Organizational Characteristics and Smoking Cessation Support in Community-Based Lung Cancer Screening Programs.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Bellinger C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8983582 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Organizational Characteristics and Smoking Cessation Support in Community-Based Lung Cancer Screening Programs.
Bellinger Christina C Foley Kristie Long KL Dressler Emily V EV Kittel Carol C Miller David P DP Weaver Kathryn E KE Sutfin Erin L EL Petty W Jeffrey WJ Spangler John J Stone Rebecca R Anderson Daniel M DM Kehn Heather H Steenstra Cindy C Panikkar Rajiv R Chiles Caroline C
Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR 20220302 4
Similar Datasets
Project description:Two preliminary studies assessed whether telephone counseling (TC) is a feasible smoking cessation intervention following lung cancer screening. Seven older smokers undergoing lung cancer screening (pack years = 61.5) completed three TC sessions, which incorporated the screening result as motivation to quit. Participation (87.5%) and retention (85.7%) rates were good, and four smokers quit smoking (three of whom received abnormal results). We conducted four focus groups with 16 current and former older smokers (pack years = 55). Most believed that an abnormal scan would motivate them to quit and expressed interest in TC. TC may be feasible and potentially efficacious within lung screening programs.
| S-EPMC5880211 | biostudies-other
Project description:IntroductionEmbedded smoking cessation support within lung cancer screening is recommended in the United Kingdom; however, little is known about why individuals decline smoking cessation support in this setting. This study identified psychosocial factors that influence smoking cessation and quit motivation among those who declined support for quitting smoking alongside lung cancer screening.Aims and methodsQualitative interviews were conducted between August 2019 and April 2021 with 30 adults with a smoking history, recruited from the Yorkshire Lung Screening Trial. Participants had declined smoking cessation support. Verbatim interview transcripts were thematically analyzed.ResultsFifty percent of participants were male and the majority were from the most deprived groups. Participants reported low motivation and a variety of barriers to stopping smoking. Participants described modifiable behavioral factors that influenced their quit motivation including self-efficacy, perceived effectiveness of stop-smoking services including smoking cessation aids, risk-minimizing beliefs, lack of social support, absence of positive influences on smoking, and beliefs about smoking/smoking cessation. Broader contextual factors included social isolation and stigma, coronavirus disease 2019, and comorbid mental and physical health conditions that deterred smoking cessation.ConclusionsTo encourage engagement in smoking cessation support during lung cancer screening, interventions should seek to encourage positive beliefs about the effectiveness of smoking cessation aids and increase confidence in quitting as part of supportive, person-centered care. Interventions should also acknowledge the wider social determinants of health among the lung screening-eligible population.ImplicationsThis study provides an in-depth understanding of the beliefs surrounding smoking and smoking cessation and further potential psychosocial factors that influence those attending lung cancer screening. Many of the barriers to smoking cessation found in the present study are similar to those outside of a lung screening setting however this work offers an understanding of potential facilitators that should be considered in future lung screening programs.
| S-EPMC11190054 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Randomized-controlled trials have confirmed substantial reductions in lung cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening. Evidence on how to integrate smoking cessation support in lung cancer screening is however scarce. This represents a significant gap in the literature, as a combined strategy of lung cancer screening and smoking cessation greatly reduces the mortality risk due to lung cancer and other related comorbidities. In this review, a literature search in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google Scholar was performed to identify randomized-controlled and observational studies investigating the effect of lung cancer screening trials and integrated cessation interventions on smoking cessation. Of the 236 identified records, we included 32 original publications. Smoking cessation rates in lung cancer screening trials are promising. Especially findings suspicious for lung cancer and referral to a physician might function as a teachable moment to motivate smoking abstinence in current smokers or recent quitters. More intensive, personalized and multi-modality smoking cessation interventions delivered by a clinician appear to be the most successful in influencing smoking behavior. While it is evident that smoking cessation should be incorporated in lung cancer screening, further research is required to ascertain the optimal treatment type, modality, timing, and content of communication including the incorporation of CT results to motivate health behavior change.
| S-EPMC7947402 | biostudies-literature
Project description:COPD is a disorder characterized by the progressive development of airflow limitation that is not fully reversible. Cigarette smoke has been generally accepted as the most important of many risk factors for the development of COPD. We used microarray technology to perform comprehensive gene expression profiling of smoke exposure and cessation effects in mouse lung tissue.
2017-10-20 | GSE17737 | GEO
Project description:BackgroundLung cancer screening (LCS) combined with smoking cessation programs is a critical strategy for reducing lung cancer mortality. Understanding the perspectives of cigarette users and former ones on these interventions is essential for enhancing their acceptability and effectiveness. This study aimed to explore, in Italy, the perceptions and experiences of individuals eligible for LCS within the context of a smoking cessation program.Methods and findingsThis multicenter qualitative study was conducted in two Italian regions as part of a larger project the Italian League against Cancer promoted. Using purposive sampling, we included (a) cigarette users and former ones who participated in an Italian trial, ITALUNG study, and (b) cigarette users who had been offered individual or group smoking cessation interventions and were theoretically eligible for screening in the following years (aged 50-70, ≥15 pack-years). Data were collected through open-ended semi-structured interviews and focus group meetings and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. The data analysis yielded six themes covering participants' views on the interactions between the two types of interventions (screening and smoking cessation program). Across their data, we generated the following themes: (i) depreciation and fatalism toward the risk of smoking, (ii) self-blaming and ethicality, (iii) ambivalent impact of the screening on smoking, (iv) LCS-related information and concerns, (v) teachable and motivating moments, and (vi) non-stigmatizing communication and testimony by professionals.ConclusionsOur study underscores the importance of avoiding stigma and respecting the dignity of cigarette users in implementing LCS and smoking cessation programs. Clear communication and supportive interactions with healthcare providers are crucial for enhancing the acceptability and effectiveness of these interventions. Future research should focus on quantifying these findings and exploring additional factors influencing the acceptability and effectiveness of combined LCS and smoking cessation programs.
| S-EPMC11882059 | biostudies-literature
Project description:RationaleSmoking cessation counseling in conjunction with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening is recommended in multiple clinical practice guidelines. The best approach for integrating effective smoking cessation interventions within this setting is unknown.ObjectivesTo summarize evidence, identify research gaps, prioritize topics for future research, and propose standardized tools for use in conducting research on smoking cessation interventions within the LDCT lung cancer screening setting.MethodsThe American Thoracic Society convened a multistakeholder committee with expertise in tobacco dependence treatment and/or LDCT screening. During an in-person meeting, evidence was reviewed, research gaps were identified, and key questions were generated for each of three research domains: (1) target population to study; (2) adaptation, development, and testing of interventions; and (3) implementation of interventions with demonstrated efficacy. We also identified standardized measures for use in conducting this research. A larger stakeholder panel then ranked research questions by perceived importance in an online survey. Final prioritization was generated hierarchically on the basis of average rank assigned.ResultsThere was little consensus on which questions within the population domain were of highest priority. Within the intervention domain, research to evaluate the effectiveness in the lung cancer screening setting of evidence-based smoking cessation interventions shown to be effective in other contexts was ranked highest. In the implementation domain, stakeholders prioritized understanding strategies to identify and overcome barriers to integrating smoking cessation in lung cancer screening settings.ConclusionsThis statement offers an agenda to stimulate research surrounding the integration and implementation of smoking cessation interventions with LDCT lung cancer screening.
| S-EPMC6072613 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC5089370 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLung cancer mortality is reduced via low-dose computed tomography screening and treatment of early-stage disease. Evidence-based smoking cessation treatment in the lung screening setting can further reduce mortality. We report the results of a cessation trial from the National Cancer Institute's Smoking Cessation at Lung Examination collaboration.MethodsEligible patients (n = 818) aged 50-80 years were randomly assigned (May 2017-January 2021) to the intensive vs minimal arms (8 vs 3 phone sessions plus 8 vs 2 weeks of nicotine patches, respectively). Bio-verified (primary) and self-reported 7-day abstinence rates were assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months post random assignment. Logistic regression analyses evaluated the effects of study arm. All statistical tests were 2-sided.ResultsParticipants reported 48.0 (SD = 17.2) pack-years, and 51.6% were not ready to quit in less than 30 days. Self-reported 3-month quit rates were statistically significantly higher in the intensive vs minimal arm (14.3% vs 7.9%; odds ratio [OR] = 2.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.26 to 3.18). Bio-verified abstinence was lower but with similar relative differences between arms (9.1% vs 3.9%; OR = 2.70, 95% CI = 1.44 to 5.08). Compared with the minimal arm, the intensive arm was more effective among those with greater nicotine dependence (OR = 3.47, 95% CI = 1.55 to 7.76), normal screening results (OR = 2.58, 95% CI = 1.32 to 5.03), high engagement in counseling (OR = 3.03, 95% CI = 1.50 to 6.14), and patch use (OR = 2.81, 95% CI = 1.39 to 5.68). Abstinence rates did not differ statistically significantly between arms at 6 months (OR = 1.2, 95% CI = 0.68 to 2.11) or 12 months (OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 0.82 to 2.42).ConclusionsDelivering intensive telephone counseling and nicotine replacement with lung screening is an effective strategy to increase short-term smoking cessation. Methods to maintain short-term effects are needed. Even with modest quit rates, integrating cessation treatment into lung screening programs may have a large impact on tobacco-related mortality.
| S-EPMC9552302 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere are limited data on the cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in lung cancer screening settings. We conducted an economic analysis embedded in a national randomized trial of 2 telephone counseling cessation interventions.MethodsWe used a societal perspective to compare the short-term cost per 6-month bio-verified quit and long-term cost-effectiveness of the interventions. Trial data were used to micro-cost intervention delivery, and the data were extended to a lifetime horizon using an established Cancer Intervention Surveillance and Modeling Network lung cancer model. We modeled the impact of screening accompanied by 8 weeks vs 3 weeks of telephone counseling (plus nicotine replacement) vs screening alone based on 2021 screening eligibility. Lifetime downstream costs (2021 dollars) and effects (life-years gained, quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]) saved were discounted at 3%. Sensitivity analyses tested the effects of varying quit rates and costs; all analyses assumed nonrelapse after quitting.ResultsThe costs for delivery of the 8-week vs 3-week protocol were $380.23 vs $144.93 per person, and quit rates were 7.14% vs 5.96%, respectively. The least costly strategy was a 3-week counseling approach. An 8-week (vs 3-week) counseling approach increased costs but gained QALYs for an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $4029 per QALY. Screening alone cost more and saved fewer QALYs than either counseling strategy. Conclusions were robust in sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsTelephone-based cessation interventions with nicotine replacement are considered cost-effective in the lung screening setting. Integrating smoking cessation interventions with lung screening programs has the potential to maximize long-term health benefits at reasonable costs.
| S-EPMC9382714 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPharmacists are uniquely positioned within the community to provide smoking cessation counseling to their patients. However, pharmacists experience significant barriers to providing counseling, including limited time, reimbursement, and training in counseling techniques. We tested a computer-driven software system, "Exper_Quit" (EQ), that provided individually tailored interventions to patients who smoke and matching tailored reports for pharmacists to help guide cessation counseling.MethodsA two-phase design was used to recruit an observation-only group (OBS; n = 100), followed by participants (n = 200) randomly assigned to receive either EQ-assisted pharmacist counseling or EQ plus 8 weeks of nicotine transdermal patch (EQ+). Both treatment groups were scheduled to receive two follow-up counseling calls from pharmacists.ResultsMost participants in the EQ and EQ+ groups reported receiving counseling from a pharmacist, including follow-up calls, while none of the OBS participants reported speaking with the pharmacist about cessation. At 6 months, fewer OBS participants reported a quit attempt (42%) compared with EQ (76%) or EQ+ (65%) participants (p < .02). At 6 months, 7-day point-prevalence abstinence was 28% and 15% among the EQ+ and EQ groups, respectively, compared with 8% among OBS participants (p < .01), and EQ+ participants were twice as likely to be quit than were EQ participants (p < .01).DiscussionA tailored software system can facilitate the delivery of smoking cessation counseling to pharmacy patients. Results suggest that EQ was successful in increasing (a) the delivery of cessation counseling, (b) quit attempts, and (c) quit rates. Pharmacists can play an important role in the effective delivery of smoking cessation counseling.
| S-EPMC2825100 | biostudies-literature