Dataset Information

Warm Handoff Versus Fax Referral for Linking Hospitalized Smokers to Quitlines.

ABSTRACT: Few hospitals treat patients' tobacco dependence. To be effective, hospital-initiated cessation interventions must provide at least 1 month of supportive contact post-discharge.Individually randomized clinical trial. Recruitment commenced July 2011; analyses were conducted October 2014-June 2015.The study was conducted in two large Midwestern hospitals. Participants included smokers who were aged ?18 years, planned to stay quit after discharge, and spoke English or Spanish.Hospital-based cessation counselors delivered the intervention. For patients randomized to warm handoff, staff immediately called the quitline from the bedside and handed the phone to participants for enrollment and counseling. Participants randomized to fax were referred on the day of hospital discharge.Outcomes at 6 months included quitline enrollment/adherence, medication use, biochemically verified cessation, and cost effectiveness.Significantly more warm handoff than fax participants enrolled in quitline (99.6% vs 59.6%; relative risk, 1.67; 95% CI=1.65, 1.68). One in four (25.4% warm handoff, 25.3% fax) were verified to be abstinent at 6-month follow-up; this did not differ significantly between groups (relative risk, 1.02; 95% CI=0.82, 1.24). Cessation medication use in the hospital and receipt of a prescription for medication at discharge did not differ between groups; however, significantly more fax participants reported using cessation medication post-discharge (32% vs 25%, p=0.01). The average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of enrolling participants into warm handoff was $0.14. Hospital-borne costs were significantly lower in warm handoff than in fax ($5.77 vs $9.41, p<0.001).One in four inpatient smokers referred to quitline by either method were abstinent at 6 months post-discharge. Among motivated smokers, fax referral and warm handoff are efficient and comparatively effective ways to link smokers with evidence-based care. For hospitals, warm handoff is a less expensive and more effective method for enrolling smokers in quitline services.

SUBMITTER: Richter KP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5031370 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Warm Handoff Versus Fax Referral for Linking Hospitalized Smokers to Quitlines.

Richter Kimber P KP Faseru Babalola B Shireman Theresa I TI Mussulman Laura M LM Nazir Niaman N Bush Terry T Scheuermann Taneisha S TS Preacher Kristopher J KJ Carlini Beatriz H BH Magnusson Brooke B Ellerbeck Edward F EF Cramer Carol C Cook David J DJ Martell Mary J MJ

American journal of preventive medicine 20161001 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>Few hospitals treat patients' tobacco dependence. To be effective, hospital-initiated cessation interventions must provide at least 1 month of supportive contact post-discharge.<h4>Study design</h4>Individually randomized clinical trial. Recruitment commenced July 2011; analyses were conducted October 2014-June 2015.<h4>Setting/participants</h4>The study was conducted in two large Midwestern hospitals. Participants included smokers who were aged ≥18 years, planned to stay qu ...[more]

PMID: 27647059

Similar Datasets

Project description:Post-discharge support is a key component of effective treatment for hospitalized smokers, but few hospitals provide it. Many hospitals and care settings fax-refer smokers to quitlines for follow-up; however, less than half of fax-referred smokers are successfully contacted and enrolled in quitline services. "Warm handoff" is a novel approach to care transitions in which health care providers directly link patients with substance abuse problems with specialists, using face-to-face or phone transfer. Warm handoff achieves very high rates of treatment enrollment for these vulnerable groups.The aim of this study-"EQUIP" (Enhancing Quitline Utilization among In-Patients)-is to determine the effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness, of warm handoff versus fax referral for linking hospitalized smokers with tobacco quitlines. This study employs a two-arm, individually randomized design. It is set in two large Kansas hospitals that have dedicated tobacco treatment interventionists on staff. At each site, smokers who wish to remain abstinent after discharge will be randomly assigned to groups. For patients in the fax group, staff will provide standard in-hospital intervention and will fax-refer patients to the state tobacco quitline for counseling post-discharge. For patients in the warm handoff group, staff will provide brief in-hospital intervention and immediate warm handoff: staff will call the state quitline, notify them that a warm handoff inpatient from Kansas is on the line, then transfer the call to the patients' mobile or bedside hospital phone for quitline enrollment and an initial counseling session. Following the quitline session, hospital staff provides a brief check-back visit. Outcome measures will be assessed at 1, 6, and 12?months post enrollment. Costs are measured to support cost-effectiveness analyses. We hypothesize that warm handoff, compared to fax referral, will improve care transitions for tobacco treatment, enroll more participants in quitline services, and lead to higher quit rates. We also hypothesize that warm handoff will be more cost-effective from a societal perspective.If successful, this project offers a low-cost solution for more efficiently linking millions of hospitalized smokers with effective outpatient treatment-smokers that might otherwise be lost in the transition to outpatient care.Clinical Trials Registration NCT01305928.

Project description:BackgroundQuitlines (QLs) are free, effective sources of treatment for tobacco dependence. Although the QL number is toll-free, the use of cell phones as the sole source of telephony may impose an unintended cost, in terms of cell minutes.ObjectivesTo quantify the use of cell-only telephony among self-pay or Medicaid smokers, assess their calling plans, and estimate the impact of a typical course of QL counseling.MethodsA survey of smokers age at least 18 years visiting an American urban emergency department from April to July, 2013.ResultsSeven-hundred seventy-three smokers were surveyed, of whom 563 (72.8%) were low-income, defined as having Medicaid or no insurance. All low-income smokers had at least one phone: 48 (8.5%) reported land-lines only, 159 (28.2%) land-lines and cells, and 356 (63.2%) cells only. Of the cell phone owners, monthly calling plans provided unlimited minutes for 339/515 (65.8%), at most 250 minutes for 124 (24.1%), and more than 250 minutes for 52 (10.0%). Another recent trial found that QL users make a median of 1 call lasting 28 minutes, with the 75th and 90th percentiles of calls and minutes at 3 and 4 calls, and 48 and 73.6 minutes, respectively. Thus, robust use of QL services could consume 11%-29% of a low-income smoker's typical 250 monthly cell minutes.ConclusionAmong low-income smokers, cell phones are often the sole telephone. Robust use of the QL may impose a substantial burden on low-income smokers' calling plans, and therefore deter use of the QL. Exempting calls to QLs from counting against smokers' plans may help promote QL utilization.ImplicationsLow-income individuals have high rates of smoking, and are more likely to own only cell phones, not landlines, for telephone access. Because cell phone calling plans often have limited numbers of monthly minutes, cell-only individuals may have to spend a substantial proportion of their monthly minutes on QL services. This may act as a deterrent to using an otherwise free, effective means of treatment for tobacco dependence. Exempting QLs from monthly calling plans may improve access for low-income smokers.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Linking 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. DESIGN:A 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/PARTICIPANTS:Over 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). INTERVENTION:Tobacco 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 MEASURES:The 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. RESULTS:A 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. CONCLUSIONS:Adding an AR to outpatient counseling and medications did not increase cigarette abstinence at 6 months compared to UC alone.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Extended smoking cessation follow-up after hospital discharge significantly increases abstinence. Hospital smoke-free policies create a period of 'forced abstinence' for smokers, thus providing an opportunity to integrate tobacco dependence treatment, and to support post-discharge maintenance of hospital-acquired abstinence. This study is funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (1U01HL1053231). METHODS/DESIGN:The Inpatient Technology-Supported Assisted Referral study is a multi-center, randomized clinical effectiveness trial being conducted at Kaiser Permanente Northwest (KPNW) and at Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) hospitals in Portland, Oregon. The study assesses the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of linking a practical inpatient assisted referral to outpatient cessation services plus interactive voice recognition (AR?+?IVR) follow-up calls, compared to usual care inpatient counseling (UC). In November 2011, we began recruiting 900 hospital patients age ?18 years who smoked ?1 cigarettes in the past 30 days, willing to remain abstinent postdischarge, have a working phone, live within 50 miles of the hospital, speak English, and have no health-related barriers to participation. Each site will randomize 450 patients to AR?+?IVR or UC using a 2:1 assignment strategy. Participants in the AR?+?IVR arm will receive a brief inpatient cessation consult plus a referral to available outpatient cessation programs and medications, and four IVR follow-up calls over seven weeks postdischarge. Participants do not have to accept the referral. At KPNW, UC participants will receive brief inpatient counseling and encouragement to self-enroll in available outpatient services. The primary outcome is self-reported thirty-day smoking abstinence at six months postrandomization for AR?+?IVR participants compared to usual care. Additional outcomes include self-reported and biochemically confirmed seven-day abstinence at six months, self-reported seven-day, thirty-day, and continuous abstinence at twelve months, intervention dose response at six and twelve months for AR?+?IVR recipients, incremental cost-effectiveness of AR?+?IVR intervention compared to usual care at six and twelve months, and health-care utilization and expenditures at twelve months for AR?+?IVR recipients compared to UC. DISCUSSION:This study will provide important evidence for the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of linking hospital-based tobacco treatment specialists' services with discharge follow-up care. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01236079.

Project description:Most smokers abstain from smoking during hospitalization but relapse upon discharge. This study tests the effectiveness of two proven treatments (i.e., nicotine patches and telephone counseling) in helping these patients stay quit after discharge from the hospital, and assesses a model of hospital-quitline partnership.This study had a 2×2 factorial design in which participants were stratified by recruitment site and smoking rate and randomly assigned to usual care, nicotine patches only, counseling only, or patches plus counseling. They were evaluated at 2 and 6 months post-randomization.A total of 1,270 hospitalized adult smokers were recruited from August 2011 to November 2013 from five hospitals within three healthcare systems.Participants in the patch condition were provided 8 weeks of nicotine patches at discharge (or were mailed them post-discharge). Quitline staff started proactively calling participants in the counseling condition 3 days post-discharge to provide standard quitline counseling.The primary outcome measure was self-reported 30-day abstinence at 6 months using an intention-to-treat analysis. Data were analyzed from September 2015 to May 2016.The 30-day abstinence rate at 6 months was 22.8% for the nicotine patch condition and 18.3% for the no-patch condition (p=0.051). Nearly all participants (99%) in the patch condition were provided nicotine patches, although 36% were sent post-discharge. The abstinence rates were 20.0% and 21.1% for counseling and no counseling conditions, respectively (p=0.651). Fewer than half of the participants in the counseling condition (47%) received counseling (mean follow-up sessions, 3.6).Provision of nicotine patches proved feasible, although their effectiveness in helping discharged patients stay quit was not significant. Telephone counseling was not effective, in large part because of low rates of engagement. Future interventions will need to be more immediate to be effective.This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01289275.

Dataset Information

Warm Handoff Versus Fax Referral for Linking Hospitalized Smokers to Quitlines.

Publications

Warm Handoff Versus Fax Referral for Linking Hospitalized Smokers to Quitlines.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets