Dataset Information

Risk reduction before surgery. The role of the primary care provider in preoperative smoking and alcohol cessation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Daily smokers and hazardous drinkers are high-risk patients, developing 2-4 times more complications after surgery. Preoperative smoking and alcohol cessation for four to eight weeks prior to surgery halves this complication rate. The patients' preoperative contact with the surgical departments might be too brief for the hospital to initiate these programmes. Therefore, it was relevant to evaluate a new clinical practice which combined the general practitioner's (GP) referral to surgery with a referral to a smoking and alcohol intervention in the surgical pathway.

Methods

The design was an exploratory prospective trial. The outcome measured was the number of patients referred to a preoperative smoking and alcohol cessation programme at the same time as being referred for elective surgery by their GP. The participants consisted of 72 high-risk patients who were referred for elective surgery by 47 local participating GPs. The GPs, nurses, and specialists in internal medicine, prehabilitation and surgery developed new clinical practice guidelines based on the literature and interviews with 11 local GPs about the specific barriers for implementing a smoking and alcohol cessation programme. The role of the GP was to be the gatekeeper: identifying daily smokers and hazardous drinkers when referring them to surgery; handing out information on risk reduction; and referring those patients identified to a preoperative smoking and alcohol cessation programme. The role of the hospital was to contact these patients to initiate smoking and alcohol cessation at the hospital out-patient clinic for life-style intervention.

Results

The GPs increased their referral to the smoking and alcohol cessation programme from 0% to 10% (7/72 patients) in the study period.

Conclusion

The effect of the study was limited in integrating the efforts of primary care providers and hospital surgical departments in increasing the up-take of preoperative smoking and alcohol cessation programmes aimed at smokers and harmful drinkers referred for surgery. New strategies for cooperation between GPs and surgical departments are urgently needed.

Trial registration

J.nr. 2005-54-1781 in Danish Data Protection Agency. J.nr. 07 268136 in Scientific Ethical Committee for Copenhagen and Frederiksberg Municipalities.

SUBMITTER: Tonnesen H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2882918 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) found a reduction in lung cancer mortality among participants screened with low-dose computed tomography vs chest radiography. In February 2015, Medicare announced its decision to cover annual lung screening for patients with a significant smoking history. These guidelines promote smoking cessation treatment as an adjunct to screening, but the frequency and effectiveness of clinician-delivered smoking cessation interventions delivered after lung screening are unknown.ObjectiveTo determine the association between the reported clinician-delivered 5As (ask, advise, assess, assist [talk about quitting or recommend stop-smoking medications or recommend counseling], and arrange follow-up) after lung screening and smoking behavior changes.Design, setting, and participantsA matched case-control study (cases were quitters and controls were continued smokers) of 3336 NLST participants who were smokers at enrollment examined participants' rates and patterns of 5A delivery after a lung screen and reported smoking cessation behaviors.Main outcomes and measuresPrevalence of the clinician-delivered 5As and associated smoking cessation after lung screening.ResultsDelivery of the 5As 1 year after screening were as follows: ask, 77.2%; advise, 75.6%; assess, 63.4%; assist, 56.4%; and arrange follow-up, 10.4%. Receipt of ask, advise, and assess was not significantly associated with quitting in multivariate models that adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, medical history, screening results, nicotine dependence, and motivation to quit. Assist was associated with a 40% increase in the odds of quitting (odds ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.21-1.63), and arrange was associated with a 46% increase in the odds of quitting (odds ratio, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.19-1.79).Conclusions and relevanceAssist and arrange follow-up delivered by primary care providers to smokers who were participating in the NLST were associated with increased quitting; less intensive interventions (ask, advise, and assess) were not. However, rates of assist and arrange follow-up were relatively low. Our findings confirm the need for and benefit of clinicians taking more active intervention steps in helping patients who undergo screening to quit smoking.

Project description:IntroductionWe compared smoking cessation outcomes between those who used a pharmacist-led community-based smoking cessation intervention and those who did not, prior to total joint replacement (TJR) surgery. Also, we examined intervention characteristics (e.g. number/duration of sessions attended, recommended therapy) and smoking cessation outcomes.MethodsThis prospective evaluation was nested within a comparative study from a centralized clinic that prepares over 3000 patients annually for TJR and focused on participants referred to the community-based smoking cessation program preoperatively. Pharmacists offered an individualized evidence-based intervention and collected visit, duration and intervention data. Smoking cessation, the primary outcome, was ascertained independently of participating pharmacists at 6 weeks post-operative using exhaled CO monitoring and at 6 months post-recruitment via telephone interview.ResultsOf 286 eligible candidates, 104 agreed to participate, with one subsequently withdrawing (n=103). At 6 weeks post-operatively, 66/103 (64%) participants returned for study re-assessment while 63/103 (61%) participants completed the post-recruitment interview at 6 months; non-respondents to study follow-up were considered smokers. Of 103 participants, 58 (56%) consulted with a pharmacist; those who did not consult a pharmacist (n=45) were slightly younger (p=0.02) with significantly higher CO level (p=0.02) on study entry. Validated 7-day point prevalence abstinence (PPA) at 6 weeks post-operative was 11/58 (19%) in pharmacist-compliant participants compared to 2/45 (4%) in non-compliant participants (p=0.04). At 6 months post-recruitment, 19/58 (33%) pharmacistcompliant participants self-reported a 7-day PPA compared to 2/45 (4%) by non-compliant participants (p<0.001). For pharmacist-compliant participants, 33/58 (54%) saw the pharmacist 4 times; the mean overall pharmacist time was 71.8±24.4 minutes/patient with 26/58 (45%) and 19/58 (33%) prescribed nicotine replacement therapy and varenicline, respectively, and 13/58 (22%) not using medication; post hoc analysis suggested varenicline was marginally more effective for smoking cessation than no medication (p=0.04).ConclusionsCommunity-based pharmacist-led smoking cessation programs are an effective addition to usual preoperative care for smokers awaiting elective TJR. Using existing community resources led to higher smoking cessation rates in smokers waiting for TJR relative to those not using these resources.

Project description:BackgroundAlcohol use disorder (AUD) imposes a high mortality and economic burden. Effective treatment is available, though underutilized.ObjectiveDescribe trends in AUD pharmacotherapy, variation in prescribing, and associated patient factors.DesignRetrospective cohort using electronic health records from 2010 to 2019.ParticipantsPrimary care patients from 39 clinics in Ohio and Florida with diagnostic codes for alcohol dependence or abuse plus social history indicating alcohol use. PCPs in family or internal medicine with at least 20 AUD patients.Main measuresPharmacotherapy for AUD (naltrexone, acamprosate, and disulfiram), abstinence from alcohol, patient demographics, and comorbidities. Generalized linear mixed models were used to identify patient factors associated with prescriptions and the association of pharmacotherapy with abstinence.Key resultsWe identified 13,250 patients; average age was 54 years, 66.9% were male, 75.0% were White, and median household income was $51,776 per year. Over 10 years, the prescription rate rose from 4.4 to 5.6%. Patients who were Black (aOR 0.74; 95% CI 0.58, 0.94) and insured by Medicare versus commercial insurance (aOR 0.61; 95% CI 0.48, 0.78) were less likely to be treated. Higher median household income ($10,000 increment, aOR 1.06; 95% CI 1.03, 1.10) and Medicaid versus commercial insurance (aOR 1.52; 95% CI 1.24, 1.87) were associated with treatment. Receiving pharmacotherapy was associated with subsequent documented abstinence from alcohol (aOR 1.60; 95% CI 1.33, 1.92). We identified 236 PCPs. The average prescription rate was 3.6% (range 0 to 24%). The top decile prescribed to 14.6% of their patients. The bottom 4 deciles had no prescriptions. Family physicians had higher rates of pharmacotherapy than internists (OR 1.50; 95% CI 1.21, 1.85).ConclusionsMedications for AUD are infrequently prescribed, but there is considerable variation among PCPs. Increasing the use of pharmacotherapy by non-prescribers may increase abstinence from alcohol.

Project description:Randomized efficacy clinical trials conducted in research settings may not accurately reflect the benefits of tobacco dependence treatments when used in real-world clinical settings. Effectiveness trials (eg, in primary care settings) are needed to estimate the benefits of cessation treatments in real-world use.A total of 1346 primary care patients attending routine appointments were recruited by medical assistants in 12 primary care clinics. Patients were randomly assigned to 5 active pharmacotherapies: 3 monotherapies (nicotine patch, nicotine lozenge, and bupropion hydrochloride sustained release [SR]) and 2 combination therapies (patch + lozenge and bupropion SR + lozenge). Patients were referred to a telephone quit line for cessation counseling. Primary outcomes included 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 1 week, 8 weeks, and 6 months after quitting and number of days to relapse.Among 7128 eligible smokers (> or =10 cigarettes per day) attending routine primary care appointments, 1346 (18.9%) were enrolled in the study. Six-month abstinence rates for the 5 active pharmacotherapies were the following: bupropion SR, 16.8%; lozenge, 19.9%; patch, 17.7%; patch + lozenge, 26.9%; and bupropion SR + lozenge, 29.9%. Bupropion SR + lozenge was superior to all of the monotherapies (odds ratio, 0.46-0.56); patch + lozenge was superior to patch and bupropion monotherapies (odds ratio, 0.56 and 0.54, respectively).One in 5 smokers attending a routine primary care appointment was willing to make a serious quit attempt that included evidence-based counseling and medication. In this comparative effectiveness study of 5 tobacco dependence treatments, combination pharmacotherapy significantly increased abstinence compared with monotherapies. Provision of free cessation medications plus quit line counseling arranged in the primary care setting holds promise for assisting large numbers of smokers to quit. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00296647.

Project description:To systematically review the effectiveness of community pharmacy-delivered interventions for alcohol reduction, smoking cessation and weight management.Systematic review and meta-analyses. 10 electronic databases were searched from inception to May 2014.randomised and non-randomised controlled trials; controlled before/after studies, interrupted times series.any relevant intervention set in a community pharmacy, delivered by the pharmacy team. No restrictions on duration, country, age, or language.19 studies were included: 2 alcohol reduction, 12 smoking cessation and 5 weight management. Study quality rating: 6 'strong', 4 'moderate' and 9 'weak'. 8 studies were conducted in the UK, 4 in the USA, 2 in Australia, 1 each in 5 other countries. Evidence from 2 alcohol-reduction interventions was limited. Behavioural support and/or nicotine replacement therapy are effective and cost-effective for smoking cessation: pooled OR was 2.56 (95% CI 1.45 to 4.53) for active intervention vs usual care. Pharmacy-based interventions produced similar weight loss compared with active interventions in other primary care settings; however, weight loss was not sustained longer term in a range of primary care and commercial settings compared with control. Pharmacy-based weight management interventions have similar provider costs to those delivered in other primary care settings, which are greater than those delivered by commercial organisations. Very few studies explored if and how sociodemographic or socioeconomic variables moderated intervention effects. Insufficient information was available to examine relationships between effectiveness and behaviour change strategies, implementation factors, or organisation and delivery of interventions.Community pharmacy-delivered interventions are effective for smoking cessation, and demonstrate that the pharmacy is a feasible option for weight management interventions. Given the potential reach, effectiveness and associated costs of these interventions, commissioners should consider using community pharmacies to help deliver public health services.

Project description:ImportanceParental smoking adversely affects parents' and children's health. There are effective interventions delivered in pediatric settings to help parents quit smoking. The cost-effectiveness of this type of intervention is not known.ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a parental smoking cessation intervention, the Clinical Effort Against Secondhand Smoke Exposure (CEASE) program, delivered in pediatric primary care, compared with usual care from a health care organization's perspective.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic evaluation used data on intervention costs and parental smoking cessation collected prospectively as part of the CEASE randomized clinical trial. Data were collected at pediatric offices in 5 US states from April 2015 to October 2017. Participants included parents of children attending 10 pediatric primary care practices (5 control, 5 intervention). Data analysis was performed from October 2019 to August 2020.ExposuresThe trial compared CEASE (practice training and support to address family tobacco use) vs usual care.Main outcomes and measuresThe overall cost and incremental cost per quit of the CEASE intervention were calculated using microcosting methods. CEASE effectiveness was estimated using 2 trial outcomes measures assessed in repeated cross-sections: (1) change in smoking prevalence assessed by parental report for intervention vs usual care practices at 2 weeks after program initiation (baseline) and at 2-year follow-up and (2) changes in the proportion of smokers who achieved cotinine-confirmed smoking cessation in the previous 2 years at baseline vs follow-up. Monte Carlo analyses were used to provide 95% CIs.ResultsThe study included a total of 3054 participants (1523 at baseline and 1531 at follow-up); 2163 (70.8%) were aged 25 to 44 years old, and 2481 (81.2%) were women. Over 2 years, the total cost of implementing and sustaining CEASE across 5 intervention practices was $115 778. The incremental cost per quit for CEASE compared with usual care was $1132 (95% CI, $653-$3603), according to the change in parent-reported smoking prevalence, and $762 (95% CI, $418-$2883), according to cotinine-confirmed cessation. CEASE was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $2000 per quit in 88.0% of simulations based on the parent-reported smoking prevalence and 94.6% of simulations based on cotinine-confirmed smoking cessation measures.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that the CEASE intervention was associated with an incremental cost per quit that compared favorably with those of other clinical smoking cessation interventions. CEASE is inexpensive to initiate and maintain in the clinical pediatric setting, suggesting that it has the potential for a high impact on population health.