Dataset Information

Effect of COVID-19 on smoking cessation outcomes in a large primary care treatment programme: an observational study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed patterns of smoking, other substance use and other health-related behaviours, leading to a virtualisation of non-urgent medical care. In this study, we examine associated changes in outcomes of smoking-cessation treatment.

Design

Observational study.

Setting

Data are drawn from 221 physician-led primary care practices participating in a smoking cessation program in Ontario, Canada.

Participants

43 509 patients (53% female), comprising 35 385 historical controls, 6109 people enrolled before the pandemic and followed up during it, and 1815 people enrolled after the pandemic began.

Intervention

Nicotine-replacement therapy with counselling.

Primary outcome measure

7-day self-reported abstinence from cigarettes at a follow-up survey 6 months after entry.

Results

For people followed up in the 6 months (6M) after the pandemic began, quit probability declined with date of enrolment. Predicted probabilities were 31.2% (95% CI 30.0% to 32.5%) for people enrolled in smoking cessation treatment 6 months prior to the emergency declaration and followed up immediately after the state of emergency was declared, and 24.1% (95% CI 22.1% to 26.2%) for those enrolled in treatment immediately before the emergency declaration and followed up 6M later (difference=-6.5%, 95% CI -9.0% to -3.9%). Seasonality and total treatment use did not explain this decline.

Conclusion

The probability of successful smoking cessation following treatment fell during the pandemic, with the decline consistent with an effect of 'exposure' to the pandemic-era environment. As many changes happened simultaneously, specific causes cannot be identified; however, the possibility that virtual care has been less effective than in-person treatment should be explored.

SUBMITTER: Veldhuizen S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8392738 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of COVID-19 on smoking cessation outcomes in a large primary care treatment programme: an observational study.

Veldhuizen Scott S Selby Peter P Wong Benjamin B Zawertailo Laurie L

BMJ open 20210826 8

<h4>Objectives</h4>The COVID-19 pandemic has changed patterns of smoking, other substance use and other health-related behaviours, leading to a virtualisation of non-urgent medical care. In this study, we examine associated changes in outcomes of smoking-cessation treatment.<h4>Design</h4>Observational study.<h4>Setting</h4>Data are drawn from 221 physician-led primary care practices participating in a smoking cessation program in Ontario, Canada.<h4>Participants</h4>43 509 patients (53% female) ...[more]

PMID: 34446503

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInternationally, there is an 'evidence-practice gap' in the rate healthcare professionals assess tobacco use and offer cessation support in clinical practice, including primary care. Evidence is needed for implementation strategies enacted in the 'real-world'.AimTo identify implementation strategies aiming to increase smoking cessation treatment provision in primary care, their effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and any perceived facilitators and barriers for effectiveness.Methods'Embase', 'Medline', 'PsycINFO', 'CINAHL', 'Global Health', 'Social Policy & Practice', 'ASSIA Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts' databases, and grey literature sources were searched from inception to April 2021. Studies were included if they evaluated an implementation strategy implemented on a nation-/state-wide scale, targeting any type of healthcare professional within the primary care setting, aiming to increase smoking cessation treatment provision.Primary outcome measuresimplementation strategy identification, and effectiveness (practitioner-/patient-level).Secondary outcome measuresperceived facilitators and barriers to effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness. Studies were assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. A narrative synthesis was conducted using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) compilation and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).ResultsOf 49 included papers, half were of moderate/low risk of bias. The implementation strategy domains identified involved utilizing financial strategies, changing infrastructure, training and educating stakeholders, and engaging consumers. The first three increased practitioner-level smoking status recording and cessation advice provision. Interventions in the utilizing financial strategies domain also appeared to increase smoking cessation (patient-level). Key facilitator: external policies/incentives (tobacco control measures and funding for public health and cessation clinics). Key barriers: time and financial constraints, lack of free cessation medications and follow-up, deprioritisation and unclear targets in primary care, lack of knowledge of healthcare professionals, and unclear messaging to patients about available cessation support options. No studies assessed cost-effectiveness.ConclusionsSome implementation strategy categories increased the rate of smoking status recording and cessation advice provision in primary care. We found some evidence for interventions utilizing financial strategies having a beneficial impact on cessation. Identified barriers to effectiveness should be reduced. More pragmatic approaches are recommended, such as hybrid effectiveness-implementation designs and utilising Multiphase Optimization Strategy methodology.Protocol registrationPROSPERO:CRD42021246683.

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.

Project description:BackgroundRandomized efficacy clinical trials conducted in research settings may not accurately reflect the benefits of tobacco dependence treatments when used in real-world clinical settings. Effectiveness trials (eg, in primary care settings) are needed to estimate the benefits of cessation treatments in real-world use.MethodsA total of 1346 primary care patients attending routine appointments were recruited by medical assistants in 12 primary care clinics. Patients were randomly assigned to 5 active pharmacotherapies: 3 monotherapies (nicotine patch, nicotine lozenge, and bupropion hydrochloride sustained release [SR]) and 2 combination therapies (patch + lozenge and bupropion SR + lozenge). Patients were referred to a telephone quit line for cessation counseling. Primary outcomes included 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 1 week, 8 weeks, and 6 months after quitting and number of days to relapse.ResultsAmong 7128 eligible smokers (> or =10 cigarettes per day) attending routine primary care appointments, 1346 (18.9%) were enrolled in the study. Six-month abstinence rates for the 5 active pharmacotherapies were the following: bupropion SR, 16.8%; lozenge, 19.9%; patch, 17.7%; patch + lozenge, 26.9%; and bupropion SR + lozenge, 29.9%. Bupropion SR + lozenge was superior to all of the monotherapies (odds ratio, 0.46-0.56); patch + lozenge was superior to patch and bupropion monotherapies (odds ratio, 0.56 and 0.54, respectively).ConclusionsOne in 5 smokers attending a routine primary care appointment was willing to make a serious quit attempt that included evidence-based counseling and medication. In this comparative effectiveness study of 5 tobacco dependence treatments, combination pharmacotherapy significantly increased abstinence compared with monotherapies. Provision of free cessation medications plus quit line counseling arranged in the primary care setting holds promise for assisting large numbers of smokers to quit. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00296647.

Project description:BackgroundSmoking prevalence is particularly high amongst more deprived social groups. This cross-sectional study uses the Mosaic classification to explore socioeconomic variations in the delivery and/or uptake of cessation interventions in UK primary care.MethodsData from 460,938 smokers registered in The Health Improvement Network between 2008 and 2010 were analysed. Logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios for smokers having a record of receiving cessation advice or a prescription for a cessation medication during the study period by Townsend quintile and for each of the 11 Mosaic groups and 61 Mosaic types. Both of these measures are area-level indicators of deprivation. Profiles of Mosaic categories were used to suggest ways to target specific groups to increase the provision of cessation support.ResultsOdds ratios for smokers having a record of advice or a prescription increased with increasing Townsend deprivation quintile. Similarly, smokers in more deprived Mosaic groups and types were more likely to have a documented cessation intervention. The odds of smokers receiving cessation advice if they have uncertain employment and live in social housing in deprived areas were 35% higher than the odds for successful professionals living in desirable areas (odds ratio (OR) 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.20-1.52; absolute risks 57.2% and 50.1% respectively), and those in low-income families living in estate-based social housing were 50% more likely to receive a prescription than these successful professionals (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.31-1.73; absolute risks 19.5% and 13% respectively). Smokers who did not receive interventions were generally well educated, financially successful, married with no children, read broadsheet newspapers and had broadband internet access.ConclusionsWide socioeconomic variations exist in the delivery and/or uptake of smoking cessation interventions in UK primary care, though encouragingly the direction of this variation may help to reduce smoking prevalence-related socioeconomic inequalities in health. Groups with particularly low intervention rates may be best targeted through broadsheet media, the internet and perhaps workplace-based interventions in order to increase the delivery and uptake of effective quit support.

Project description:As primary care practices evolve into medical homes, there is an increasing need for effective models to shift from visit-based to population-based strategies for care. However, most medical teams lack tools and training to manage panels of patients. As part of a study comparing different approaches to panel management at the Manhattan and Brooklyn campuses of the VA New York Harbor Healthcare System, we created a toolkit of strategies that non-clinician panel management assistants (PMAs) can use to enhance panel-wide outcomes in smoking cessation and hypertension.We created the toolkit using: 1) literature review and consultation with outside experts, 2) key informant interviews with staff identified using snowball sampling, 3) pilot testing for feasibility and acceptability, and 4) further revision based on a survey of primary care providers and nurses. These steps resulted in progressively refined strategies for the PMAs to support the primary care team.Literature review and expert consultation resulted in an extensive list of potentially useful strategies. Key informant interviews and staff surveys identified several areas of need for assistance, including help to manage the most challenging patients, providing care outside of the visit, connecting patients with existing resources, and providing additional patient education. The strategies identified were then grouped into 5 areas - continuous connection to care, education and connection to clinical resources, targeted behavior change counseling, adherence support, and patients with special needs.Although panel management is a central aspect of patient-centered medical homes, providers and health care systems have little guidance or evidence as to how teams should accomplish this objective. We created a toolkit to help PMAs support the clinical care team for patients with hypertension or tobacco use. This toolkit development process could readily be adapted to other behaviors or conditions.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01677533.

Project description:BackgroundDigital interventions are increasingly used to support smoking cessation. Ex-smokers iCoach was a widely available app for smoking cessation used by 404,551 European smokers between June 15, 2011, and June 21, 2013. This provides a unique opportunity to investigate the uptake of a freely available digital smoking cessation intervention and its effects on smoking-related outcomes.ObjectiveWe aimed to investigate whether there were distinct trajectories of iCoach use, examine which baseline characteristics were associated with user groups (based on the intensity of use), and assess if and how these groups were associated with smoking-related outcomes.MethodsAnalyses were performed using data from iCoach users registered between June 15, 2011, and June 21, 2013. Smoking-related data were collected at baseline and every 3 months thereafter, with a maximum of 8 follow-ups. First, group-based modeling was applied to detect distinct trajectories of app use. This was performed in a subset of steady users who had completed at least 1 follow-up measurement. Second, ordinal logistic regression was used to assess the baseline characteristics that were associated with user group membership. Finally, generalized estimating equations were used to examine the association between the user groups and smoking status, quitting stage, and self-efficacy over time.ResultsOf the 311,567 iCoach users, a subset of 26,785 (8.6%) steady iCoach users were identified and categorized into 4 distinct user groups: low (n=17,422, 65.04%), mild (n=4088, 15.26%), moderate (n=4415, 16.48%), and intensive (n=860, 3.21%) users. Older users and users who found it important to quit smoking had higher odds of more intensive app use, whereas men, employed users, heavy smokers, and users with higher self-efficacy scores had lower odds of more intensive app use. User groups were significantly associated with subsequent smoking status, quitting stage, and self-efficacy over time. For all groups, over time, the probability of being a smoker decreased, whereas the probability of being in an improved quitting stage increased, as did the self-efficacy to quit smoking. For all outcomes, the greatest change was observed between baseline and the first follow-up at 3 months. In the intensive user group, the greatest change was seen between baseline and the 9-month follow-up, with the observed change declining gradually in moderate, mild, and low users.ConclusionsIn the subset of steady iCoach users, more intensive app use was associated with higher smoking cessation rates, increased quitting stage, and higher self-efficacy to quit smoking over time. These users seemed to benefit most from the app in the first 3 months of use. Women and older users were more likely to use the app more intensively. Additionally, users who found quitting difficult used the iCoach app more intensively and grew more confident in their ability to quit over time.

Project description:ImportanceParental smoking adversely affects parents' and children's health. There are effective interventions delivered in pediatric settings to help parents quit smoking. The cost-effectiveness of this type of intervention is not known.ObjectiveTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a parental smoking cessation intervention, the Clinical Effort Against Secondhand Smoke Exposure (CEASE) program, delivered in pediatric primary care, compared with usual care from a health care organization's perspective.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic evaluation used data on intervention costs and parental smoking cessation collected prospectively as part of the CEASE randomized clinical trial. Data were collected at pediatric offices in 5 US states from April 2015 to October 2017. Participants included parents of children attending 10 pediatric primary care practices (5 control, 5 intervention). Data analysis was performed from October 2019 to August 2020.ExposuresThe trial compared CEASE (practice training and support to address family tobacco use) vs usual care.Main outcomes and measuresThe overall cost and incremental cost per quit of the CEASE intervention were calculated using microcosting methods. CEASE effectiveness was estimated using 2 trial outcomes measures assessed in repeated cross-sections: (1) change in smoking prevalence assessed by parental report for intervention vs usual care practices at 2 weeks after program initiation (baseline) and at 2-year follow-up and (2) changes in the proportion of smokers who achieved cotinine-confirmed smoking cessation in the previous 2 years at baseline vs follow-up. Monte Carlo analyses were used to provide 95% CIs.ResultsThe study included a total of 3054 participants (1523 at baseline and 1531 at follow-up); 2163 (70.8%) were aged 25 to 44 years old, and 2481 (81.2%) were women. Over 2 years, the total cost of implementing and sustaining CEASE across 5 intervention practices was $115 778. The incremental cost per quit for CEASE compared with usual care was $1132 (95% CI, $653-$3603), according to the change in parent-reported smoking prevalence, and $762 (95% CI, $418-$2883), according to cotinine-confirmed cessation. CEASE was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $2000 per quit in 88.0% of simulations based on the parent-reported smoking prevalence and 94.6% of simulations based on cotinine-confirmed smoking cessation measures.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that the CEASE intervention was associated with an incremental cost per quit that compared favorably with those of other clinical smoking cessation interventions. CEASE is inexpensive to initiate and maintain in the clinical pediatric setting, suggesting that it has the potential for a high impact on population health.

Dataset Information

Effect of COVID-19 on smoking cessation outcomes in a large primary care treatment programme: an observational study.

Objectives

Design

Setting

Participants

Intervention

Primary outcome measure

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Effect of COVID-19 on smoking cessation outcomes in a large primary care treatment programme: an observational study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets