Dataset Information

Chronic care treatment for smoking cessation in patients with serious mental illness: a pilot randomized trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Rates of smoking among those with serious mental illness (SMI) are two to three times higher than for the general population. Smoking is rarely addressed in mental health settings. Innovative outreach and treatment strategies are needed to address these disparities. The current study is a pilot study of the feasibility and acceptability of a chronic care model of tobacco cessation treatment implemented in outpatient psychiatry clinics.

Methods

Participants were recruited from two outpatient psychiatric clinics and randomly assigned to intervention (counseling and nicotine replacement for 8 weeks, plus ongoing proactive outreach calls inviting reengagement in treatment) or control (brief education and referral to the state quit line). Assessments were conducted at 8 weeks (end of initial treatment block) and 6 months (end of window for retreatment). Feasibility was assessed by enrollment rate, treatment engagement, and completion of follow-up assessments. Acceptability was assessed both quantitatively and qualitatively. Preliminary efficacy was assessed by 7-day and 30-day abstinence rates, rate of quit attempts, and cigarettes per day. Psychological health was measured to assess for changes related to treatment group or attempts to quit smoking.

Results

Nineteen participants were randomized to intervention and 19 to control. Recruitment proved feasible, and high rates of treatment engagement (mean of 4.5 sessions completed in initial treatment block, 89.5% uptake of nicotine replacement) and retention (94.7% of follow-up assessments completed) were observed. Treatment acceptability was high. As anticipated, there were no significant differences in abstinence between groups, but results generally favored the intervention group, including bio-verified 7-day abstinence rates of 21.1% in intervention vs. 17.6% in control and self-reported 30-day abstinence rates of 16.1% in intervention vs. 5.1% in control at 8 weeks. Significantly more intervention participants made at least one quit attempt (94.7% vs 52.6%; OR = 16.20, 95% CI: 1.79-147.01). Cigarettes per day decreased significantly more in the intervention group at 8 weeks (b = - 13.19, SE = 4.88, p = .02).

Conclusions

It was feasible to recruit and retain SMI patients in a smoking cessation trial in the context of outpatient psychiatry. The novel chronic care model treatment was acceptable to patients and showed promise for efficacy. If efficacious, a chronic care model could be effective at reducing smoking among SMI patients.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrial.gov #: NCT03822416 (registered January 30th 2019).

SUBMITTER: Busch AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7886429 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPeople with a serious mental illness are more likely to smoke more and to be more dependent smokers than the general population. This may be due to a wide range of factors that could include a common aetiology to both smoking and the illness, self medication, smoking to alleviate adverse effects of medications, boredom in the existing environment, or a combination of these factors. It is important to undertake this review to facilitate improvements in both the health and safety of people with serious mental illness who smoke, and to reduce the overall burden of costs (both financial and health) to the smoker and, eventually, to the taxpayer.ObjectivesTo review the effects of smoking cessation advice for people with serious mental illness.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Specialized Trials Register up to 2 April 2015, which is based on regular searches of CENTRAL, BIOSIS, PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and trial registries. We also undertook unsystematic searches of a sample of the component databases (BNI, CINHAL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO), up to 2 April 2015, and searched references of all identified studiesSelection criteriaWe planned to include all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that focussed on smoking cessation advice versus standard care or comparing smoking cessation advice with other more focussed methods of delivering care or information.Data collection and analysisThe review authors (PK, AC, and DB) independently screened search results but did not identify any trials that fulfilled the inclusion criteria of this review.Main resultsWe did not identify any RCTs that evaluated advice regarding smoking cessation for people with serious mental illness. The excluded studies illustrate that randomisation of packages of care relevant to smokers with serious mental illness is possible.Authors' conclusionsPeople with serious mental illness are more likely to smoke than the general population. Yet we could not find any high quality evidence to guide the smoking cessation advice healthcare professionals pass onto service users. This is an area where trials are possible and needed.

Project description:IntroductionHigh rates of tobacco use among people with serious mental illness (SMI), along with their unique needs, suggest the importance of developing tailored smoking cessation interventions for this group. Previous early-phase work empirically validated the design and content of Learn to Quit, a theory-based app designed for this population.MethodsIn a pilot randomized controlled trial, we compared the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of Learn to Quit versus QuitGuide, an app designed for the general population. All participants received nicotine replacement therapy and technical assistance. Daily smokers with SMI (N = 62) participated in the trial with outcomes assessed at weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16.ResultsCompared to QuitGuide, Learn to Quit participants had similar number of days of app use (34 vs. 32, p = .754), but larger number of app interactions (335 vs. 205; p = .001), longer durations of app use (4.24 hrs. vs. 2.14 hrs; p = .044), and higher usability scores (85 vs. 79, p = .046). At week 16, Learn to Quit led to greater reductions in cigarettes per day (12.3 vs. 5.9 for QuitGuide; p = 0.10). Thirty-day point prevalence abstinence was verified in 12% of Learn to Quit participants versus 3% of QuitGuide participants (odds ratio = 3.86, confidence interval = 0.41 to 36, p = .239). Changes in psychiatric symptoms and adverse events were not clinically significant between conditions.ConclusionsThis pilot trial provides strong evidence of Learn to Quit's usability, feasibility, and safety. Preliminary evidence suggests the app may be efficacious. A randomized controlled efficacy trial is needed to test the app in a larger sample of smokers with SMI.ImplicationsThis study suggests that the Learn to Quit app is a feasible approach to deliver smoking cessation treatment in patients with co-occurring tobacco use disorder and SMI. This means that, if found efficacious, this technology could be used to deploy smoking cessation treatment to larger segments of this population, hence improving public health. Therefore, a randomized controlled trial should be conducted to examine the efficacy of this digital intervention.

Project description:IntroductionIndividuals with serious mental illness (SMI) smoke at rates two to three times greater than the general population but are less likely to receive treatment. Increasing our understanding of correlates of smoking cessation behaviors in this group can guide intervention development.Aims and methodsBaseline data from an ongoing trial involving smokers with SMI (N = 482) were used to describe smoking cessation behaviors (ie, quit attempts, quit motivation, and smoking cessation treatment) and correlates of these behaviors (ie, demographics, attitudinal and systems-related variables).ResultsForty-three percent of the sample did not report making a quit attempt in the last year, but 44% reported making one to six quit attempts; 43% and 20%, respectively, reported wanting to quit within the next 6 months or the next 30 days. Sixty-one percent used a smoking cessation medication during their quit attempt, while 13% utilized counseling. More quit attempts were associated with lower nicotine dependence and carbon monoxide and greater beliefs about the harms of smoking. Greater quit motivation was associated with lower carbon monoxide, minority race, benefits of cessation counseling, and importance of counseling within the clinic. A greater likelihood of using smoking cessation medications was associated with being female, smoking more cigarettes, and receiving smoking cessation advice. A greater likelihood of using smoking cessation counseling was associated with being male, greater academic achievement, and receiving smoking cessation advice.ConclusionsMany smokers with SMI are engaged in efforts to quit smoking. Measures of smoking cessation behavior are associated with tobacco use indicators, beliefs about smoking, race and gender, and receiving cessation advice.ImplicationsConsideration of factors related to cessation behaviors among smokers with SMI continues to be warranted, due to their high smoking rates compared to the general population. Increasing our understanding of these predictive characteristics can help promote higher engagement in evidence-based smoking cessation treatments among this subpopulation.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Smoking rates of Australians with severe mental illness (SMI) are disproportionately higher than the general population. Despite the rapid growth in mobile health (mHealth) apps, limited evidence exists to inform their design for SMI populations. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to explore the feasibility, acceptability, and utility of adapting a novel smoking cessation app (Kick.it) to assist smokers with SMI to prevent smoking relapse and quit. METHODS:Using co-design, two in-depth interviews with 12 adult smokers and ex-smokers with SMI were conducted in this qualitative study. Stage 1 interviews explored participants' smoking-related experiences and perceptions of social support for smoking cessation, informed the development of the stage 2 interview schedule, and provided context for participants' responses to the second interview. Stage 2 interviews explored participants' perceptions of the feasibility, utility, and acceptability of the app features for SMI populations. RESULTS:People with SMI perceived mHealth interventions to support their quit smoking attempts as feasible, acceptable, and useful. Key emerging themes included personalization of the app to users' psychosocial needs, a caring app to mediate self-esteem and self-efficacy, an app that normalizes smoking relapse and multiple quit attempts, a strong focus on user experience to improve usability, and a social network to enhance social support for smoking cessation. CONCLUSIONS:This study gained an in-depth understanding of the lived experiences of smoking and quitting among people with SMI and their perception of the Kick.it app features to help inform the tailoring of the app. Specific program tailoring is required to assist them in navigating the complex interactions between mental illness and smoking in relation to their psychosocial well-being and capacity to quit. This study describes the adaptations required for the Kick.it app to meet the specific needs and preferences of people with SMI. Results of this study will guide the tailoring of the Kick.it app for SMI populations. The study findings can also inform a co-design process for the future development and design of smoking cessation apps for SMI populations.

Project description:BackgroundYoung adults have elevated rates of mental health disorders, yet they often do not receive consistent care. The challenge of continuing to engage young adults has been pervasive worldwide. Few engagement interventions have been designed for young adults with serious mental illness. Just Do You is a theoretically guided engagement intervention. It uses innovative modalities (i.e., technology, expressive arts activities, narrative expression, mentoring) to engage participants in conversations about services and how they work, while simultaneously orienting them to treatment.Methods/designThis pilot and feasibility study utilizes a hybrid research design, examining feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary impact, alongside implementation. The study combines qualitative methods, a small pilot randomized trial, and a small cost-benefit analysis. Respondents are clinic staff and young adults who have made initial contact with the Personalized Recovery Oriented Services (PROS) program. Quantitative survey data are collected at baseline, 2 weeks (post-intervention), 1 month, and 3 months. The assessments focus on measuring feasibility, acceptability, engagement, and mental health outcomes. Medical record extraction will be used to triangulate self-report data. We will conduct single degree of freedom contrasts to examine whether Just Do You leads to improved outcomes relative to Treatment-As-Usual using robust regression for each outcome measure. We will examine whether changes in the proposed mediating variables occur across groups using a similar contrast strategy. In addition, we will use structural equation modeling to examine the contribution of mediators to ultimate outcomes. Finally, we will use constant comparison coding techniques for qualitative analyses.DiscussionThe aim of this study is to examine the feasibility of a young adult engagement meta-intervention through an intensive preliminary pilot trial, learning through collaboration with stakeholders. Just Do You has the potential to fill a gap in the service system for young adults with serious mental illnesses, improving the seemingly intractable problem of disengagement. The program uses culturally responsive strategies, is recovery-oriented, and builds upon the best evidence to date. Our efforts align with local and national health care reform efforts embedding people with lived experience.Trial registrationThis trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT03423212) on April 18, 2018, as Protocol Record R34 MH111861-01, New York University, as the Just Do You Program for Young Adults with Serious Mental Illness.

Project description:BackgroundImplementation researchers have sought ways to use simulations to support the core components of implementation, which typically include assessing the need for change, designing implementation strategies, executing the strategies, and evaluating outcomes. The goal of this paper is to explain how agent-based modeling could fulfill this role.MethodsWe describe agent-based modeling with respect to other simulation methods that have been used in implementation science, using non-technical language that is broadly accessible. We then provide a stepwise procedure for developing agent-based models of implementation processes. We use, as a case study to illustrate the procedure, the implementation of evidence-based smoking cessation practices for persons with serious mental illness (SMI) in community mental health clinics.ResultsFor our case study, we present descriptions of the motivating research questions, specific models used to answer these questions, and a summary of the insights that can be obtained from the models. In the first example, we use a simple form of agent-based modeling to simulate the observed smoking behaviors of persons with SMI in a recently completed trial (IDEAL, Comprehensive Cardiovascular Risk Reduction Trial in Persons with SMI). In the second example, we illustrate how a more complex agent-based approach that includes interactions between patients, providers and site administrators can be used to provide guidance for an implementation intervention that includes training and organizational strategies. This example is based in part on an ongoing project focused on scaling up evidence-based tobacco smoking cessation practices in community mental health clinics in Maryland.ConclusionIn this paper we explain how agent-based models can be used to address implementation science research questions and provide a procedure for setting up simulation models. Through our examples, we show how what-if scenarios can be examined in the implementation process, which are particularly useful in implementation frameworks with adaptive components.