Interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients

Psychosocial interventions for smoking cessation in people with coronary heart disease

OBJECTIVES

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows: Primary objective To examine the benefits and harms of different types of psychosocial interventions for smoking cessation in people with CHD. Secondary objectives To examine the benefits and harms of psychosocial interventions aimed solely at smoking cessation compared with multi-risk factor interventions for smoking cessation in people with CHD. To examine the benefits and harms of brief (duration of < one month) compared to extended (duration of ≥ one month) psychosocial interventions for smoking cessation in people with CHD. To explore whether using a validated biochemical assessment versus a self-report of abstinence moderates the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in people with CHD. To assess the equity of psychosocial interventions for smoking cessation in people with CHD.

Interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients

BACKGROUND

In 2020, 32.6% of the world's population used tobacco. Smoking contributes to many illnesses that require hospitalisation. A hospital admission may prompt a quit attempt. Initiating smoking cessation treatment, such as pharmacotherapy and/or counselling, in hospitals may be an effective preventive health strategy. Pharmacotherapies work to reduce withdrawal/craving and counselling provides behavioural skills for quitting smoking. This review updates the evidence on interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients, to understand the most effective smoking cessation treatment methods for hospitalised smokers.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of any type of smoking cessation programme for patients admitted to an acute care hospital.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 7 September 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised studies of behavioural, pharmacological or multicomponent interventions to help patients admitted to hospital quit. Interventions had to start in the hospital (including at discharge), and people had to have smoked within the last month. We excluded studies in psychiatric, substance and rehabilitation centres, as well as studies that did not measure abstinence at six months or longer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was abstinence from smoking assessed at least six months after discharge or the start of the intervention. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence, preferring biochemically-validated rates where reported. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 82 studies (74 RCTs) that included 42,273 participants in the review (71 studies, 37,237 participants included in the meta-analyses); 36 studies are new to this update. We rated 10 studies as being at low risk of bias overall (low risk in all domains assessed), 48 at high risk of bias overall (high risk in at least one domain), and the remaining 24 at unclear risk. Cessation counselling versus no counselling, grouped by intensity of intervention Hospitalised patients who received smoking cessation counselling that began in the hospital and continued for more than a month after discharge had higher quit rates than patients who received no counselling in the hospital or following hospitalisation (risk ratio (RR) 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24 to 1.49; 28 studies, 8234 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might account for an additional 76 quitters in every 1000 participants (95% CI 51 to 103). The evidence was uncertain (very low-certainty) about the effects of counselling interventions of less intensity or shorter duration (in-hospital only counselling ≤ 15 minutes: RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.89; 2 studies, 1417 participants; and in-hospital contact plus follow-up counselling support for ≤ 1 month: RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.20; 7 studies, 4627 participants) versus no counselling. There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, that smoking cessation counselling for at least 15 minutes in the hospital without post-discharge support led to higher quit rates than no counselling in the hospital (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.58; 12 studies, 4432 participants). Pharmacotherapy versus placebo or no pharmacotherapy Nicotine replacement therapy helped more patients to quit than placebo or no pharmacotherapy (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.67; 8 studies, 3838 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might equate to an additional 62 quitters per 1000 participants (95% CI 9 to 126). There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision (as CI encompassed the possibility of no difference), that varenicline helped more hospitalised patients to quit than placebo or no pharmacotherapy (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.75; 4 studies, 829 participants). Evidence for bupropion was low-certainty; the point estimate indicated a modest benefit at best, but CIs were wide and incorporated clinically significant harm and clinically significant benefit (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.43, 4 studies, 872 participants). Hospital-only intervention versus intervention that continues after hospital discharge Patients offered both smoking cessation counselling and pharmacotherapy after discharge had higher quit rates than patients offered counselling in hospital but not offered post-discharge support (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.38; 7 studies, 5610 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might equate to an additional 34 quitters per 1000 participants (95% CI 13 to 55). Post-discharge interventions offering real-time counselling without pharmacotherapy (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.60, 8 studies, 2299 participants; low certainty-evidence) and those offering unscheduled counselling without pharmacotherapy (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.14; 2 studies, 1598 participants; very low-certainty evidence) may have little to no effect on quit rates compared to control. Telephone quitlines versus control To provide post-discharge support, hospitals may refer patients to community-based telephone quitlines. Both comparisons relating to these interventions had wide CIs encompassing both possible harm and possible benefit, and were judged to be of very low certainty due to imprecision, inconsistency, and risk of bias (post-discharge telephone counselling versus quitline referral: RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.51; 3 studies, 3260 participants; quitline referral versus control: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.96; 2 studies, 1870 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Offering hospitalised patients smoking cessation counselling beginning in hospital and continuing for over one month after discharge increases quit rates, compared to no hospital intervention. Counselling provided only in hospital, without post-discharge support, may have a modest impact on quit rates, but evidence is less certain. When all patients receive counselling in the hospital, high-certainty evidence indicates that providing both counselling and pharmacotherapy after discharge increases quit rates compared to no post-discharge intervention. Starting nicotine replacement or varenicline in hospitalised patients helps more patients to quit smoking than a placebo or no medication, though evidence for varenicline is only moderate-certainty due to imprecision. There is less evidence of benefit for bupropion in this setting. Some of our evidence was limited by imprecision (bupropion versus placebo and varenicline versus placebo), risk of bias, and inconsistency related to heterogeneity. Future research is needed to identify effective strategies to implement, disseminate, and sustain interventions, and to ensure cessation counselling and pharmacotherapy initiated in the hospital is sustained after discharge.

Rationale and Design of a Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Effectiveness of Medical Student Counseling for Hospitalized Patients Addicted to Tobacco (the MS-CHAT Trial)

Globally, India is the second largest consumer of tobacco. However, Indian medical students do not receive adequate training in smoking cessation counseling. Each patient hospitalization is an opportunity to counsel smokers. Medical Student Counseling for Hospitalized patients Addicted to Tobacco (MS-CHAT) is a 2-arm multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) that compares the effectiveness of a medical student-guided smoking cessation program initiated in inpatients and continued for two months after discharge versus standard hospital practice. Current smokers admitted to the hospital are randomized to receive either usual care or the intervention. The intervention group receives inpatient counseling and longitudinal postdischarge telephone follow-up by medical students. The control group receives counseling at the discretion of the treating physician. The primary outcome is biochemically verified 7-day point prevalence of smoking cessation at 6 months after enrollment. Changes in medical student knowledge and attitude will also be studied using a pre- and postquestionnaire delivered prior to and 12 months after training. This trial tests a unique model that seeks to provide hands-on experience in smoking cessation counseling to medical students while simultaneously improving cessation outcomes among hospitalized smokers in India.

Initiating Pharmacologic Treatment in Tobacco-Dependent Adults. An Official American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice Guideline

Background: Current tobacco treatment guidelines have established the efficacy of available interventions, but they do not provide detailed guidance for common implementation questions frequently faced in the clinic. An evidence-based guideline was created that addresses several pharmacotherapy-initiation questions that routinely confront treatment teams.Methods: Individuals with diverse expertise related to smoking cessation were empaneled to prioritize questions and outcomes important to clinicians. An evidence-synthesis team conducted systematic reviews, which informed recommendations to answer the questions. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach was used to rate the certainty in the estimated effects and the strength of recommendations.Results: The guideline panel formulated five strong recommendations and two conditional recommendations regarding pharmacotherapy choices. Strong recommendations include using varenicline rather than a nicotine patch, using varenicline rather than bupropion, using varenicline rather than a nicotine patch in adults with a comorbid psychiatric condition, initiating varenicline in adults even if they are unready to quit, and using controller therapy for an extended treatment duration greater than 12 weeks. Conditional recommendations include combining a nicotine patch with varenicline rather than using varenicline alone and using varenicline rather than electronic cigarettes.Conclusions: Seven recommendations are provided, which represent simple practice changes that are likely to increase the effectiveness of tobacco-dependence pharmacotherapy.

The provision of preventive care for modifiable health risk behaviours by clinicians within substance use treatment settings: A systematic review

People who use substances have a high prevalence of other modifiable health risk behaviours such as tobacco smoking which contribute to an increased mortality and morbidity. Preventive care can reduce the prevalence of such behaviours and is recommended by clinical practice guidelines. This review describes the prevalence of preventive care delivery by substance use treatment healthcare providers and examines differences by treatment setting. Five databases were searched for studies published between 2005 and 2017. Eligible studies reported levels of preventive care (assessment, brief advice and/or referral/follow-up) in substance use treatment services for tobacco smoking, nutrition or physical activity. Two reviewers independently conducted article screening, data extraction and methodological quality assessment. Sixteen studies were included and all except one investigated care provision for tobacco smoking only. Four studies reported care levels as a proportion and 12 studies reported care as a score-based mean. Client-reported receipt of smoking cessation care ranged from: 79-90% for assessment; 15-79% for brief advice; 0-30% for referral/follow-up. Meta-regression analyses of 12 studies found clinician-reported preventative care for tobacco smoking was more frequently reported in studies assessing care occurring across multiple substance use treatment settings, compared to studies reporting provision in inpatient only. This review indicated that, compared to smoking cessation care, little is known about the level of preventive care for nutrition or physical activity. Overall, the delivery of smoking cessation care reported was sub-optimal. High levels of assessment relative to brief advice and low levels of referral to ongoing assistance were indicated.

Nurse-Driven mHealth Implementation Using the Technology Inpatient Program for Smokers (TIPS): Mixed Methods Study

Background

Smoking is the leading cause of preventable death and disease, yet implementation of smoking cessation in inpatient settings is inconsistent. The Technology Inpatient Program for Smokers (TIPS) is an implementation program designed to reach smokers with a mobile health (mHealth) intervention using stakeholder-supported strategies.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of the TIPS implementation strategies on smoker-level engagement of the mHealth intervention during care transition.

Methods

We examined varying intensities (passive motivational posters only and posters + active nurse-led facilitation) of TIPS strategies on four hospital units located in two sites. Unit-level and smoker-level adoption was monitored during active implementation (30 weeks) and sustainability follow-up (30 weeks). Process measures reflecting the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance (RE-AIM) framework, stakeholder reported adaptations of strategies, and formative evaluation data were collected and analyzed.

Results

For our smoker-level reach, 103 smokers signed up for the mHealth intervention in-hospital, with minimal decline during sustainability follow-up. While posters + nurse facilitation did not lead to higher reach than posters alone during active implementation (27 vs 30 signed up), it did lead to higher engagement of smokers (85.2% vs 73.3% completion of the full 2-week intervention). TIPS strategy adoption and fidelity varied by unit, including adoption of motivational posters (range: weeks 1 and 5), fidelity of posters (0.4% to 16.2% of posters missing per unit weekly) and internal facilitation of nurse training sessions (average of 2 vs 7.5 by site). Variable maintenance costs of the program totaled US $6.63 (US $683.28/103) per smoker reached. Reported family-member facilitation of mHealth sign-up was an observation of unintended behavior.

Conclusions

TIPS is a feasible and low-cost implementation program that successfully engages smokers in an mHealth intervention and sustains engagement after discharge. Further testing of nurse facilitation and expanding reach to patient family and friends as an implementation strategy is needed.

Update on the approach to smoking in patients with respiratory diseases

Smoking is the leading cause of respiratory disease (RD). The harmful effects of smoking on the respiratory system begin in utero and influence immune responses throughout childhood and adult life. In comparison with "healthy" smokers, smokers with RD have peculiarities that can impede smoking cessation, such as a higher level of nicotine dependence; nicotine withdrawal; higher levels of exhaled carbon monoxide; low motivation and low self-efficacy; greater concern about weight gain; and a high prevalence of anxiety and depression. In addition, they require more intensive, prolonged treatment. It is always necessary to educate such individuals about the fact that quitting smoking is the only measure that will reduce the progression of RD and improve their quality of life, regardless of the duration and severity of the disease. Physicians should always offer smoking cessation treatment. Outpatient or inpatient smoking cessation treatment should be multidisciplinary, based on behavioral interventions and pharmacotherapy. It will thus be more effective and cost-effective, doubling the chances of success.

Comparison of two smoking cessation interventions for inpatients

Objective:

This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of two cognitive behavioral therapy-based smoking cessation interventions initiated during hospitalization and to evaluate the factors related to relapse after discharge.

Methods:

This was a prospective randomized study involving 90 smokers hospitalized in a university hospital. We collected data related to sociodemographic characteristics, reasons for admission, smoking-related diseases, smoking history, the degree of nicotine dependence (ND), and the level of craving. Patients were divided into two treatment groups: brief intervention (BrInter, n = 45); and intensive intervention with presentation of an educational video (InInterV, n=45). To assess relapse, all patients were assessed by telephone interview in the first, third, and sixth months after discharge. Abstinence was confirmed by measurement of exhaled carbon monoxide (eCO).

Results:

Of the 90 patients evaluated, 55 (61.1%) were male. The mean age was 51.1 ± 12.2 years. The degree of ND was elevated in 39 (43.4%), and withdrawal symptoms were present in 53 (58.9%). The mean eCO at baseline was 4.8 ± 4.5 ppm. The eCO correlated positively with the degree of ND (r = 0.244; p = 0.02) and negatively with the number of smoke-free days (r = −0.284; p = 0.006). There were no differences between the groups in terms of the variables related to socioeconomic status, smoking history, or hospitalization. Of the 81 patients evaluated at 6 months, 33 (40.7%) remained abstinent (9 and 24 BrInter and InInterV group patients, respectively; p = 0.001), and 48 (59.3%) had relapsed (31 and 17 BrInter and InInterV group patients, respectively; p= 0.001). Moderate or intense craving was a significant independent risk factor for relapse, with a relative risk of 4.0 (95% CI: 1.5-10.7; p < 0.00001).

Conclusions:

The inclusion of an educational video proved effective in reducing relapse rates. Craving is a significant risk factor for relapse.

Smoking cessation after engagement in HIV care in rural Uganda

People living with HIV (PLWH) are more likely to smoke compared to HIV-uninfected counterparts, but little is known about smoking behaviors in sub-Saharan Africa. To address this gap in knowledge, we characterized smoking cessation patterns among people living with HIV (PLWH) compared to HIV-uninfected individuals in rural Uganda. PLWH were at least 40 years of age and on antiretroviral therapy for at least three years, and HIV-uninfected individuals were recruited from the clinical catchment area. Our primary outcome of interest was smoking cessation, which was assessed using an adapted WHO STEPS smoking questionnaire. We fit Cox proportional hazards models to compare time to smoking cessation between PLWH pre-care, PLWH in care, and HIV-uninfected individuals. We found that, compared to HIV-uninfected individuals, PLWH in care were less likely to have ever smoked (40% vs. 49%, p = 0.04). The combined sample of 267 ever-smokers had a median age of 56 (IQR 49-68), 56% (n = 150) were male, and 26% (n = 70) were current smokers. In time-to-event analyses, HIV-uninfected individuals and PLWH prior to clinic enrollment ceased smoking at similar rates (HR 0.8, 95% CI 0.5-1.2). However, after enrolling in HIV care, PLWH had a hazard of smoking cessation over twice that of HIV-uninfected individuals and three times that of PLWH prior to enrollment (HR 2.4, 95% CI 1.3-4.6, p = 0.005 and HR 3.0, 95% CI 1.6-5.5, p = 0.001, respectively). In summary, we observed high rates of smoking cessation among PLWH after engagement in HIV care in rural Uganda. While we hypothesize that greater access to primary care services and health counseling might contribute, future studies should better investigate the mechanism of this association.

Smoking Cessation Advisory Intervention in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease

Introduction:

Several studies have examined the efficacy of smoking cessation therapies in the general population. However little is known about the efficacy of these advisory methods in cardiovascular patients.

Aim:

The aim of the study is to determine the prevalence and the characteristics of smoking abstinence in cardiovascular patients, after a smoking intervention during hospitalization.

Methods:

The study involved 442 patients, smokers admitted for cardiovascular disease to the Department of Cardiology. During hospitalization patient’s data were collected and all patients were subjected to a 30-minutes long advisory session with drug administration in selected cases (varenicycline, bupropione, nocitine replacement therapy), according to standard protocol. After the discharge patients were asked about smoking abstinence at time intervals of 24 hours, 1 month, 3, 6 and 12 months.

Results:

After hospital discharge 11 patients (2.49%) could not be contacted after several attempts and 19 patients (4.3%) were died during follow up period. A total of 412 patients (218 men and 194 women, mean age 56.49+10.57 years) made up the final study population. Twenty four hours after hospital discharge 364 patients (88.35%) had quitted smoking. At 1, 3, 6 and 12 months the abstinence rates were 70.87%, 64.8%, 55.82% and 47.83% respectively. Patients with ischaemic cardiovascular diseases (angina – infarction) had a significantly higher probability of quitting smoking at 12 months (Hazard ratio: 0.64 – p=0.01).

Conclusion:

A smoking cessation program in cardiovascular patients during hospitalization was unlikely to result in success. These patients might benefit by following programs promoting smoking cessation in experienced specialized centers, involving a group of health professionals, such as psychologists and/or trained nurses.

Providing routine chronic disease preventive care in community substance use services: a pilot study of a multistrategic clinical practice change intervention

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the potential effectiveness of a practice change intervention in increasing preventive care provision in community-based substance use treatment services. In addition, client and clinician acceptability of care were examined.

DESIGN

A pre-post trial conducted from May 2012 to May 2014.

SETTING

Public community-based substance use treatment services (n=15) in one health district in New South Wales (NSW), Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

Surveys were completed by 226 clients and 54 clinicians at baseline and 189 clients and 46 clinicians at follow-up.

INTERVENTIONS

A 12-month multistrategic clinician practice change intervention that aimed to increase the provision of preventive care for smoking, insufficient fruit and/or vegetable consumption and insufficient physical activity.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Client and clinician reported provision of assessment, brief advice and referral for three modifiable health risk behaviours: smoking, insufficient fruit and/or vegetable consumption and insufficient physical activity. Clinician-reported optimal care was defined as providing care to 80% of clients or more. Client acceptability and clinician attitudes towards preventive care were assessed at follow-up.

RESULTS

Increases in client reported care were observed for insufficient fruit and/or vegetable consumption including: assessment (24% vs 54%, p<0.001), brief advice (26% vs 46%, p<0.001), and clinicians speaking about (10% vs 31%, p<0.001) and arranging a referral (1% vs 8%, p=0.006) to telephone helplines. Clinician reported optimal care delivery increased for: assessment of insufficient fruit and/or vegetable consumption (22% vs 63%, p<0.001) and speaking about telephone helplines for each of the three health risk behaviours. Overall, clients and clinicians held favourable views regarding preventive care.

CONCLUSION

This study reported increases in preventive care for insufficient fruit and/or vegetable consumption; however, minimal increases were observed for smoking or insufficient physical activity. Further investigation of the barriers to preventive care delivery in community substance use settings is needed.

TRIALREGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12614000469617.

Smoking among hospitalized patients: A multi-hospital cross-sectional study of a widely neglected problem

INTRODUCTION

A comprehensive smoking ban was recently enacted for acute-care hospital campuses in Spain. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and patterns of smoking among inpatients before and during hospitalization.

METHODS

Multi-center cross-sectional study was conducted in 13 hospitals in the province of Barcelona, Spain from May 2014 to May 2015. Participants were adults who provided informed consent. The sample size was calculated to be representative of each hospital (prevalence 29.4%, precision ± 5%, error 5%). We approached 1228 subjects, 888 accepted to participate and 170 were replaced (were not available or declined to participate). Final sample comprised 1047 subjects. We used a computer-assisted personal interview system to collect data, including sociodemographic variables and use of tobacco before and during hospitalization. Smoking status was validated with exhaled carbon monoxide. We calculated overall tobacco prevalence and investigated associations with participant and center characteristics. We performed multiple polytomous and multilevel logistic regression analyses to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), with adjustments for potential confounders.

RESULTS

In all, 20.5% (95% CI: 18.1–23.0) of hospitalized patients were smokers. Smoking was most common among men (aOR=7.47; 95% CI: 4.88–11.43), young age groups (18–64 years), and individuals with primary or less than primary education (aOR=2.76; 95% CI: 1.44–5.28). Of the smokers, 97.2% were daily consumers of whom 44.9% had medium nicotine dependence. Of all smokers, three-quarters expressed a wish to quit, and one-quarter admitted to consuming tobacco during hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate the need to offer smoking cessation interventions among hospitalized patients in all units and service areas, to avoid infringements and increase patient safety, hospital efficiency, and improve clinical outcomes. Hospitalization represents a promising window for initiating smoking interventions addressed to all patients admitted to smoke-free hospitals, specially after applying a smoke-free campus ban.

Smoke-Free Recovery from Trauma Surgery: A Pilot Trial of an Online Smoking Cessation Program for Orthopaedic Trauma Patients

Smoking increases the risk of complications associated with orthopaedic trauma surgery, however delivery of care is low. Online interventions may provide needed smoking cessation care and promote abstinence. This study aims to examine the engagement, acceptability, and retention of an online smoking cessation program (Smoke-Free Recovery; SFR) among a sample of orthopaedic trauma patients, as well as themes around the smoking cessation process. A pilot study of SFR with 31 orthopaedic trauma patients admitted to a public hospital in New South Wales, Australia took place. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted following hospital discharge. Thematic analysis and descriptive statistics were used. Engagement was high with 28 participants accessing SFR during admission. Twenty individuals completed follow-up phone calls. Program acceptability was rated favourably. After discharge, changes in smoking habits were noted, with program retention low. Themes on program use included: lack of time or need for additional support; computer illiteracy or technology issues; feeling unready or too stressed to quit; or feeling they had reached the boundary of what could be learnt from the program. This study highlights the difficulties faced by patients following hospital admission, the lack of follow-up support received, and the need for consumer testing prior to roll out. Continuing to develop interventions to promote hospital-initiated cessation attempts that continue post-discharge should be a priority.

Treating tobacco dependence: guidance for primary care on life-saving interventions. Position statement of the IPCRG

Tobacco smoking is the world's leading cause of premature death and disability. Global targets to reduce premature deaths by 25% by 2025 will require a substantial increase in the number of smokers making a quit attempt, and a significant improvement in the success rates of those attempts in low, middle and high income countries. In many countries the only place where the majority of smokers can access support to quit is primary care. There is strong evidence of cost-effective interventions in primary care yet many opportunities to put these into practice are missed. This paper revises the approach proposed by the International Primary Care Respiratory Group published in 2008 in this journal to reflect important new evidence and the global variation in primary-care experience and knowledge of smoking cessation. Specific for primary care, that advocates for a holistic, bio-psycho-social approach to most problems, the starting point is to approach tobacco dependence as an eminently treatable condition. We offer a hierarchy of interventions depending on time and available resources. We present an equitable approach to behavioural and drug interventions. This includes an update to the evidence on behaviour change, gender difference, comparative information on numbers needed to treat, drug safety and availability of drugs, including the relatively cheap drug cytisine, and a summary of new approaches such as harm reduction. This paper also extends the guidance on special populations such as people with long-term conditions including tuberculosis, human immunodeficiency virus, cardiovascular disease and respiratory disease, pregnant women, children and adolescents, and people with serious mental illness. We use expert clinical opinion where the research evidence is insufficient or inconclusive. The paper describes trends in the use of waterpipes and cannabis smoking and offers guidance to primary-care clinicians on what to do faced with uncertain evidence. Throughout, it recognises that clinical decisions should be tailored to the individual's circumstances and attitudes and be influenced by the availability and affordability of drugs and specialist services. Finally it argues that the role of the International Primary Care Respiratory Group is to improve the confidence as well as the competence of primary care and, therefore, makes recommendations about clinical education and evaluation. We also advocate for an update to the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines to optimise each primary-care intervention. This International Primary Care Respiratory Group statement has been endorsed by the Member Organisations of World Organization of Family Doctors Europe.

Buerger's disease: providing integrated care

Buerger’s disease, also known as thromboangiitis obliterans (TAO), is a segmental inflammatory disease affecting small- and medium-sized vessels, which is strongly associated with tobacco use. Although the etiology is still unknown, recent studies suggest an immunopathogenesis. Diagnosis is based on clinical and angiomorphologic criteria, including age, history of smoking, clinical presentation with distal extremity ischemia, and the absence of other risk factors for atherosclerosis, autoimmune disease, hypercoagulable states, or embolic disease. Until now, no causative therapy exists for TAO. The most important therapeutic intervention is smoking cessations and intravenous prostanoid infusions (iloprost). Furthermore, effective analgesia is crucial for the treatment of ischemic and neuropathic pain and might be expanded by spinal cord stimulation. Revascularization procedures do not play a major role in the treatment of TAO due to the distal localization of arterial occlusion. More recently, immunoadsorption has been introduced eliminating vasoconstrictive G-protein-coupled receptor and other autoantibodies. Cell-based therapies and treatment with bosentan were also advocated. Finally, a consequent prevention and treatment of wounds and infections are essential for the prevention of amputations. To achieve better clinical results, integrated care in multidisciplinary and trans-sectoral teams with emphasis on smoking cessation, pain control, wound management, and social care by professionals, social workers, and family members is necessary.

Warm Handoff Versus Fax Referral for Linking Hospitalized Smokers to Quitlines

INTRODUCTION

Few hospitals treat patients' tobacco dependence. To be effective, hospital-initiated cessation interventions must provide at least 1 month of supportive contact post-discharge.

STUDY DESIGN

Individually randomized clinical trial. Recruitment commenced July 2011; analyses were conducted October 2014-June 2015.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

The study was conducted in two large Midwestern hospitals. Participants included smokers who were aged ≥18 years, planned to stay quit after discharge, and spoke English or Spanish.

INTERVENTION

Hospital-based cessation counselors delivered the intervention. For patients randomized to warm handoff, staff immediately called the quitline from the bedside and handed the phone to participants for enrollment and counseling. Participants randomized to fax were referred on the day of hospital discharge.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcomes at 6 months included quitline enrollment/adherence, medication use, biochemically verified cessation, and cost effectiveness.

RESULTS

Significantly more warm handoff than fax participants enrolled in quitline (99.6% vs 59.6%; relative risk, 1.67; 95% CI=1.65, 1.68). One in four (25.4% warm handoff, 25.3% fax) were verified to be abstinent at 6-month follow-up; this did not differ significantly between groups (relative risk, 1.02; 95% CI=0.82, 1.24). Cessation medication use in the hospital and receipt of a prescription for medication at discharge did not differ between groups; however, significantly more fax participants reported using cessation medication post-discharge (32% vs 25%, p=0.01). The average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of enrolling participants into warm handoff was $0.14. Hospital-borne costs were significantly lower in warm handoff than in fax ($5.77 vs $9.41, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

One in four inpatient smokers referred to quitline by either method were abstinent at 6 months post-discharge. Among motivated smokers, fax referral and warm handoff are efficient and comparatively effective ways to link smokers with evidence-based care. For hospitals, warm handoff is a less expensive and more effective method for enrolling smokers in quitline services.

Uptake and efficacy of a systematic intensive smoking cessation intervention using motivational interviewing for smokers hospitalised for an acute coronary syndrome: a multicentre before-after study with parallel group comparisons

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of a proactive approach with a reactive approach to offer intensive smoking cessation intervention using motivational interviewing (MI).

DESIGN

Before-after comparison in 2 academic hospitals with parallel comparisons in 2 control hospitals.

SETTING

Academic hospitals in Switzerland.

PARTICIPANTS

Smokers hospitalised for an acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

INTERVENTION

In the intervention hospitals during the intervention phase, a resident physician trained in MI systematically offered counselling to all smokers admitted for ACS, followed by 4 telephone counselling sessions over 2 months by a nurse trained in MI. In the observation phase, the in-hospital intervention was offered only to patients whose clinicians requested a smoking cessation intervention. In the control hospitals, no intensive smoking cessation intervention was offered.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

The primary outcome was 1 week smoking abstinence (point prevalence) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were the number of smokers who received the in-hospital smoking cessation intervention and the duration of the intervention.

RESULTS

In the intervention centres during the intervention phase, 87% of smokers (N=193/225) received a smoking cessation intervention compared to 22% in the observational phase (p<0.001). Median duration of counselling was 50 min. During the intervention phase, 78% received a phone follow-up for a median total duration of 42 min in 4 sessions. Prescription of nicotine replacement therapy at discharge increased from 18% to 58% in the intervention phase (risk ratio (RR): 3.3 (95% CI 2.4 to 4.3; p≤0.001). Smoking cessation at 12-month increased from 43% to 51% comparing the observation and intervention phases (RR=1.20, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.46; p=0.08; 97% with outcome assessment). In the control hospitals, the RR for quitting was 1.02 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.25; p=0.8, 92% with outcome assessment).

CONCLUSIONS

A proactive strategy offering intensive smoking cessation intervention based on MI to all smokers hospitalised for ACS significantly increases the uptake of smoking cessation counselling and might increase smoking abstinence at 12 months.

Provision of Chronic Disease Preventive Care in Community Substance Use Services: Client and Clinician Report

INTRODUCTION

People with substance use problems have a higher prevalence of modifiable health risk behaviors. Routine clinician provision of preventive care may be effective in reducing such health behaviors. This study aimed to examine clinician provision of preventive care to clients of community substance use treatment services.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was undertaken with 386 clients and 54 clinicians of community substance use treatment services in one health district in New South Wales, Australia. Client- and clinician-reported provision of three elements of care (assessment, brief advice and referral) for three health risk behaviors (tobacco smoking, insufficient fruit and/or vegetable consumption and insufficient physical activity) was assessed, with associations with client characteristics examined.

RESULTS

Provision was highest for tobacco smoking assessment (90% client reported, 87% clinician reported) and brief advice (79% client reported, 80% clinician reported) and lowest for fruit and vegetable consumption (assessment 23%, brief advice 25%). Few clients reported being offered a referral (<10%). Assessment of physical activity and brief advice for all behaviors was higher for clients residing in rural/remote areas.

CONCLUSION

Assessment and brief advice were provided to the majority of clients for smoking, but sub-optimally for the other behaviors. Further investigation of barriers to the provision of preventive care within substance use treatment settings is required, particularly for referral to ongoing support.

Improving Quality of Care for Hospitalized Smokers with HIV: Tobacco Dependence Treatment Referral and Utilization

BACKGROUND

Most persons living with HIV smoke cigarettes and tend to be highly dependent, heavy smokers. Few such persons receive tobacco treatment, and many die from tobacco-related illness. Although advancements in antiretroviral therapy (ART) have increased the quality and quantity of life, the health harms from tobacco use diminish these gains. Without cessation assistance, thousands will benefit from costly ART, only to suffer the consequences of tobacco-related disease and death. A study was conducted to examine in detail inpatient tobacco treatment for smokers with HIV.

METHODS

Data collected at hospital admission and data collected by tobacco treatment specialists were examined retrospectively for all inpatients with HIV who were admitted to an academic medical center for a five-year period. Specifically, the prevalence of cigarette smoking, factors predictive of referral to tobacco treatment, referral for tobacco treatment, treatment participation, and abstinence at six months posttreatment were measured. Differences in referral and treatment participation between all smokers and smokers with HIV were also assessed.

RESULTS

Among the 422 admitted persons with HIV, 54.5% smoked and 21.7% were referred to inpatient tobacco treatment services. Substance abuse and tobacco-related diagnoses were predictive of referral to inpatient tobacco treatment specialists. Among the 14 treatment participants reached for follow-up, 11 (78.6%) made quit attempts and 3 (21.4%) reported abstinence. Smokers with HIV were less likely to be referred to and treated by tobacco treatment services than all smokers admitted during the same time frame.

CONCLUSIONS

Although tobacco is a major cause of mortality, few smokers with HIV are offered treatment during hospitalization. Those who are treated attempt to quit. Hospitalization offers a prime opportunity for initiating smoking cessation among those with HIV.

Integrating Tobacco Use Treatment Into Practice: Billing and Documentation

Balancing population-based efforts to modify the social and environmental factors that promote tobacco dependence with efforts to improve the delivery of case-based treatments is necessary for realizing maximum reductions in the cost and consequences of the disease. Public health antismoking campaigns following the 1964 Surgeon General's report on the health risks of smoking have changed social norms, prevented initiation among youth, and promoted abstinence among the addicted. However, the rate of progress enjoyed to date is unlikely to continue into the coming decades, given that current annual unassisted cessation rates among prevalent smokers remains fairly low. With more than 1 billion patient interactions annually, there is an enormous unrealized capacity for health-care systems to have an effect on this problem. Clinicians report a perceived lack of reimbursement as a significant barrier to full integration of tobacco dependence into health care. A more complete understanding of the coding and documentation requirements for successful practice in this critically important area is a prerequisite to increasing engagement. This paper presents several case-based scenarios illustrating important practice management issues related to the treatment of tobacco dependence in health care.

Narratives to enhance smoking cessation interventions among African-American smokers, the ACCE project

BACKGROUND

Low-income, African-American smokers are less likely to have resources to aid in quitting smoking. Narrative communication may provide an enhancement to traditional smoking cessation interventions like NRT, medications, or behavioral treatments for this audience. After extensive pilot testing of stories and personal experiences with smoking cessation from African-Americans from a low-income community, we conducted a randomized control trial using stories to augment routine inpatient treatment among African-Americans at an urban Southern hospital (N = 300).

RESULTS

Differences in smoking cessation outcomes between the intervention (stories DVD + routine clinical treatment) and control (routine clinical treatment) arms were compared using self-report and carbon monoxide measurement at 6-months. Compared to control, individuals who viewed the intervention stories DVD reported greater intentions to quit. Although continuous quitting marginally favored the intervention, our main result did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.16).

CONCLUSION

Narrative communication via storytelling to promote smoking cessation among African-Americans in the South is one method to communicate smoking cessation. Results suggest this may not be sufficient as a stand-alone augmentation of routine clinical treatment for continuous smoking cessation. Smoking cessation efforts need to continually assess different means of communicating to smokers about quitting.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

The ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier is NCT00101491. This trial was registered January 10, 2005.

Cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation treatment initiated during psychiatric hospitalization: analysis from a randomized, controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

We examined the cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation treatment for psychiatric inpatients.

METHOD

Smokers, regardless of intention to quit, were recruited during psychiatric hospitalization and randomized to receive stage-based smoking cessation services or usual aftercare. Smoking cessation services, quality of life, and biochemically verified abstinence from cigarettes were assessed during 18 months of follow-up. A Markov model of cost-effectiveness over a lifetime horizon was constructed using trial findings and parameters obtained in a review of the literature on quit and relapse rates and the effect of smoking on health care cost, quality of life, and mortality.

RESULTS

Among 223 smokers randomized between 2006 and 2008, the mean cost of smoking cessation services was $189 in the experimental treatment group and $37 in the usual care condition (P < .001). At the end of follow-up, 18.75% of the experimental group was abstinent from cigarettes, compared to 6.80% abstinence in the usual care group (P < .05). The model projected that the intervention added $43 in lifetime cost and generated 0.101 additional quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $428 per QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis found the experimental intervention was cost-effective against the acceptance criteria of $50,000/QALY in 99.0% of the replicates.

CONCLUSIONS

A cessation intervention for smokers identified in psychiatric hospitalization did not result in higher mental health care costs in the short-run and was highly cost-effective over the long-term. The stage-based intervention was a feasible and cost-effective way of addressing the high smoking prevalence in persons with serious mental illness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00136812.

Validity of subjective smoking status in orthopedic patients

Purpose

In this level 1 diagnostic study, we analyzed the validity of subjective smoking status and, as secondary research question, the smoking cessation adherence in orthopedic patients during a routine hospital stay of nonunion patients by measuring serum cotinine.

Methods

We included patients undergoing revision surgery due to nonunion of long bones. Patients were interviewed about their smoking status. Blood samples were taken from all the patients prior to surgery and for an additional 6 weeks following surgery. Serum levels of cotinine were measured, and coherence between subjective smoking status and objective cotinine analysis was evaluated.

Results

Between March 2012 and August 2014, we enrolled 136 patients. Six of the 26 “previous smokers” (23%) and four of the 65 “nonsmokers” (6%) had serum cotinine above cutoff levels. In self-labeled smokers, serum cotinine levels averaged at 2,367.4±14,885.9 ng/mL (with a median of 100 ng/mL), whereas in previous smokers the levels averaged at 4,270±19,619.4 ng/mL (with a median of 0 ng/mL) and in the nonsmokers group the levels averaged at 12±53.9 ng/mL (with a median of 0.03 ng/mL). Overall, the subjective smoking status matched serum cotinine testing in 88% of the cases. Sensitivity was 79.6% and specificity was 93.1%. Ninety-one percent of the patients with preoperative positive serum values were still positive at follow-up.

Conclusion

In this study, we could show that subjective smoking status in orthopedic patients is predominantly reliable as validated by objective cotinine measurements; however, patients who declare themselves as “previous smokers” are at elevated risk for underreporting continued smoking and patients who smoked preoperatively are at high risk for continuing their habit. In the future, caregivers should consider introducing effective treatments for smoking cessation to smokers and furthermore offer effective treatments to maintain smoking cessation in previous smokers during their routine consultation prior to orthopedic and trauma surgery.

Psychosocial interventions for smoking cessation in patients with coronary heart disease

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a Cochrane review previously published in 2008. Smoking increases the risk of developing atherosclerosis but also acute thrombotic events. Quitting smoking is potentially the most effective secondary prevention measure and improves prognosis after a cardiac event, but more than half of the patients continue to smoke, and improved cessation aids are urgently required.

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to examine the efficacy of psychosocial interventions for smoking cessation in patients with coronary heart disease in short-term (6 to 12 month follow-up) and long-term (more than 12 months). Moderators of treatment effects (i.e. intervention types, treatment dose, methodological criteria) were used for stratification.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 12, 2012), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and PSYNDEX were searched from the start of the database to January 2013. This is an update of the initial search in 2003. Results were supplemented by cross-checking references, and handsearches in selected journals and systematic reviews. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with CHD with a minimum follow-up of 6 months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias. Abstinence rates were computed according to an intention to treat analysis if possible, or if not according to completer analysis results only. Subgroups of specific intervention strategies were analysed separately. The impact of study quality on efficacy was studied in a moderator analysis. Risk ratios (RR) were pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel and random-effects model with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We found 40 RCTs meeting inclusion criteria in total (21 trials were new in this update, 5 new trials contributed to long-term results (more than 12 months)). Interventions consist of behavioural therapeutic approaches, telephone support and self-help material and were either focused on smoking cessation alone or addressed several risk factors (eg. obesity, inactivity and smoking). The trials mostly included older male patients with CHD, predominantly myocardial infarction (MI). After an initial selection of studies three trials with implausible large effects of RR > 5 which contributed to substantial heterogeneity were excluded. Overall there was a positive effect of interventions on abstinence after 6 to 12 months (risk ratio (RR) 1.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13 to 1.32, I² 54%; abstinence rate treatment group = 46%, abstinence rate control group 37.4%), but heterogeneity between trials was substantial. Studies with validated assessment of smoking status at follow-up had similar efficacy (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.39) to non-validated trials (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.35). Studies were stratified by intervention strategy and intensity of the intervention. Clustering reduced heterogeneity, although many trials used more than one type of intervention. The RRs for different strategies were similar (behavioural therapies RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.34, I² 40%; telephone support RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.30, I² 44%; self-help RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.33, I² 40%). More intense interventions (any initial contact plus follow-up over one month) showed increased quit rates (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.40, I² 58%) whereas brief interventions (either one single initial contact lasting less than an hour with no follow-up, one or more contacts in total over an hour with no follow-up or any initial contact plus follow-up of less than one months) did not appear effective (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.12, I² 0%). Seven trials had long-term follow-up (over 12 months), and did not show any benefits. Adverse side effects were not reported in any trial. These findings are based on studies with rather low risk of selection bias but high risk of detection bias (namely unblinded or non validated assessment of smoking status).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Psychosocial smoking cessation interventions are effective in promoting abstinence up to 1 year, provided they are of sufficient duration. After one year, the studies showed favourable effects of smoking cessation intervention, but more studies including cost-effectiveness analyses are needed. Further studies should also analyse the additional benefit of a psychosocial intervention strategy to pharmacological therapy (e.g. nicotine replacement therapy) compared with pharmacological treatment alone and investigate economic outcomes.

Self-management following an acute exacerbation of COPD: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Self-management (SM) reduces hospital admissions in patients with stable COPD. However, its role immediately post-acute exacerbation (AE) is unclear. The objectives of this review were to describe SM interventions delivered immediately following an AE of COPD (AECOPD) and to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis of its impact on health-care utilization and health outcomes.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials reporting on SM interventions delivered during hospitalization for an AECOPD or within 1 month of hospital discharge were included. Seven articles were identified. Data were extracted and assessed for quality by two researchers.

RESULTS

By definition, all interventions included action plans, education, and at least two SM skills. Nurses were responsible for providing all SM interventions. The delivery and follow-up periods varied widely. At 12 months, there were no significant differences between those who completed the SM intervention and control subjects in the number of patients readmitted to hospital (P = .38), or in health-related quality of life (P = .27). No effects were found on rate of mortality, depressive symptoms, primary care usage, or exercise capacity. Minimal effects were found on self-efficacy, anxiety symptoms, and health promoting behavior. SM was associated with positive effects on knowledge and management of an AECOPD.

CONCLUSIONS

SM interventions delivered immediately post-AE vary widely and outcome measures are inconsistent, making it difficult to draw strong recommendations regarding its effectiveness. The evaluation of SM interventions, delivered by trained health-care professionals to selected patients and which offer structured follow-up, appears necessary.

Efficacy of initiating tobacco dependence treatment in inpatient psychiatry: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated the efficacy of a motivational tobacco cessation treatment combined with nicotine replacement relative to usual care initiated in inpatient psychiatry.

METHODS

We randomized participants (n = 224; 79% recruitment rate) recruited from a locked acute psychiatry unit with a 100% smoking ban to intervention or usual care. Prior to hospitalization, participants averaged 19 (SD = 12) cigarettes per day; only 16% intended to quit smoking in the next 30 days. Results. Verified smoking 7-day point prevalence abstinence was significantly higher for intervention than usual care at month 3 (13.9% vs 3.2%), 6 (14.4% vs 6.5%), 12 (19.4% vs 10.9%), and 18 (20.0% vs 7.7%; odds ratio [OR] = 3.15; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.22, 8.14; P = .018; retention > 80%). Psychiatric measures did not predict abstinence; measures of motivation and tobacco dependence did. The usual care group had a significantly greater likelihood than the intervention group of psychiatric rehospitalization (adjusted OR = 1.92; 95% CI = 1.06, 3.49).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings support initiation of motivationally tailored tobacco cessation treatment during acute psychiatric hospitalization. Psychiatric severity did not moderate treatment efficacy, and cessation treatment appeared to decrease rehospitalization risk, perhaps by providing broader therapeutic benefit.

Smoking behaviour, motives, motivation to quit and self-efficacy among patients in a secure mental health service: comparison with staff controls

People with mental disorder account for a disproportionately large amount of smokers, and the problem is greatest in inpatient settings. 'Stop smoking' services should be tailored to the needs of individual patient groups. It is important therefore to investigate factors relevant to different groups in order to inform future quit smoking interventions. We compared 50 patients and 50 staff in a secure mental health hospital on measures of smoking and smoking motives, nicotine dependence, craving, previous cessation attempts, motivation to quit and quit smoking-related self-efficacy. Patients were significantly more dependent on nicotine with higher levels of craving; were more likely to smoke to cope with stress, for something to do when bored, for enjoyment and pleasure; and reported significantly less readiness to quit smoking. Staff were more likely to cite health concerns as reasons for quitting. Future pre-intervention work with inpatients should focus on increasing their readiness to quit smoking. Once motivation is increased, interventions should include advice on reducing cravings, finding alternative methods for coping with stress and boredom and achieving enjoyment and pleasure from alternative sources.

Smoking cessation interventions following acute coronary syndrome: a missed opportunity?

BACKGROUND

It is recommended that general practitioners (GPs) offer cessation advice and pharmacological interventions to smokers with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The study objective was to describe the extent to which this is done, and to describe outcomes by smoking status.

DESIGN

Patients aged 30+ hospitalised for troponin-positive ACS from 2002 to 2009, discharged home alive, were identified in the Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project registry. Patient data were linked to the General Practice Research Database, Hospital Episode Statistics, and Office of National Statistics mortality data, enabling a unique perspective of longitudinal smoking data. Patients who smoked prior to the hospitalisation had GP interventions and quitting status established in the 3 months following discharge, and were followed up for major clinical outcomes.

METHODS

The outcomes evaluated included death, repeat ACS, stroke, heart failure, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE).

RESULTS

Of the 4834 patients included, 965 (20%) were smokers at the time of their ACS. After the ACS event, only 225 (24%) received any GP smoking intervention within 3 months, with 82 (9%) receiving advice only, and 143 (15%) receiving a pharmacological intervention. Patients who quit (320; 33%) were at a decreased risk of mortality (relative risk (RR) 0.49; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35-0.69) and MACE (RR 0.61; 0.46-0.80) compared with patients who did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Whilst a high proportion of patients with ACS are smokers, there is a low level of GP cessation intervention following hospital discharge. This missed opportunity of patient care is important given the decreased risk of mortality and MACE found amongst those who quit.

The relation between smoking status and medical conditions among incarcerated adults

OBJECTIVES

The rate of smoking among incarcerated adults is more than 3 times that of the general population. Negative health consequences of smoking have prompted many correctional facilities to become tobacco-free. This presents a unique opportunity to examine health conditions associated with motivation to remain tobacco-free after release from prison. We examined this association among individuals who participated in the WISE randomized clinical trial.

METHODS

A total of 247 participants completed a baseline questionnaire asking about illnesses (both smoking-related and non-smoking-related), family history of smoking-related illnesses, demographics, and smoking history. Smoking status was assessed 3 weeks postrelease.

RESULTS

Approximately 38% of participants reported having an illness caused by or worsened by smoking and 53.0% reported having "moderate" to "a lot" of concern about their health due to smoking; 22.9% reported having asthma and 26.8% reported hypertension. The adjusted odds of remaining tobacco-free at 3 weeks postrelease from a tobacco-free prison was significant only for individuals with a family history of smoking-related illnesses (odds ratio [OR] = 0.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.12-0.68). For individuals with smoking-related conditions, the adjusted odds of remaining tobacco-free was nonsignificant (OR = 1.91; 95% CI, 0.85-4.27). Similarly, the adjusted odds of remaining tobacco-free for participants with non-smoking-related medical conditions was nonsignificant (OR = 0.27; 95% CI, 0.06-1.22).

CONCLUSIONS

These results offer a first look at understanding health conditions as a motivator to remain tobacco-free after release from prison. Although these findings require additional investigation, these results suggest that providing treatment to prisoners with chronic disease and specifically targeting smoking-related illnesses might be beneficial with regard to smoking cessation success.

Clinician assessment, advice and referral for multiple health risk behaviors: prevalence and predictors of delivery by primary health care nurses and allied health professionals

OBJECTIVE

Primary care clinicians have considerable potential to provide preventive care. This study describes their preventive care delivery.

METHODS

A survey of 384 community health nurses and allied health clinicians from in New South Wales, Australia was undertaken (2010-11) to examine the assessment of client risk, provision of brief advice and referral/follow-up regarding smoking inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption, alcohol misuse, and physical inactivity; the existence of preventive care support strategies; and the association between supports and preventive care provision.

RESULTS

Preventive care to 80% or more clients was least often provided for referral/follow-up (24.7-45.6% of clinicians for individual risks, and 24.2% for all risks) and most often for assessment (34.4-69.3% of clinicians for individual risks, and 24.4% for all risks). Approximately 75% reported having 9 or fewer of 17 supports. Provision of care was associated with: availability of a paper screening tool; training; GP referral letter; and number of supports.

CONCLUSION

The delivery of preventive care was limited, and varied according to type of care and risk. Supports were variably associated with elements of preventive care.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Further research is required to increase routine preventive care delivery and the availability of supports.

Smoking cessation for hospital inpatients

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 .

Feasibility and efficacy of an intervention to reduce secondhand smoke exposure among infants discharged from a neonatal intensive care unit

OBJECTIVE

To examine the feasibility and efficacy of a hospital-based, motivational intervention to reduce secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe) with mothers of infants in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

STUDY DESIGN

One-hundred and forty-four mothers with infants ( ≤ 1500 g at birth or ≥ 12 h ventilation) in a NICU who reported a smoker in the household were randomized to two sessions of motivational interviewing (MI) conducted in the hospital, usual care (UC) or usual care-reduced measurement (UC-RM); follow-up occurred at 1- and 6-months post discharge.

RESULT

For households that did not have a total smoking ban at baseline, 63.6% of those in the MI group instituted a ban by 1-month post discharge compared with 20% of the UC group, P<0.02. Six months post discharge, fewer smoking bans were noted in the UC-RM group relative to MI and UC, P<0.01.

CONCLUSION

A need for SHSe interventions among NICU parents exists and initial evidence suggests MI can impact SHSe after discharge.

Evaluating the effectiveness of a clinical practice change intervention in increasing clinician provision of preventive care in a network of community-based mental health services: a study protocol of a non-randomized, multiple baseline trial

BACKGROUND

People with a mental illness experience substantial disparities in health, including increased rates of morbidity and mortality caused by potentially preventable chronic diseases. One contributing factor to such disparity is a higher prevalence of modifiable health risk behaviors, such as smoking, inadequate fruit and vegetable intake, harmful alcohol consumption, and inadequate physical activity. Evidence supports the effectiveness of preventive care in reducing such risks, and guidelines recommend that preventive care addressing such risks be incorporated into routine clinical care. Although community-based mental health services represent an important potential setting for ensuring that people with a mental illness receive such care, research suggests its delivery is currently sub-optimal. A study will be undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness of a clinical practice change intervention in increasing the routine provision of preventive care by clinicians in community mental health settings.

METHODS/DESIGN

A two-group multiple baseline design will be utilized to assess the effectiveness of a multi-strategic intervention implemented over 12 months in increasing clinician provision of preventive care. The intervention will be implemented sequentially across the two groups of community mental health services to increase provision of client assessment, brief advice, and referral for four health risk behaviors (smoking, inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption, harmful alcohol consumption, and inadequate physical activity). Outcome measures of interest will be collected via repeated cross-sectional computer-assisted telephone interviews undertaken on a weekly basis for 36 months with community mental health clients.

DISCUSSION

This study is the first to assess the effectiveness of a multi-strategic clinical practice change intervention in increasing routine clinician provision of preventive care for chronic disease behavioral risk factors within a network of community mental health services. The results will inform future policy and practice regarding the ability of clinicians within mental health settings to improve preventive care provision as a result of such interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12613000693729.

Preventive counseling for chronic disease: missed opportunities in a community mental health center

BACKGROUND

The tremendous burden of cardiovascular risk among persons with serious mental illness underscores a critical need for prevention. Counseling by primary care clinicians increases patient smoking cessation, physical activity, and the consumption of fruits and vegetables. The extent to which community mental health clinicians counsel about cardiovascular risk factors has not been reported.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study examines the rates of counseling about cardiovascular risk factors by mental health providers at an urban community mental health center (n = 154). Logistic regression analyses identified clinician characteristics associated with counseling more than 50% of clients about diet, exercise, and smoking.

RESULTS

72% of clinical staff members responded to the survey, for a sample of 154 mental health clinicians; 26.6% of the clinicians counseled more than half of their clients annually about all three cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors. Logistic regression showed that mental health providers who counseled clients about CVD risk factors were less likely to be obese, and were more likely to have received formal training about how to counsel clients about CVD risk.

DISCUSSION

This is the first study to examine the routine clinical practice of community mental health clinicians in addressing CVD risk at an urban community mental health center. Both training mental health clinicians about CVD risk and also support for improving clinician health status may improve the preventive care provided to clients at community mental health centers.

Pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation: an overview and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Smoking is the leading preventable cause of illness and premature death worldwide. Some medications have been proven to help people to quit, with three licensed for this purpose in Europe and the USA: nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, and varenicline. Cytisine (a treatment pharmacologically similar to varenicline) is also licensed for use in Russia and some of the former socialist economy countries. Other therapies, including nortriptyline, have also been tested for effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

How do NRT, bupropion and varenicline compare with placebo and with each other in achieving long-term abstinence (six months or longer)? How do the remaining treatments compare with placebo in achieving long-term abstinence? How do the risks of adverse and serious adverse events (SAEs) compare between the treatments, and are there instances where the harms may outweigh the benefits?

METHODS

The overview is restricted to Cochrane reviews, all of which include randomised trials. Participants are usually adult smokers, but we exclude reviews of smoking cessation for pregnant women and in particular disease groups or specific settings. We cover nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), antidepressants (bupropion and nortriptyline), nicotine receptor partial agonists (varenicline and cytisine), anxiolytics, selective type 1 cannabinoid receptor antagonists (rimonabant), clonidine, lobeline, dianicline, mecamylamine, Nicobrevin, opioid antagonists, nicotine vaccines, and silver acetate. Our outcome for benefit is continuous or prolonged abstinence at least six months from the start of treatment. Our outcome for harms is the incidence of serious adverse events associated with each of the treatments. We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) in The Cochrane Library, for any reviews with 'smoking' in the title, abstract or keyword fields. The last search was conducted in November 2012. We assessed methodological quality using a revised version of the AMSTAR scale. For NRT, bupropion and varenicline we conducted network meta-analyses, comparing each with the others and with placebo for benefit, and varenicline and bupropion for risks of serious adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 12 treatment-specific reviews. The analyses covered 267 studies, involving 101,804 participants. Both NRT and bupropion were superior to placebo (odds ratios (OR) 1.84; 95% credible interval (CredI) 1.71 to 1.99, and 1.82; 95% CredI 1.60 to 2.06 respectively). Varenicline increased the odds of quitting compared with placebo (OR 2.88; 95% CredI 2.40 to 3.47). Head-to-head comparisons between bupropion and NRT showed equal efficacy (OR 0.99; 95% CredI 0.86 to 1.13). Varenicline was superior to single forms of NRT (OR 1.57; 95% CredI 1.29 to 1.91), and to bupropion (OR 1.59; 95% CredI 1.29 to 1.96). Varenicline was more effective than nicotine patch (OR 1.51; 95% CredI 1.22 to 1.87), than nicotine gum (OR 1.72; 95% CredI 1.38 to 2.13), and than 'other' NRT (inhaler, spray, tablets, lozenges; OR 1.42; 95% CredI 1.12 to 1.79), but was not more effective than combination NRT (OR 1.06; 95% CredI 0.75 to 1.48). Combination NRT also outperformed single formulations. The four categories of NRT performed similarly against each other, apart from 'other' NRT, which was marginally more effective than NRT gum (OR 1.21; 95% CredI 1.01 to 1.46). Cytisine (a nicotine receptor partial agonist) returned positive findings (risk ratio (RR) 3.98; 95% CI 2.01 to 7.87), without significant adverse events or SAEs. Across the 82 included and excluded bupropion trials, our estimate of six seizures in the bupropion arms versus none in the placebo arms was lower than the expected rate (1:1000), at about 1:1500. SAE meta-analysis of the bupropion studies demonstrated no excess of neuropsychiatric (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.31 to 2.50) or cardiovascular events (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.37 to 1.59). SAE meta-analysis of 14 varenicline trials found no difference between the varenicline and placebo arms (RR 1.06; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.55), and subgroup analyses detected no significant excess of neuropsychiatric events (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.17 to 1.67), or of cardiac events (RR 1.26; 95% CI 0.62 to 2.56). Nortriptyline increased the chances of quitting (RR 2.03; 95% CI 1.48 to 2.78). Neither nortriptyline nor bupropion were shown to enhance the effect of NRT compared with NRT alone. Clonidine increased the chances of quitting (RR 1.63; 95% CI 1.22 to 2.18), but this was offset by a dose-dependent rise in adverse events. Mecamylamine in combination with NRT may increase the chances of quitting, but the current evidence is inconclusive. Other treatments failed to demonstrate a benefit compared with placebo. Nicotine vaccines are not yet licensed for use as an aid to smoking cessation or relapse prevention. Nicobrevin's UK license is now revoked, and the manufacturers of rimonabant, taranabant and dianicline are no longer supporting the development or testing of these treatments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

NRT, bupropion, varenicline and cytisine have been shown to improve the chances of quitting. Combination NRT and varenicline are equally effective as quitting aids. Nortriptyline also improves the chances of quitting. On current evidence, none of the treatments appear to have an incidence of adverse events that would mitigate their use. Further research is warranted into the safety of varenicline and into cytisine's potential as an effective and affordable treatment, but not into the efficacy and safety of NRT.

The delivery of preventive care to clients of community health services

Background

Smoking, poor nutrition, risky alcohol use, and physical inactivity are the primary behavioral risks for common causes of mortality and morbidity. Evidence and guidelines support routine clinician delivery of preventive care. Limited evidence describes the level delivered in community health settings. The objective was to determine the: prevalence of preventive care provided by community health clinicians; association between client and service characteristics and receipt of care; and acceptability of care. This will assist in informing interventions that facilitate adoption of opportunistic preventive care delivery to all clients.

Methods

In 2009 and 2010 a telephone survey was undertaken of 1284 clients across a network of 56 public community health facilities in one health district in New South Wales, Australia. The survey assessed receipt of preventive care (assessment, brief advice, and referral/follow-up) regarding smoking, inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption, alcohol overconsumption, and physical inactivity; and acceptability of care.

Results

Care was most frequently reported for smoking (assessment: 59.9%, brief advice: 61.7%, and offer of referral to a telephone service: 4.5%) and least frequently for inadequate fruit or vegetable consumption (27.0%, 20.0% and 0.9% respectively). Sixteen percent reported assessment for all risks, 16.2% received brief advice for all risks, and 0.6% were offered a specific referral for all risks. The following were associated with increased care: diabetes services, number of appointments, being male, Aboriginal, unemployed, and socio-economically disadvantaged. Acceptability of preventive care was high (76.0%-95.3%).

Conclusions

Despite strong client support, preventive care was not provided opportunistically to all, and was preferentially provided to select groups. This suggests a need for practice change strategies to enhance preventive care provision to achieve adherence to clinical guidelines.

Predictors of cessation in African American light smokers enrolled in a bupropion clinical trial

BACKGROUND

This is the first study to examine predictors of successful cessation in African American (AA) light smokers treated within a placebo-controlled trial of bupropion.

METHODS

We analyzed data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of bupropion and health education for 540 African American light smokers. African American light smokers (≤10 cigarettes per day, cpd) were randomly assigned to receive 150mg bid bupropion SR (n=270) or placebo (n=270) for 7weeks. All participants received health education counseling at weeks 0, 1, 3, 5 and 7. Using chi-square tests, two sample t-tests, and multiple logistic regression analyses, we examined baseline psychosocial and smoking characteristics as predictors of cotinine-verified 7-day point prevalence smoking abstinence among study participants at the end treatment (Week 7) and at the end of follow-up (Week 26).

RESULTS

Participants who received bupropion were significantly more likely to quit smoking compared to those who received placebo (OR=2.72, 95% CI=1.60-4.62, P=0.0002). Greater study session attendance (OR=2.47, 95% CI=1.76-3.46, P=0.0001), and smoking non-menthol cigarettes increased the likelihood of quitting (OR=1.84, 95% CI=1.01-3.36, P=0.05); while longer years of smoking (OR=0.98, 95% CI=0.96-1.00, P=0.05) and higher baseline cotinine (OR=0.97, 95% CI=0.95-0.99, P=0.002) significantly reduced the odds of quitting at Week 7. Conversely, at the end of follow-up (Week 26), treatment with bupropion vs. placebo (OR=1.14, 95% CI=0.65-2.02, P=0.64) was not significantly associated with quitting and type of cigarette smoked (menthol vs. non-menthol) did not appear in the final logistic regression model. Greater study session attendance (OR=1.96, 95% CI=1.44-2.66, P=0.0001); BMI (OR=1.03, 95% CI=1.00-1.07, P=0.04); and weight efficacy (OR=1.03, 95% CI=1.01-1.05, P=0.01) increased the likelihood of quitting at Week 26. Similar to our findings at Week 7, longer years of smoking (OR=0.96, 95% CI=0.94-0.99, P=0.01) and higher baseline cotinine (OR=0.97, 95% CI=0.95-0.99, P=0.02) significantly reduced the odds of quitting at Week 26.

CONCLUSIONS

Baseline cotinine levels, number of years smoked and study session attendance are associated with both short- and long-term smoking cessation, while bupropion and the type of cigarette smoked were associated with quitting on short term only.

Baby's Breath II protocol development and design: a secondhand smoke exposure prevention program targeting infants discharged from a neonatal intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

Over one-third of all children live with at least one parent who smokes cigarettes, which is associated with compromised child health. The impact of secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe) in medically fragile infants born prematurely is likely to be much higher. The Baby's Breath II study tests whether a hospital-initiated, motivational-enhancement program will result in less SHSe relative to conventional care in high-risk, low birthweight (LBW) infants discharged from a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). The design and protocol for the ongoing BBII trial is described.

METHODS/DESIGN

Eligible participants are: (1) primary caregivers (typically mothers) of NICU infants who were born at LBW (<2500g) or ventilated for more than 12h; and (2) who smoke or live with at least one smoker. This randomized controlled trial has two conditions: Motivational interviewing plus incentives (MI+) and conventional care (CC). MI+ participants receive two hospital-based and two home-based counseling sessions, as well as incentives (i.e., prize-based draws) for (a) intervention attendance and (b) biochemical validation (i.e., urine cotinine dipstick) indicative of low or no infant SHSe. Participants in the control group receive conventional education-based care. Assessments are completed at baseline, mid-point, and 1- and 4-months post-intervention.

DISCUSSION

This study is the first to determine the efficacy of a brief intervention for reducing SHSe among high-risk, LBW infants discharged from a NICU, with the potential for saving lives and healthcare costs. Strengths, limitations and challenges to the conduct of this trial are discussed.

Predictors of smoking patterns after first stroke

Persistent smoking following stroke is associated with poor outcomes including development of secondary stroke and increased mortality risk. This study uses longitudinal data from the U.S. Health and Retirement Study (1992-2008) to investigate whether depression and duration of inpatient hospital care impact smoking outcomes among stroke survivors (N = 745). Longer duration of care was associated with lower likelihood of persistent smoking. Depression was associated with greater cigarette consumption. Interaction effects were also significant, indicating that for survivors who experienced longer inpatient care there was a weaker association between depression and cigarette consumption. Implications for practice and research are discussed.

Behavioral medicine approaches to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a prevalent respiratory disease and associated with considerable individual and socioeconomic burden. Recent research started examining the role of psychosocial factors for course and management of the disease.

PURPOSE

This review provides an overview on recent findings on psychosocial factors and behavioral medicine approaches in COPD.

RESULTS

Research has identified several important psychosocial factors and effective behavioral medicine interventions in COPD. However, there is considerable need for future research in this field.

CONCLUSIONS

Although beneficial effects of some behavioral medicine interventions have been demonstrated in COPD, future research efforts are necessary to study the effects of distinct components of these interventions, to thoroughly examine promising but yet not sufficiently proven interventions, and to develop new creative interventions.

Smoking behavior, attitudes, and cessation counseling among healthcare professionals in Armenia

BACKGROUND

Smoking cessation counseling by health professionals has been effective in increasing cessation rates. However, little is known about smoking cessation training and practices in transition countries with high smoking prevalence such as Armenia. This study identified smoking-related attitudes and behavior of physicians and nurses in a 500-bed hospital in Yerevan, Armenia, the largest cancer hospital in the country, and explored barriers to their effective participation in smoking cessation interventions.

METHODS

This study used mixed quantitative and qualitative methods. Trained interviewers conducted a survey with physicians and nurses using a 42-item self-administered questionnaire that assessed their smoking-related attitudes and behavior and smoking cessation counseling training. Four focus group discussions with hospital physicians and nurses explored barriers to effective smoking cessation interventions. The focus group sessions were audio-taped, transcribed, and analyzed.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 58.5% (93/159) for physicians and 72.2% (122/169) for nurses. Smoking prevalence was almost five times higher in physicians compared to nurses (31.2% vs. 6.6%, p < 0.001). Non-smokers and ex-smokers had more positive attitudes toward the hospital's smoke-free policy compared to smokers (90.1% and 88.2% vs. 73.0%). About 42.6% of nurses and 26.9% of physicians reported having had formal training on smoking cessation methods. While both groups showed high support for routinely assisting patients to quit smoking, nurses more often than physicians considered health professionals as role models for patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study was the first to explore differences in smoking-related attitudes and behavior among hospital physicians and nurses in Yerevan, Armenia. The study found substantial behavioral and attitudinal differences in these two groups. The study revealed a critical need for integrating cessation counseling training into Armenia's medical education. As nurses had more positive attitudes toward cessation counseling compared to physicians, and more often reported having cessation training, they are an untapped resource that could be more actively engaged in smoking cessation interventions in healthcare settings.

Why do cancer patients smoke and what can providers do about it?

Despite the widespread dissemination of information about the health risks associated with smoking, many cancer patients continue to smoke, which results in a decreased quality of life, an increased probability of cancer recurrence, and a decreased survival time. Efficacious interventions are available to assist cancer patients to quit smoking, yet smoking cessation interventions are often not implemented. This review describes how clinicians, administrators, insurers, and purchasers can encourage a culture of health care in which tobacco cessation interventions are implemented consistent with evidenced-based standards of care. Implementing efficacious tobacco cessation interventions can reduce morbidity and mortality among cancer patients.

Development of an electronic medical record based intervention to improve medical care of osteoporosis

Osteoporosis is infrequently addressed during hospitalization for osteoporotic fractures. An EMR-based intervention (osteoporosis order set) was developed with physician and patient input. There was a trend toward greater calcium supplementation from July 2008 to April 2009 (s = 0.058); however, use of antiresorptives (13%) or discharge instructions for BMD testing and osteoporosis treatment (10%) remained low.

INTRODUCTION

Osteoporosis is infrequently addressed during hospitalization for osteoporotic fractures. The study population consisted of patients over 50 years of age.

METHODS

Northwestern Memorial Hospital is a tertiary care academic hospital in Chicago. This study was conducted from September 1, 2007 through June 30, 2009.

RESULTS

Physicians reported that barriers to care comprised nonacute nature of osteoporosis, belief that osteoporosis should be addressed by the PCP, low awareness of recurrent fractures, and radiographs with terms such as "compression deformity", "wedge deformity", or "vertebral height loss" which in their opinion were not clearly indicative of vertebral fractures. An EMR-based intervention was developed with physician and patient input. Over the evaluation period, 295 fracture cases in individuals over the age of 50 years in the medicine floors were analyzed. Mean age was 72 ± 11 years; 74% were female. Sites of fracture included hip n = 78 (27%), vertebral n = 87 (30%), lower extremity n = 61 (21%), upper extremity n = 43 (15%) and pelvis n = 26 (9%). There was no increase in documentation of osteoporosis in the medical record from pre- to post-EMR implementation (p = 0.89). There was a trend toward greater calcium supplementation from July 2008 to April 2009 (p = 0.058); however, use of antiresorptives (13%) or discharge instructions for BMD testing and osteoporosis treatment (10%) remained low.

CONCLUSION

An electronic medical record intervention without electronic reminders created with physician input achieves an increase in calcium supplementation but fails to increase diagnosis or treatment for osteoporosis at the time of hospitalization for a fragility fracture.

Pharmacological interventions for promoting smoking cessation during pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Smoking in pregnancy is a substantial public health problem. When used by non-pregnant smokers, pharmacotherapies [nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion and varenicline] are effective treatments for smoking cessation, however, their efficacy and safety in pregnancy remains unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of smoking cessation pharmacotherapies, including NRT, varenicline and bupropion (or any other medications) when used to support smoking cessation in pregnancy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (5 March 2012), checked references of retrieved studies and contacted authors in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with designs that permit the independent effects of any type of NRT (e.g. patch, gum etc.) or any other pharmacotherapy on smoking cessation to be ascertained were eligible for inclusion. Trials must provide very similar (ideally identical) levels of behavioural support or cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) to participants in active drug and comparator trial arms.The following RCT designs are considered acceptable.Placebo RCTs: any form of NRT or other pharmacotherapy, with or without behavioural support/CBT, or brief advice compared with placebo NRT and additional support of similar intensity.RCTs providing a comparison between i) behavioural support/CBT or brief advice and ii) any form of NRT or other pharmacotherapy added to behavioural support of similar (ideally identical) intensity.Parallel- or cluster-randomised design trials are eligible for inclusion. However, quasi-randomised, cross-over and within-participant designs are not eligible for inclusion due to the potential biases associated with these designs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias and extracted data. Two assessors independently extracted data and cross checked individual outcomes of this process to ensure accuracy. The primary efficacy outcome was smoking cessation in later pregnancy (in all but one trial, at or around delivery); safety was assessed by seven birth outcomes that indicated neonatal well being and we also collated data on adherence.

MAIN RESULTS

Six trials of NRT enrolling 1745 pregnant smokers were included; we found no trials of varenicline or bupropion. No statistically significant difference was seen for smoking cessation in later pregnancy after using NRT as compared to control (risk ratio (RR) 1.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.91, six studies, 1745 women). Subgroup analysis comparing placebo-RCTs with those which did not use placebos found that efficacy estimates for cessation varied with trial design (placebo RCTs, RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.56, four studies, 1524 women; non-placebo RCTs, RR 7.81, 95% CI 1.51 to 40.35, two studies, 221 women; P value for random-effects subgroup interaction test = 0.03). There were no statistically significant differences in rates of miscarriage, stillbirth, premature birth, birthweight, low birthweight, admissions to neonatal intensive care or neonatal death between NRT or control groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Nicotine replacement therapy is the only pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation that has been tested in RCTs conducted in pregnancy. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether or not NRT is effective or safe when used to promote smoking cessation in pregnancy or to determine whether or not using NRT has positive or negative impacts on birth outcomes. Further research evidence of efficacy and safety is needed, ideally from placebo-controlled RCTs that investigate higher doses of NRT than were tested in the included studies.

Using "warm handoffs" to link hospitalized smokers with tobacco treatment after discharge: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Post-discharge support is a key component of effective treatment for hospitalized smokers, but few hospitals provide it. Many hospitals and care settings fax-refer smokers to quitlines for follow-up; however, less than half of fax-referred smokers are successfully contacted and enrolled in quitline services. "Warm handoff" is a novel approach to care transitions in which health care providers directly link patients with substance abuse problems with specialists, using face-to-face or phone transfer. Warm handoff achieves very high rates of treatment enrollment for these vulnerable groups.

METHODS

The aim of this study-"EQUIP" (Enhancing Quitline Utilization among In-Patients)-is to determine the effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness, of warm handoff versus fax referral for linking hospitalized smokers with tobacco quitlines. This study employs a two-arm, individually randomized design. It is set in two large Kansas hospitals that have dedicated tobacco treatment interventionists on staff. At each site, smokers who wish to remain abstinent after discharge will be randomly assigned to groups. For patients in the fax group, staff will provide standard in-hospital intervention and will fax-refer patients to the state tobacco quitline for counseling post-discharge. For patients in the warm handoff group, staff will provide brief in-hospital intervention and immediate warm handoff: staff will call the state quitline, notify them that a warm handoff inpatient from Kansas is on the line, then transfer the call to the patients' mobile or bedside hospital phone for quitline enrollment and an initial counseling session. Following the quitline session, hospital staff provides a brief check-back visit. Outcome measures will be assessed at 1, 6, and 12 months post enrollment. Costs are measured to support cost-effectiveness analyses. We hypothesize that warm handoff, compared to fax referral, will improve care transitions for tobacco treatment, enroll more participants in quitline services, and lead to higher quit rates. We also hypothesize that warm handoff will be more cost-effective from a societal perspective.

DISCUSSION

If successful, this project offers a low-cost solution for more efficiently linking millions of hospitalized smokers with effective outpatient treatment-smokers that might otherwise be lost in the transition to outpatient care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials Registration NCT01305928.