiang Q Caburnay Charlene C Thompson Tess T Roberts Christina C Sandheinrich Dominique D Javed Irum I Wolff Jennifer M JM Butler Taylor T Grimes Lauren M LM Carpenter Kelly M KM Pokojski Robin R Engelbrecht Kristen K Howard Valerie V McQueen Amy A

Lancet regional health. Americas 20230624

<h4>Background</h4>Quitting smoking is especially challenging for low-income smokers due to high stress, high smoking prevalence around them, and limited support for quitting. This study aimed to determine whether any of three interventions designed specifically for low-income smokers would be more effective than standard tobacco quitline services: a specialized quitline, the specialized quitline with social needs navigation, or the standard quitline with social needs navigation.<h4>Methods</h4> ...[more]

PMID: 37408953

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionSocial support from nonsmokers may have a role in prompting smokers to use evidence-based cessation treatment. Prior studies found that an intervention for nonsmoking support persons (SPs) was effective for promoting smokers' use of free, state quitline services. This pilot study adapted and assessed feasibility of this intervention for a racially diverse, low-income population.MethodsSingle group, non-randomized design enrolling SP-smoker dyads with low income status enrolled in one of three study "waves" of 10 pairs each. Participants were recruited using flyers and in-person outreach methods. The SP intervention included a 1-session coaching call and written materials; study waves 2 and 3 also included text messaging and a monetary incentive for smokers who used quitline services. Using content analysis, the intervention was iteratively adapted based on SP feedback. Baseline measures assessed socio-demographics, dyad and tobacco use characteristics. Follow-up assessments were conducted among SPs at 1-month follow-up and among smokers at 3-months follow-up. Feasibility indicators were recruitment, retention, and SP intervention acceptability and adherence. Secondary outcomes were smokers' use of any quitline service verified by quitline staff and 7-day, point prevalence, biochemically verified smoking abstinence at 3 months.ResultsRecruitment of 30 dyads was feasible; in-person recruitment methods were the most successful. SPs who completed follow-up assessments found the intervention acceptable, suggesting only minor content modifications, and they perceived the quitline information as novel. But the study had some feasibility challenges (e.g., SP coaching call completion: 60% and SP study retention: 53%). At 3 months, 2 smokers (7%) had used any quitline service and 13% were biochemically confirmed smoking abstinent.ConclusionsThis pilot study demonstrated feasibility of recruiting SP-smoker dyads from diverse, low-income communities. While the intervention was well received, its delivery was not feasible in this population. Results suggest that further consumer adaptation of the intervention is needed among both SPs and smokers.

Project description:IntroductionLinking outpatient cessation services to bedside counseling for hospitalized smokers can improve long-run quit rates. Adding an assisted referral (AR) offer to a tobacco treatment specialist consult service fits the team approach to care in U.S. hospitals.DesignA two-arm patient-randomized trial tested the effectiveness of adding an AR offer to outpatient smoking-cessation services and interactive voice recognition (AR+IVR) follow-up to a usual care (UC) tobacco-cessation consult for hospitalized smokers.Setting/participantsOver 24 months (November 2011-November 2013), 898 hospitalized adult smokers interested in quitting smoking were recruited from three large hospitals in the Portland, Oregon, area: an integrated group model HMO (n=622), a community hospital (n=195), and an academic health center (n=81).InterventionTobacco treatment specialists identified smokers and provided an intensive bedside tobacco use assessment and cessation consultation (UC). AR+IVR recipients also received proactive ARs to available outpatient counseling programs and medications, and linked patients to a tailored IVR telephone follow-up system.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was self-reported 30-day abstinence at 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes included self-reported and continuous abstinence and biochemically confirmed 7-day abstinence at 6 months. Follow-up was completed in September 2014; data were analyzed in 2015.ResultsA total of 597 and 301 hospitalized smokers were randomized to AR+IVR and UC, respectively. AR+IVR and UC recipients received 19.3 and 17.0 minutes of bedside counseling (p=0.372), respectively. Most (58%) AR+IVR patients accepted referrals for counseling, 43% accepted medications, and 28% accepted both. Self-reported 30-day abstinence for AR+IVR (17.9%) and UC (17.3%) were not statistically significant (p=0.569). Differences in 7-day, continuous, and biochemically confirmed abstinence by treatment group also were insignificant, overall and adjusting for site.ConclusionsAdding an AR to outpatient counseling and medications did not increase cigarette abstinence at 6 months compared to UC alone.

Project description:BackgroundThe potential of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) to reduce the cardiovascular and other disease risks of smoking is of great interest. While many smokers report using ENDS for cessation, their impact under real-world use patterns and conditions on adult smokers' quitting behavior is uncertain. The objective of this study was to generate more recent and comprehensive evidence on the effect of "real world" ENDS use on the population quit rates of adult smokers while taking account of frequency and duration of use, device type, e-liquid flavor, and reasons for use.Methods and findingsWe conducted a population-based, prospective cohort study of a random probability sample of 1284 U.S. adult smokers recruited in August/September 2015 and re-contacted one-year later (September 2016) from GfK's KnowledgePanel, a national, probability-based web-panel designed to be representative of non-institutionalized U.S. adults. Among the 1081 baseline smokers who remained members of KnowledgePanel, 858 completed the follow-up survey. The primary outcome was smoking abstinence for at least 30 days prior to follow-up. Secondary outcomes were making a quit attempt during the 12-month study period and number of cigarettes smoked per day at follow-up. The adjusted odds of quitting smoking were lower for those that used ENDS at baseline (9.4%, 95% CI = 5.22%-16.38%; AOR = 0.30, 95% CI = 0.13-0.72) compared to smokers who did not use at ENDS (18.9%, 95% CI = 14.24%-24.68%). Smokers who used ENDS daily at some point during the study period were also less likely to quit smoking than nonusers (AOR = 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04-0.82). Limited ability to draw causal inferences from the observational design and a lack of biochemical verification of quitting smoking or ENDS use are limitations of this study.ConclusionsWe found no evidence that ENDS use, within context of the 2015-2016 US regulatory and tobacco/vaping market landscape, helped adult smokers quit at rates higher than smokers who did not use these products. Absent any meaningful changes, ENDS use among adult smokers is unlikely to be a sufficient solution to obtaining a meaningful increase in population quit rates. Additional research is needed to reconcile the divergent literature and monitor the impact of ENDS in an environment of rapidly evolving markets and regulatory policies.

Project description:BackgroundDespite evidence showing that continued smoking in patients with non-communicable diseases can reduce treatment efficacy and increase the risk of disease progression and multimorbidity, many smoker patients either have no intention to quit or have had failed attempts at quitting.ObjectiveTo examine the feasibility of a general health promotion approach that uses instant messaging to deliver brief motivational interviewing to help smokers with non-communicable diseases quit smoking.MethodsIn total, 60 participants who had medical follow-up in a special out-patient clinic were randomized into two groups, 30 in the intervention group received brief motivational interviewing to assist them with their chosen behavioral changes, and 30 in the control group received only a smoking cessation booklet. The outcome measures included self-reported 7-day point prevalence of smoking abstinence and any behavioral change reported by the participants at 6 and 12 months. Biochemical validation was performed for those who verbally reported a 7-day point prevalence of smoking abstinence at 12 months.ResultsThe majority (95%) of smokers who attended the out-patient clinic owned a smartphone. The response rate was 73.2%. Retention rates at 6-month and 12-month follow-up were 83.3 and 71.7%, respectively. The process evaluation indicated that participants were satisfied with the content of the brief MI messages and appreciated the use of instant messaging as a way to provide them with professional advice and support for managing their health-related lifestyles. The intervention group had a higher biochemically validated abstinence rate than the control group at 12 months (16.7 vs. 6.7 P = 0.23) although the difference was not statistically significant (Adjusted odd ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval, 0.43-13.75; P = 0.32.), In addition, the proportion of participants reporting a behavioral change was higher in the intervention group at 6 and 12 months.ConclusionThis study suggested the potential efficacy and feasibility of a general health promotion approach that uses instant messaging to deliver brief motivational interviewing to help smokers with non-communicable diseases quit smoking. The findings can be used to create a new smoking cessation service model that implements a flexible, proactive and personalized approach to help smokers quit smoking.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03983330.

Project description:IntroductionMost smoking cessation approaches are modeled on heavy daily smoking. With increasing prevalence of nondaily smoking, it may be necessary to modify these approaches for nondaily smokers.AimsTo provide information about beliefs and attitudes relevant to smoking cessation for nondaily smokers.MethodsSecondary analysis of two prospective studies on young adult smokers (18-24 years of age) provided brief advice to quit smoking. Measures include baseline levels of constructs relevant to smoking cessation counseling and perceived benefits of and barriers to smoking cessation.ResultsParticipants (n = 40 nondaily, 122 daily smokers) were predominantly White (70% and 84%, respectively), gender-balanced (50% and 43% female), full-time college students (89% and 95%). At baseline, nondaily smokers reported lower levels of nicotine dependence (p < .001; nondaily: Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND) = 0.8 ± 1.5, daily: FTND = 3.1 ± 1.9), lower urge to smoke (p < .001), greater self-efficacy when facing external smoking stimuli (p = .03), expecting to experience fewer positive effects (reduced negative affect, p = <.001, stimulation, p = .02), and valuing the importance of smoking effects less (ps < .01) than daily smokers. During counseling, nondaily smokers generated both fewer benefits of cessation (Wald X2(df = 1) = 4.91, p = .027) and fewer barriers (Wald X2(df = 1) = 5.99, p =.014) than daily smokers. Withdrawal was not listed by nondaily smokers as a barrier (p < .01).ConclusionsConstructs relevant to smoking cessation for daily smokers were less salient to young nondaily smokers, compared with moderately addicted young daily smokers, as indicated by responses to standardized scales and by the generation of fewer benefits and barriers in counseling. Interventions may need to find novel ways to engage nondaily smokers, particularly young adult, in smoking cessation efforts.ImplicationsThis study is unique in eliciting benefits and barriers from nondaily smokers as they are about to make a quit attempt. This is a critically important point in time, as this is the point in time in which an action plan is formed and can be informed and enhanced by smoking cessation support. Our study further allowed direct comparison to daily smokers undergoing the same procedures, which allowed the identification of unique factors that may impact nondaily smokers in their quit attempt, which may guide intervention efforts. Use of a mixed method design further strengthen the rigor of this study.

Project description:Introduction: Although smokers with severe mental illnesses (SSMI) make quit attempts at comparable levels to other smokers, fewer are successful in achieving smoking cessation. Specialized smoking cessation treatments targeting their needs can be effective but have not been widely disseminated. Telephone delivered interventions, including by quitlines, show promise. However, few SSMI contact quitlines and few are referred to them by health professionals. Mental health peer workers can potentially play an important role in supporting smoking cessation. This study will apply a pragmatic model using peer workers to engage SSMI with a customized quitline service, forming the "Quitlink" intervention. Methods: A multi-center prospective, cluster-randomized, open, blinded endpoint (PROBE) trial. Over 3 years, 382 smokers will be recruited from mental health services in Victoria, Australia. Following completion of baseline assessment, a brief intervention will be delivered by a peer worker. Participants will then be randomly allocated either to no further intervention, or to be referred and contacted by the Victorian Quitline and offered a targeted 8-week cognitive behavioral intervention along with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Follow-up measures will be administered at 2-, 5-, and 8-months post-baseline. The primary outcome is 6 months continuous abstinence from end of treatment with biochemical verification. Secondary outcomes include 7-day point prevalence abstinence from smoking, increased quit attempts, and reductions in cigarettes per day, cravings and withdrawal, mental health symptoms, and other substance use, and improvements in quality of life. We will use a generalized linear mixed model (linear regression for continuous outcomes and logistic regression for dichotomous outcomes) to handle clustering and the repeated measures at baseline, 2-, 5-, and 8-months; individuals will be modeled as random effects, cluster as a random effect, and group assignment as a fixed effect. Discussion: This is the first rigorously designed RCT to evaluate a specialized quitline intervention accompanied by NRT among SSMI. The study will apply a pragmatic model to link SSMI to the Quitline, using peer workers, with the potential for wide dissemination. Clinical Trial Registration: Trial Registry: The trial is registered with ANZCTR (www.anzctr.org.au): ACTRN12619000244101 prior to the accrual of the first participant and updated regularly as per registry guidelines. Trial Sponsor: University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia.

Project description:ImportanceSocial determinants of health (SDOH) are associated with health outcomes. Thus, providing referrals for unmet social needs within clinical settings may improve the health of children.ObjectiveTo examine the prevalence and demographic characteristics of pediatric families with unmet social needs and their association with families accepting help from a pediatric clinical practice.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study examined data from a comprehensive SDOH screening and referral program at a large academic pediatric practice in the US. Participants were caregivers of patients younger than 17 years and indicated at least 1 social need. Data were collected from April 16, 2018, through September 29, 2019, and analyzed from November 18, 2019, through December 17, 2019. The data review was finalized December 20, 2023.ExposureScreening for SDOH in primary care.Main outcome and measuresThe main outcome was interest in assistance among patient families with at least 1 social need. Factor analyses categorized social needs as basic needs, stress, challenges to economic mobility, and marginalization. χ2 Tests and multivariable Poisson regression were used to examine the associations between patient characteristics and caregiver interest in assistance.ResultsThere were 758 caregivers (median [IQR] age, 34 [29-40] years; 614 mothers [81.0%]) reporting at least 1 unmet social need, such as food or utility insecurity or unemployment. The median age of children was 23 months (IQR, 4-70 months), and 163 (21.5%)were of Asian, Pacific Islander, or Native Hawaiian ; 213 (28.1%) of Black; 156 (20.6%) of Latino or Hispanic; 37 (4.9%) of White ; and 122 (16.1%) of other race and ethnicity. A total of 315 caregivers (41.6%) were not interested in assistance. Families with basic needs (adjusted prevalence ratio [PR], 5.56; 95% CI, 3.33-10.00), stress (adjusted PR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.43-2.17), challenges to economic mobility (adjusted PR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.67-2.86), or marginalization (adjusted PR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.15-1.72) were more likely to be interested in assistance. Additionally, Black race (adjusted PR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.01-1.49), other race and ethnicity (adjusted PR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.01-1.47), and inadequate social support (adjusted PR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.32-2.63) were associated with acceptance of referral services.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that the implementation of referral programs may help to achieve health equity, especially among marginalized populations, and improve the referral process for families who have social needs but are not interested in assistance.

Dataset Information

Helping low-income smokers quit: findings from a randomized controlled trial comparing specialized quitline services with and without social needs navigation.

Background

Methods

Findings

Interpretation

Trial registration

Funding

Publications

Helping low-income smokers quit: findings from a randomized controlled trial comparing specialized quitline services with and without social needs navigation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets