Adapting screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment to tobacco: a hospital trial of warm handoffs for smoking cessation
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Richter K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3480098 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionThe prevalence of smoking among people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) remains higher than the general population. Life expectancy among PLWHA has increased over the past decade, however, PLWHA who smoke will die younger than their non-smoking peers. The primary aim of this pilot study was to examine the effects of warm handoff versus fax referral to the quitline for smoking cessation among hospitalized smokers living with HIV/AIDS.Methods25 smokers with a diagnosis of HIV/AIDS hospitalized at a Midwestern academic medical center in 2012-2013 (19 male; mean age=47.7; 48% African-American) were identified, approached, and randomized to one of two treatment arms. At the bedside for patients in warm handoff, staff telephoned the quitline for on-the-spot enrollment and counseling. Participants randomized to fax were fax-referred to the quitline on the day of discharge. The quitline provided continued outpatient counseling to participants in both conditions. The main outcome was verified tobacco abstinence at 6-months post randomization.ResultsEnrollment and participation in quitline counseling was high among both warm handoff (100%) and fax-referred (71.4%) PLWHA participants. Nearly all completed follow up for outcome data collection at 6months. Verified abstinent rates were 45.5% in warm handoff versus 14.3% in fax referral at 6months (not significant).ConclusionsHospitalized smokers living with HIV/AIDS were highly engaged in quitline services. Warm handoff seems a promising intervention for hospitalized PLWHA that requires further exploration. Clinical Trials Registration NCT01305928.
| S-EPMC5783732 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveContinuation of smoking after a cancer diagnosis increases the burdensome side effects from cancer treatment, and decreases the chances of cure. Smoking cessation may improve oncological outcomes in cancer patients. This study aims to evaluate if radiation oncologists can be motivated by a smoking cessation awareness intervention to discuss smoking status more frequently and increase the referral rate for smoking cessation-support.Study design and Setting:A multifaceted approach was used to improve awareness: First, current practice was evaluated by a retrospective chart review of 282 patients referred for radiotherapy to ascertain smoking status, discussion of smoking cessation support and referral rates. Secondly, radiation oncologists were interviewed about their motives and barriers to discuss smoking status and smoking cessation support. The results were fed back in a teaching lecture to the doctors involved. Finally, the effect of this smoking cessation awareness intervention was prospectively evaluated in 100 patients.ResultsAfter the smoking cessation awareness intervention, smoking cessation was more frequently discussed compared to baseline (77% (10/13)) and 39.5% (17/43) respectively. The referral rate for smoking cessation increased from 2.3% (1/43) to 69.2% (9/13).ConclusionWithout an active smoking prevention awareness policy, referral for smoking cessation support for cancer patients by radiation oncologists is low. A relatively short and simple smoking awareness intervention for radiation oncologist may result in a more frequent discussion with patients about smoking cessation and an even larger increase in referrals for smoking cessation support.
| S-EPMC10761906 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFew studies have rigorously evaluated whether providing biologically based health-risk feedback is more effective than standard interventions in increasing smokers' motivation to quit and their long-term abstinence.DesignAn RCT was conducted from 2005 to 2008. Data were analyzed in 2008.Setting/participantsSmokers (N=536) were recruited from the community, regardless of their interest in quitting smoking.InterventionSmokers either received brief ( approximately 20 minutes), personally tailored counseling sessions based on their lung functioning, carbon monoxide (CO) exposure, and smoking-related health conditions, or they received generic smoking-risk information and personalized counseling about their diet, BMI, and physical activity. All were advised to quit smoking and were offered access to a free phone-counseling program.Main outcome measuresTreatment utilization and abstinence at 6 and 12 months post-intervention.ResultsParticipants who received the experimental treatment demonstrated no greater motivation to quit, use of treatment services, or abstinence compared to controls at either follow-up assessment. In fact, controls reported greater motivation to quit at 12 months (M 3.42 vs 3.20, p=0.03), greater use of pharmacotherapy at 6 months (37.8% vs 28.0%, p=0.02), and greater 30-day point prevalent abstinence at 6 months, after controlling for relevant covariates (10.8% vs 6.4%, adjusted p=0.04).ConclusionsThe present study found no support for adding a personalized health-risk assessment emphasizing lung health and CO exposure to generic cessation advice and counseling for community-based smokers not otherwise seeking treatment.Trial registrationNCT00169260.
| S-EPMC2889910 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMost smokers do not use smoking cessation (SC) services although it increases successful quits. Passive referral providing SC information to smokers is commonly used in SC studies. Little was known about active referral in the community setting. This study aims to motivate community smokers to quit by brief SC advice using a validated AWARD model (Ask, Warn, Advise, Refer and Do-it-again) that adjunct with active referral of smokers to various SC services in Hong Kong.Methods/designThis is a single-blinded, parallel three-armed cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) with two treatment groups of (1) brief SC advice using the AWARD model, active referral to SC services plus a referral card and a health warning leaflet (active referral group) and (2) brief SC advice using AWARD model and health warning leaflet (brief advice group) and a control group receives general very brief advice with a self-help booklet. A total of 1291 smokers will be recruited from 66 clusters (recruitment sessions) with 22 will be allocated to each of the two intervention and one control groups. SC ambassadors will be trained for delivering the interventions and conducting telephone follow-up. The primary outcomes are self-reported 7-days point prevalence (PP) abstinence at 3 and 6 months follow-up. Intention-to-treat principle and multi-level regressions will be used for data analysis.DiscussionThis is the first RCT on assessing a model combining brief advice and active referral to SC services among community smokers. The results will inform the practices of SC services and intervention studies.Trial registrationNCT02539875 (ClinicalTrials.gov registry; registered retrospectively on 22 July 2015).
| S-EPMC4866301 | biostudies-literature
Project description:People who smoke make up a significant number of those admitted to hospital (NICE 2014). Being admitted to hospital can present a unique opportunity to attempt to stop smoking. Many smokers find quitting very difficult (Rigotti et al 2007), in large part due to them living and working in environments that contain many cues and triggers associated with nicotine consumption and smoking behaviours. Hospitals generally do not contain such environmental prompts to smoke. In the community, smokers have access to numerous types of support including GP's, pharmacies and Stop Smoking Services (SSS). Once admitted to hospital access to such support is significantly diminished. Given that many patients may be highly motivated to attempt to stop smoking due to heightened concerns about their health and being in an environment not associated with their smoking habits, it seems prudent to ensure there is access to all the levels of smoking cessation support available outside of the hospital. Not providing such support neglects implementing an evidence based, cost-effective health intervention in a major health setting (NICE 2014). A SSS pathway was designed that enabled existing hospital healthcare staff to be trained to identify patients that smoke, ask if the patient is considering quitting or abstaining whilst in hospital. If motivated to quit or abstain, to complete an assessment. This being based around dependence to nicotine and motivation to quit. Access to all available stop smoking medications should be included. Medication should only be provided alongside some level of motivational support up to discharge. Training core staff was felt to be the best option. They are available outside of office hours and access hospital systems such as pharmacy more readily than satellite staff. On discharge the patient is 'handed over' to SSS for continued contact and support once at home. Over 200 staff are trained to complete the assessment and support inpatients to stop or abstain. Approximately 30-35 referrals are made to the local SSS each month, the quit rate at 4 weeks averaging around 40-45%. Most referrals are seen from cardiology and respiratory. All hospital departments should identify staff to be trained to offer cessation support to their patients .
| S-EPMC4645840 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe National Health Service in England aims to implement tobacco dependency treatment services in all hospitals by 2024. We aimed to assess the uptake of a new service, adapted from the Ottawa Model of Smoking Cessation, and its impact on 6-month quit rates and readmission or death at 1-year follow-up.MethodsWe conducted a pragmatic service evaluation of a tobacco dependency service implemented among 2067 patients who smoked who were admitted to 2 acute hospitals in London, England, over a 12-month period from July 2020. The intervention consisted of the systematic identification of smoking status, automatic referral to tobacco dependence specialists, provision of pharmacotherapy and behavioural support throughout the hospital stay, and telephone support for 6 months after discharge. The outcomes were (i) patient acceptance of the intervention during admission, (ii) quit success at 6 months after discharge, (iii) death, or (iv) readmission up to 1 year following discharge. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the impact of a range of clinical and demographic variables on these outcomes.ResultsThe majority (79.4%) of patients accepted support at the first assessment. Six months after discharge, 35.1% of successfully contacted patients reported having quit smoking. After adjustment, odds of accepting support were 51-61% higher among patients of all non-White ethnicity groups, relative to White patients, but patients of Mixed, Asian, or Other ethnicities had decreased odds of quit success (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 0.32, 95%CI = 0.15-0.66). Decreased odds of accepting support were associated with a diagnosis of cardiovascular disease or diabetes; however, diabetes was associated with increased odds of quit success (AOR = 1.88, 95%CI = 1.17-3.04). Intention to make a quit attempt was associated with a threefold increase in odds of quit success, and 60% lower odds of death, compared to patients who did not intend to quit. A mental health diagnosis was associated with an 84% increase in the odds of dying within 12 months.ConclusionsThe overall quit rates were similar to results from Ottawa models implemented elsewhere, although outcomes varied by site. Outcomes also varied according to patient demographics and diagnoses, suggesting personalised and culturally tailored interventions may be needed to optimise quit success.
| S-EPMC10964535 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8733777 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesCue-reactivity is a critical step leading to the emergence of addictive psychology and the triggering of addictive behaviors within the framework of addiction theory and is considered a significant risk factor for addiction-related behaviors. However, the effect of cue-reactivity targeted smoking cessation intervention and the cue-reactivity paradigms used in the randomized controlled trials varies, which introduces more heterogeneity and makes a side-by-side comparison of cessation responses difficult. Therefore, the scoping review aims to integrate existing research and identify evidence gaps.MethodsWe searched databases in English (PubMed and Embase) and Chinese (CNKI and Wanfang) using terms synonymous with 'cue' and 'tobacco use disorder (TUD)' to April 2023, and via hand-searching and reference screening of included studies. Studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials taking cue-reactivity as an indicator for tobacco use disorder (TUD) defined by different kinds of criteria.ResultsData were extracted on each study's country, population, methods, timeframes, outcomes, cue-reactivity paradigms, and so on. Of the 2,944 literature were retrieved, 201 studies met the criteria and were selected for full-text screening. Finally, 67 pieces of literature were selected for inclusion and data extraction. The results mainly revealed that non-invasive brain stimulation and exercise therapy showed a trend of greater possibility in reducing subjective craving compared to the remaining therapies, despite variations in the number of research studies conducted in each category. And cue-reactivity paradigms vary in materials and mainly fall into two main categories: behaviorally induced craving paradigm or visually induced craving paradigm.ConclusionThe current studies are still inadequate in terms of comparability due to their heterogeneity, cue-reactivity can be conducted in the future by constructing a standard library of smoking cue materials. Causal analysis is suggested in order to adequately screen for causes of addiction persistence, and further explore the specific objective cue-reactivity-related indicators of TUD.
| S-EPMC10512743 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of brief counseling on patient readiness for behavioral change and cessation/reduction of tobacco and alcohol use.MethodsThis clinical trial randomized patients in blocks, stratified by risk factor. Adult smokers or at-risk drinkers undergoing surgical or diagnostic procedures were recruited. Outcome assessments and analyses were blinded. Brief counseling was compared with educational materials for the outcomes progress in stage of change and smoking/alcohol cessation/reduction.ResultsOverall, 222 participants were randomly assigned to the intervention group and 218 to the control group. Among them, 28 and 18 patients were lost to follow-up, respectively. Progress in change stage was 94.1% at 1 month in both groups (RR = 1.00; 95%CI 0.95-1.05) and 94.8 vs. 90.5% at 3 months (RR = 1.05; 95%CI 0.99-1.11) in the intervention and control groups, respectively. Smoking cessation and alcohol reduction rates at 3 months were 57.2 vs. 41% (RR = 1.40; 95%CI 1.14-1.71) in the intervention and control groups, respectively. Only brief counseling led to significant differences in smoking cessation (51.4 vs. 35.1%; RR = 1.46; 95%CI 1.12-1.92).ConclusionsBrief counseling and educational materials improved patient motivation for behavioral change, but brief counseling had a greater effect on smoking cessation.
| S-EPMC9561838 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Most smoking cessation (SC) clinics are costly, passive, and underused. Objective:To compare the SC effect of a combined intervention involving brief, model-guided SC advice plus active referral to SC services (active referral group) with those of brief, model-guided SC advice only (brief advice group) and general SC advice only (control group). Design, Setting, and Participants:A single-blind, 3-arm, pragmatic cluster randomized clinical trial was conducted including 1226 adult daily smokers in the general Hong Kong community proactively recruited to participate in the Quit-to-Win Contest held in 2015. The study was conducted from June 20 to September 24, 2015. Participants were randomly allocated to the active referral (n = 402), brief advice (n = 416), and control (n = 408) groups. Intention-to-treat analysis was used. Interventions:Brief telephone counseling was offered to the active referral and brief advice groups at 1 and 2 months. Interventions were delivered by SC ambassadors who had undergone a short training period. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was the self-reported past 7-day point prevalence of abstinence (PPA) at 6 months. The secondary outcomes were carbon monoxide level-validated abstinence, smoking reduction, and SC service use. Results:Participants included 991 (80.8%) men; mean (SD) age was 42.0 (14.8) years. The response rate was 68.2% at 3 and 72.3% at 6 months. The corresponding PPAs were 18.9% and 17.2% in the active referral group-higher than in the brief advice (8.9% and 9.4%; both P ≤ .001) or control (14.0% and 11.5%; P = .03 at 6 months) groups. Compared with the other 2 groups, the active referral group had significantly higher validated abstinence rates (10.2% at 3 months and 9.0% at 6 months, all P < .05) with odds ratios of 2.84 (95% CI, 1.57-5.15) and 2.61 (95% CI, 1.46-4.68) at 3 months, and 1.85 (95% CI, 1.06-3.23) and 1.81 (95% CI, 1.04-3.16) at 6 months in the brief advice and control groups, respectively. The SC service use rate was significantly higher in the active referral group (25.1%) than in either brief advice (2.4%) or control (3.4%) groups at 6 months (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance:An intervention involving brief advice and active referral delivered to smokers in the community by volunteers can increase quitting in places where SC services are available but underused. Trial Registration:clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02539875.
| S-EPMC5820734 | biostudies-literature