Dataset Information

Smoking-Cessation Interventions for Urban Hospital Patients: A Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Trial.

ABSTRACT: Hospitalization is a unique opportunity for smoking cessation, but prior interventions have measured efficacy with narrowly defined populations. The objective of this study was to enroll smokers admitted to two "safety net" hospitals and compare the effectiveness of two post-discharge cessation interventions.A randomized comparative effectiveness trial was conducted.At two New York City public hospitals, every hospitalized patient identified as a smoker (based on admission records) was approached. Inclusion criteria were: smoked cigarettes in the past 30 days; spoke English, Spanish, or Mandarin; had a U.S. phone number; not discharged to an institution where follow-up or smoking was limited; and not pregnant/breastfeeding. Of 18,797 patients identified as current smokers between July 2011 and April 2014, a total of 3,047 (16%) were discharged before being approached, 3,273 (17%) were not current smokers, 4,026 (21%) had no U.S. phone number, 2,831 (15%) were ineligible for other reasons, and 3,983 (21%) refused participation. In total, 1,618 (9%) participants enrolled in the study. During follow-up, 69% of participants were reached at 2 months and 68% at 6 months.At discharge, participants were randomized to multisession telephone counseling from study staff (n=804) or referral to the state quitline for proactive outreach and counseling (n=814).Self-reported abstinence at 6 months was measured. Analyses were conducted in late 2015.One quarter of participants were homeless or in unstable housing, 60% had a history of substance abuse, 43% reported current hazardous drinking, and half had a psychiatric diagnosis other than substance abuse. At follow-up, the rate of abstinence (30-day point prevalence) was higher in the intensive counseling arm than the quitline arm at 2 months (29.0% vs 20.7%; relative risk=1.40; 95% CI=1.13, 1.73) and 6 months (37.4% vs 31.5%; relative risk=1.19; 95% CI=1.01, 1.40).Intensive counseling was more effective than referral to the state quitline. Long-term abstinence was excellent in both groups. Many patients were not eligible for enrollment despite minimal exclusion criteria.This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01363245.

SUBMITTER: Sherman SE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5089173 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Smoking-Cessation Interventions for Urban Hospital Patients: A Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Trial.

Sherman Scott E SE Link Alissa R AR Rogers Erin S ES Krebs Paul P Ladapo Joseph A JA Shelley Donna R DR Fang Yixin Y Wang Binhuan B Grossman Ellie E

American journal of preventive medicine 20161001 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>Hospitalization is a unique opportunity for smoking cessation, but prior interventions have measured efficacy with narrowly defined populations. The objective of this study was to enroll smokers admitted to two "safety net" hospitals and compare the effectiveness of two post-discharge cessation interventions.<h4>Design</h4>A randomized comparative effectiveness trial was conducted.<h4>Setting/participants</h4>At two New York City public hospitals, every hospitalized patient ...[more]

PMID: 27647057

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceSmoking cessation interventions for hospitalized patients must continue after discharge to improve long-term tobacco abstinence. How health systems can best deliver postdischarge tobacco treatment is uncertain.ObjectiveTo determine if health system-based tobacco cessation treatment after hospital discharge produces more long-term tobacco abstinence than referral to a community-based quitline.Design, setting, and participantsThis randomized clinical trial was conducted September 2018 to November 2020 in 3 hospitals in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee. Cigarette smokers admitted to a study hospital who received brief in-hospital tobacco treatment and wanted to quit smoking were recruited for participation and randomized for postdischarge treatment to health system-based Transitional Tobacco Care Management (TTCM) or electronic referral to a community-based quitline (QL). Both multicomponent interventions offered smoking cessation counseling and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for up to 3 months. Data were analyzed from February 1, 2021, to April 25, 2022.InterventionsTTCM provided 8 weeks of NRT at discharge and 7 automated calls with a hospital-based counselor call-back option. The QL intervention sent referrals from the hospital electronic health record to the state quitline, which offered 5 counseling calls and an NRT sample.Main outcomes and measuresThe main outcome was biochemically verified past 7-day tobacco abstinence at 6 months. Self-reported point-prevalence and continuous tobacco abstinence and tobacco treatment utilization were assessed 1, 3, and 6 months after discharge.ResultsA total of 1409 participants (mean [SD] age, 51.7 [12.6] years; 784 [55.6%] women; mean [SD] 16.4 [10.6] cigarettes/day) were recruited, including 706 randomized to TTCM and 703 randomized to QL. Participants were comparable at baseline, including 216 Black participants (15.3%), 82 Hispanic participants (5.8%), and 1089 White participants (77.3%). At 1 and 3 months after discharge, more TTCM participants than QL participants used cessation counseling (1 month: 245 participants [34.7%] vs 154 participants [21.9%]; 3 months: 248 participants [35.1%] vs 123 participants [17.5%]; P < .001) and pharmacotherapy (1 month: 455 participants [64.4%] vs 324 participants [46.1%]; 3 months: 367 participants [52.0%] vs 264 participants [37.6%]; P < .001). More TTCM than QL participants reported continuous abstinence for 3 months (RR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.06-1.58) and point-prevalence abstinence at 1 month (RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.08-1.35) and 3 months (RR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.09-1.37) but not at 6 months (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.99-1.29). The primary outcome, biochemically verified point-prevalence abstinence at 6 months, was not statistically significantly different between groups (19.9% vs 16.9%; RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.92-1.50).Conclusions and relevanceIn this randomized clinical trial, biochemically verified tobacco abstinence rates were not significantly different between groups at the 6-month follow-up. However, the health system-based model was superior to the community-based quitline model throughout the 3 months of active treatment. A longer duration of postdischarge treatment may sustain the superiority of the health system-based model.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03603496.

Project description:ImportanceGuidelines recommend cancer care clinicians offer smoking cessation treatment. Cost analyses will help stakeholders understand and plan for implementation of cessation programs.ObjectiveTo estimate the incremental cost per quit (ICQ) of adopting an intensive smoking cessation intervention among patients undergoing treatment at cancer care clinics, from a clinic perspective.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic evaluation, a secondary analysis of the Smokefree Support Study (conducted 2013-2018; completed 2021), used microcosting methods and sensitivity analyses to estimate the ICQ of the interventions. Participants included patients undergoing treatment for a broad range of solid tumors and lymphomas who reported current smoking and were receiving care at cancer care clinics within 2 academic medical centers.ExposuresIntensive smoking cessation treatment (up to 11 counseling sessions with free medications), standard of care (up to 4 counseling sessions with medication advice), or usual care (referral to the state quitline).Main outcomes and measuresTotal costs, component-specific costs, and the ICQ of the intensive smoking cessation treatment relative to both standard of care (comparator in the parent randomized trial) and usual care (a common comparator outside this trial) were calculated. Overall and post hoc site-specific estimates are provided. Because usual care was not included in the parent trial, sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess how assumptions about usual care quit rates affected study outcomes (ie, base case [from a published smoking cessation trial among patients with thoracic cancer], best case, and conservative case scenarios).ResultsThe per-patient costs of offering intensive smoking cessation treatment, standard of care, and usual care were $1989, $1482, and $0, respectively. For intensive treatment, the dominant costs were treatment (35%), staff supervision (26%), and patient enrollment (24%). Relative to standard of care, intensive treatment had an overall ICQ of $3906, and one site had an ICQ of $2892. Relative to usual care, intensive treatment had an ICQ of $9866 overall (base case), although at one site, the ICQ was $5408 (base case) and $3786 (best case).Conclusions and relevanceIn this economic evaluation study, implementation of an intensive smoking cessation treatment intervention was moderately to highly cost-effective, depending on existing smoking cessation services in place.

Project description:Hospitalization provides an opportunity for smokers to quit, but tobacco-cessation interventions started in hospital must continue after discharge to be effective. This study aimed to improve the scalability of a proven effective post-discharge intervention by incorporating referral to a telephone quitline, a nationally available cessation resource.A three-site RCT compared Sustained Care, a post-discharge tobacco-cessation intervention, with Standard Care among hospitalized adult smokers who wanted to quit smoking and received in-hospital tobacco-cessation counseling.A total of 1,357 daily smokers admitted to three hospitals were enrolled from December 2012 to July 2014.Sustained Care started at discharge and included automated interactive voice response telephone calls and the patient's choice of cessation medication for 3 months. Each automated call advised cessation, supported medication adherence, and triaged smokers seeking additional counseling or medication support directly to a telephone quitline. Standard Care provided only medication and counseling recommendations at discharge.Biochemically confirmed past 7-day tobacco abstinence 6 months after discharge (primary outcome) and self-reported tobacco abstinence and tobacco-cessation treatment use at 1, 3, and 6 months and overall (0-6 months). Analyses were done in 2015-2016.Smokers offered Sustained Care (n=680), versus those offered Standard Care (n=677), did not have greater biochemically confirmed abstinence at 6 months (17% vs 16%, p=0.58). However, the Sustained Care group reported more tobacco-cessation counseling and medication use at each follow-up and higher rates of self-reported past 7-day tobacco abstinence at 1 month (43% vs 32%, p<0.0001) and 3 months (37% vs 30%, p=0.008). At 6 months, the difference narrowed (31% vs 27%, p=0.09). Overall, the intervention increased self-reported 7-day abstinence over the 6-month follow-up (relative risk, 1.25; 95% CI=1.10, 1.40; p=0.0006).A 3-month post-discharge smoking-cessation intervention for hospitalized smokers who wanted to quit did not increase confirmed tobacco abstinence at 6 months but did increase self-reported abstinence during the treatment period (3 months). Real-time linkage of interactive voice response calls to a quitline, done in this trial to increase scalability of a previously proven cessation intervention, demonstrated short-term promise but did not sustain long-term intervention effectiveness.This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01714323.

Project description:Importance:While the proportion of adults who smoke cigarettes has declined substantially in the past decade, socioeconomic disparities in cigarette smoking remain. Few interventions have targeted low socioeconomic status (SES) and minority smokers in primary care settings. Objective:To evaluate a multicomponent intervention to promote smoking cessation among low-SES and minority smokers. Design, Setting, and Participants:For this prospective, unblinded, randomized clinical trial conducted between May 1, 2015, and September 4, 2017, adults 18 years and older who spoke English, smoked 10 or more cigarettes per day in the past week, were contemplating or preparing to quit smoking, and had a primary care clinician were recruited from general internal medicine and family medicine practices at 1 large safety-net hospital in Boston, Massachusetts. Interventions:Patients were randomized to a control group that received an enhancement of usual care (n = 175 participants) or to an intervention group that received up to 4 hours of patient navigation delivered over 6 months in addition to usual care, as well as financial incentives for biochemically confirmed smoking cessation at 6 and 12 months following enrollment (n = 177 participants). Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome determined a priori was biochemically confirmed smoking cessation at 12 months. Results:Among 352 patients who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 50.0 [11.0] years; 191 women [54.3%]; 197 participants who identified as non-Hispanic black [56.0%]; 40 participants who identified as Hispanic of any race [11.4%]), all were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. At 12 months following enrollment, 21 participants [11.9%] in the navigation and incentives group, compared with 4 participants [2.3%] in the control group, had quit smoking (odds ratio, 5.8; 95% CI, 1.9-17.1; number needed to treat, 10.4; P < .001). In prespecified subgroup analyses, the intervention was particularly beneficial for older participants (19 [19.8%] vs 1 [1.0%]; P < .001), women (17 [16.8%] vs 2 [2.2%]; P < .001), participants with household yearly income of $20 000 or less (15 [15.5%] vs 3 [3.1%]; P = .003), and nonwhite participants (21 [15.2%] vs 4 [3.0%]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance:In this study of adult daily smokers at 1 large urban safety-net hospital, patient navigation and financial incentives for smoking cessation significantly increased the rates of smoking cessation. Trial Registration:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02351609.

Project description:Although screening for tobacco use is increasing with electronic health records and standard protocols, other tobacco-control activities, such as referral of patients to cessation resources, is quite low. In the QUIT-PRIMO study, an online referral portal will allow providers to enter smokers' email addresses into the system. Upon returning home, the smokers will receive automated emails providing education about tobacco cessation and encouragement to use the patient smoking cessation website (with interactive tools, educational resources, motivational email messages, secure messaging with a tobacco treatment specialist, and online support group).The informatics system will be evaluated in a comparative effectiveness trial of 160 community-based primary care practices, cluster-randomized at the practice level. In the QUIT-PRIMO intervention, patients will be provided a paper information-prescription referral and then "e-referred" to the system. In the comparison group, patients will receive only the paper-based information-prescription referral with the website address. Once patients go to the website, they are subsequently randomized within practices to either a standard patient smoking cessation website or an augmented version with access to a tobacco treatment specialist online, motivational emails, and an online support group. We will compare intervention and control practice participation (referral rates) and patient participation (proportion referred who go to the website). We will then compare the effectiveness of the standard and augmented patient websites.Our goal is to evaluate an integrated informatics solution to increase access to web-delivered smoking cessation support. We will analyze the impact of this integrated system in terms of process (provider e-referral and patient login) and patient outcomes (six-month smoking cessation).Web-delivered Provider Intervention for Tobacco Control (QUIT-PRIMO) - a randomized controlled trial: NCT00797628.

Dataset Information

Smoking-Cessation Interventions for Urban Hospital Patients: A Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Trial.

Publications

Smoking-Cessation Interventions for Urban Hospital Patients: A Randomized Comparative Effectiveness Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets