Implementing Tobacco Use Treatment Guidelines in Public Health Dental Clinics in New York City

Interventions for tobacco cessation delivered by dental professionals

BACKGROUND

Dental professionals are well placed to help their patients stop using tobacco products. Large proportions of the population visit the dentist regularly. In addition, the adverse effects of tobacco use on oral health provide a context that dental professionals can use to motivate a quit attempt.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness, adverse events and oral health effects of tobacco cessation interventions offered by dental professionals.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialised Register up to February 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised clinical trials assessing tobacco cessation interventions conducted by dental professionals in the dental practice or community setting, with at least six months of follow-up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed abstracts for potential inclusion and extracted data from included trials. We resolved disagreements by consensus. The primary outcome was abstinence from all tobacco use (e.g. cigarettes, smokeless tobacco) at the longest follow-up, using the strictest definition of abstinence reported. Individual study effects and pooled effects were summarised as risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models to combine studies where appropriate. We assessed statistical heterogeneity with the I² statistic. We summarised secondary outcomes narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty clinical trials involving 14,897 participants met the criteria for inclusion in this review. Sixteen studies assessed the effectiveness of interventions for tobacco-use cessation in dental clinics and four assessed this in community (school or college) settings. Five studies included only smokeless tobacco users, and the remaining studies included either smoked tobacco users only, or a combination of both smoked and smokeless tobacco users. All studies employed behavioural interventions, with four offering nicotine treatment (nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) or e-cigarettes) as part of the intervention. We judged three studies to be at low risk of bias, one to be at unclear risk of bias, and the remaining 16 studies to be at high risk of bias. Compared with usual care, brief advice, very brief advice, or less active treatment, we found very low-certainty evidence of benefit from behavioural support provided by dental professionals, comprising either one session (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.01 to 3.41; I² = 66%; four studies, n = 6328), or more than one session (RR 1.90, 95% CI 1.17 to 3.11; I² = 61%; seven studies, n = 2639), on abstinence from tobacco use at least six months from baseline. We found moderate-certainty evidence of benefit from behavioural interventions provided by dental professionals combined with the provision of NRT or e-cigarettes, compared with no intervention, usual care, brief, or very brief advice only (RR 2.76, 95% CI 1.58 to 4.82; I² = 0%; four studies, n = 1221). We did not detect a benefit from multiple-session behavioural support provided by dental professionals delivered in a high school or college, instead of a dental setting (RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.65; I² = 83%; three studies, n = 1020; very low-certainty evidence). Only one study reported adverse events or oral health outcomes, making it difficult to draw any conclusions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very low-certainty evidence that quit rates increase when dental professionals offer behavioural support to promote tobacco cessation. There is moderate-certainty evidence that tobacco abstinence rates increase in cigarette smokers if dental professionals offer behavioural support combined with pharmacotherapy. Further evidence is required to be certain of the size of the benefit and whether adding pharmacological interventions is more effective than behavioural support alone. Future studies should use biochemical validation of abstinence so as to preclude the risk of detection bias. There is insufficient evidence on whether these interventions lead to adverse effects, but no reasons to suspect that these effects would be specific to interventions delivered by dental professionals. There was insufficient evidence that interventions affected oral health.

Payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings

BACKGROUND

Changes to the method of payment for healthcare providers, including pay-for-performance schemes, are increasingly being used by governments, health insurers, and employers to help align financial incentives with health system goals. In this review we focused on changes to the method and level of payment for all types of healthcare providers in outpatient healthcare settings. Outpatient healthcare settings, broadly defined as 'out of hospital' care including primary care, are important for health systems in reducing the use of more expensive hospital services.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the impact of different payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings on the quantity and quality of health service provision, patient outcomes, healthcare provider outcomes, cost of service provision, and adverse effects.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase (searched 5 March 2019), and several other databases. In addition, we searched clinical trials platforms, grey literature, screened reference lists of included studies, did a cited reference search for included studies, and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. We screened records from an updated search in August 2020, with any potentially relevant studies categorised as awaiting classification.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials, non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies, interrupted time series, and repeated measures studies that compared different payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient care settings.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We conducted a structured synthesis. We first categorised the payment methods comparisons and outcomes, and then described the effects of different types of payment methods on different outcome categories. Where feasible, we used meta-analysis to synthesise the effects of payment interventions under the same category. Where it was not possible to perform meta-analysis, we have reported means/medians and full ranges of the available point estimates. We have reported the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and the relative difference (as per cent change or mean difference (MD)) for continuous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 27 studies in the review: 12 randomised trials, 13 controlled before-and-after studies, one interrupted time series, and one repeated measure study. Most healthcare providers were primary care physicians. Most of the payment methods were implemented by health insurance schemes in high-income countries, with only one study from a low- or middle-income country. The included studies were categorised into four groups based on comparisons of different payment methods. (1) Pay for performance (P4P) plus existing payment methods compared with existing payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings P4P incentives probably improve child immunisation status (RR 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.36; 3760 patients; moderate-certainty evidence) and may slightly increase the number of patients who are asked more detailed questions on their disease by their pharmacist (MD 1.24, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.54; 454 patients; low-certainty evidence). P4P may slightly improve primary care physicians' prescribing of guideline-recommended antihypertensive medicines compared with an existing payment method (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.12; 362 patients; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effects of extra P4P incentives on mean blood pressure reduction for patients and costs for providing services compared with an existing payment method (very low-certainty evidence). Outcomes related to workload or other health professional outcomes were not reported in the included studies. One randomised trial found that compared to the control group, the performance of incentivised professionals was not sustained after the P4P intervention had ended. (2) Fee for service (FFS) compared with existing payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings We are uncertain about the effect of FFS on the quantity of health services delivered (outpatient visits and hospitalisations), patient health outcomes, and total drugs cost compared to an existing payment method due to very low-certainty evidence. The quality of service provision and health professional outcomes were not reported in the included studies. One randomised trial reported that physicians paid via FFS may see more well patients than salaried physicians (low-certainty evidence), possibly implying that more unnecessary services were delivered through FFS. (3) FFS mixed with existing payment methods compared with existing payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings FFS mixed payment method may increase the quantity of health services provided compared with an existing payment method (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.76; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of FFS mixed payment on quality of services provided, patient health outcomes, and health professional outcomes compared with an existing payment method due to very low-certainty evidence. Cost outcomes and adverse effects were not reported in the included studies. (4) Enhanced FFS compared with FFS for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings Enhanced FFS (higher FFS payment) probably increases child immunisation rates (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.48; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether higher FFS payment results in more primary care visits and about the effect of enhanced FFS on the net expenditure per year on covered children with regular FFS (very low-certainty evidence). Quality of service provision, patient outcomes, health professional outcomes, and adverse effects were not reported in the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings, P4P or an increase in FFS payment level probably increases the quantity of health service provision (moderate-certainty evidence), and P4P may slightly improve the quality of service provision for targeted conditions (low-certainty evidence). The effects of changes in payment methods on health outcomes is uncertain due to very low-certainty evidence. Information to explore the influence of specific payment method design features, such as the size of incentives and type of performance measures, was insufficient. Furthermore, due to limited and very low-certainty evidence, it is uncertain if changing payment models without including additional funding for professionals would have similar effects. There is a need for further well-conducted research on payment methods for healthcare providers working in outpatient healthcare settings in low- and middle-income countries; more studies comparing the impacts of different designs of the same payment method; and studies that consider the unintended consequences of payment interventions.

HIV screening in dental settings: Challenges, opportunities, and a call to action

HIV is responsible for tremendous suffering and loss around the world, but many advances in HIV screening, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention provide hope for an end to the HIV epidemic. Global and national campaigns facilitate access to these HIV advances, but some individuals and communities still lack access, particularly in developing countries. To reach those who remain under-served, campaigns encourage greater integration of HIV services with non-HIV services. As members of the healthcare team with a clinical stake in HIV, dental care providers have a unique contribution to make. Much research on the role of dental care providers in HIV has focused on HIV screening in the dental setting, and researchers have identified possible ways forward but also daunting challenges. Approaches for screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment used in primary care and dental care settings for other health risks may help overcome challenges related to provider scope of practice and need for training. Approaches to managing distress and uncertainty in other clinical contexts may help overcome challenges related to patient acceptability, equipping providers to manage sensitive topics and emotional aspects of HIV screening. While not panaceas, these approaches may be useful to dental care providers interested in answering the global "call to action" for contributing to ending the HIV epidemic.

The effectiveness of guideline implementation strategies in the dental setting: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Guideline implementation has been an ongoing challenge in the dental practice setting. Despite this, there are no reviews summarising the existing evidence regarding effective guideline implementation strategies in this setting. In order to address this, this systematic review examines the effectiveness of guideline implementation strategies in the dental practice setting.

METHODS

A systematic search was undertaken according to the PRISMA statement across nine electronic databases, targeting randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies which evaluated the effectiveness of guideline implementation strategies in improving guideline adherence in the dental setting. All records were independently examined for relevance and appraised for study quality by two authors, with consensus achieved by a third author. Data were extracted from included studies using a standardised data extraction pro forma.

RESULTS

A total of 15 records were eligible for inclusion in this review, which focused on the effects of audit and feedback, reminders, education, patient-mediated interventions, pay for performance and multifaceted interventions. Although there were some conflicting evidence, studies within each category of implementation strategy indicated a positive effect on guideline adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has identified education, reminders and multifaceted interventions as effective implementation strategies for the dental practice setting. Although this is similar to research findings from other health sectors, there is some evidence to suggest patient-mediated interventions may be less effective and pay for performance may be more effective in the dental setting. These findings can inform policy makers, professional associations, colleges and organisations in the future adoption of clinical guidelines in the dental practice setting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This systematic review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration ID CRD42018093023.

Dentists' self-perceived role in offering tobacco cessation services: results from a nationally representative survey, United States, 2010-2011

Introduction

Dental visits represent an opportunity to identify and help patients quit smoking, yet dental settings remain an untapped venue for treatment of tobacco dependence. The purpose of this analysis was to assess factors that may influence patterns of tobacco-use–related practice among a national sample of dental providers.

Methods

We surveyed a representative sample of general dentists practicing in the United States (N = 1,802). Multivariable analysis was used to assess correlates of adherence to tobacco use treatment guidelines and to analyze factors that influence providers’ willingness to offer tobacco cessation assistance if reimbursed for this service.

Results

More than 90% of dental providers reported that they routinely ask patients about tobacco use, 76% counsel patients, and 45% routinely offer cessation assistance, defined as referring patients for cessation counseling, providing a cessation prescription, or both. Results from multivariable analysis indicated that cessation assistance was associated with having a practice with 1 or more hygienists, having a chart system that includes a tobacco use question, having received training on treating tobacco dependence, and having positive attitudes toward treating tobacco use. Providers who did not offer assistance but who reported that they would change their practice patterns if sufficiently reimbursed were more likely to be in a group practice, treat patients insured through Medicaid, and have positive attitudes toward treating tobacco dependence.

Conclusion

Findings indicate the potential benefit of increasing training opportunities and promoting system changes to increase involvement of dental providers in conducting tobacco use treatment. Reimbursement models should be tested to assess the effect on dental provider practice patterns.

Dentists United to Extinguish Tobacco (DUET): a study protocol for a cluster randomized, controlled trial for enhancing implementation of clinical practice guidelines for treating tobacco dependence in dental care settings

BACKGROUND

Although dental care settings provide an exceptional opportunity to reach smokers and provide brief cessation advice and treatment to reduce oral and other tobacco-related health conditions, dental care providers demonstrate limited adherence to evidence-based guidelines for treatment of tobacco use and dependence.

METHODS/DESIGN

Guided by a multi-level, conceptual framework that emphasizes changes in provider beliefs and organizational characteristics as drivers of improvement in tobacco treatment delivery, the current protocol will use a cluster, randomized design and multiple data sources (patient exit interviews, provider surveys, site observations, chart audits, and semi-structured provider interviews) to study the process of implementing clinical practice guidelines for treating tobacco dependence in 18 public dental care clinics in New York City. The specific aims of this comparative-effectiveness research trial are to: compare the effectiveness of three promising strategies for implementation of tobacco use treatment guidelines-staff training and current best practices (CBP), CBP + provider performance feedback (PF), and CBP + PF + provider reimbursement for delivery of tobacco cessation treatment (pay-for-performance, or P4P); examine potential theory-driven mechanisms hypothesized to explain the comparative effectiveness of three strategies for implementation; and identify baseline organizational factors that influence the implementation of evidence-based tobacco use treatment practices in dental clinics. The primary outcome is change in providers' tobacco treatment practices and the secondary outcomes are cost per quit, use of tobacco cessation treatments, quit attempts, and smoking abstinence.

DISCUSSION

We hypothesize that the value of these promising implementation strategies is additive and that incorporating all three strategies (CBP, PF, and P4P) will be superior to CBP alone and CBP + PF in improving delivery of cessation assistance to smokers. The findings will improve knowledge pertinent to the implementation, dissemination, and sustained utilization of evidence-based tobacco use treatment in dental practices.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01615237.

Smoking and age-related macular degeneration: biochemical mechanisms and patient support

A small percentage of the population associates smoking with ocular disease. Most optometrists do not stress the importance of smoking cessation to their patients, and the centrality of smoking regarding the risk for ocular disease is not emphasized in optometric education. Age-related macular degeneration has strong epidemiological associations with smoking, and so serves as an appropriate model for the adverse effects of cigarette smoke on the eye. This article aims to provide basic scientific information to optometrists and optometry students so that they can better understand the pathogenesis of age-related macular degeneration and provide education and support to their patients wishing to stop smoking.

Research priorities for Article 14--demand reduction measures concerning tobacco dependence and cessation

INTRODUCTION

Tobacco dependence treatment (TDT) interventions are often seen as expensive with little impact on the prevalence of tobacco use. However, activities that promote the cessation of tobacco use and support abstinence have an important role in any comprehensive tobacco control program and as such are recognized within Article 14 (A14) of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.

OBJECTIVES

To review current evidence for TDT and recommend research priorities that will contribute to more people being helped to stop tobacco use.

METHODS

We used the recommendations within the A14 guidelines to guide a review of current evidence and best practice for promotion of tobacco cessation and TDT, identify gaps, and propose research priorities.

RESULTS

We identified nine areas for future research (a) understanding current tobacco use and the effect of policy on behavior, (b) promoting cessation of tobacco use, (c) implementation of TDT guidelines, (d) increasing training capacity, (e) enhancing population-based TDT interventions, (f) treatment for different types of tobacco use, (g) supply of low-cost pharmaceutical devices/ products, (h) investigation use of nonpharmaceutical devices/ products, and (i) refinement of current TDTs. Specific research topics are suggested within each of these areas and recognize the differences needed between high- and low-/middle-income countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Research should be prioritized toward examining interventions that (a) promote cessation of tobacco use, (b) assist health care workers provide better help to smokers (e.g., through implementation of guidelines and training), (c) enhance population-based TDT interventions, and (d) assist people to cease the use of other tobacco products.

Cluster-randomized trial of a web-assisted tobacco quality improvement intervention of subsequent patient tobacco product use: a National Dental PBRN study

Background

Brief clinician delivered advice helps in tobacco cessation efforts. This study assessed the impact of our intervention on instances of advice given to dental patients during visits on tobacco use quit rates 6 months after the intervention.

Methods

The intervention was cluster randomized trial at the dental practice level. Intervention dental practices were provided a longitudinal technology-assisted intervention, oralcancerprevention.org that included a series of interactive educational cases and motivational email cues to remind dental provides to complete guideline-concordant brief behavioral counseling at the point of care. In all dental practices, exit cards were given to the first 100 consecutive patients, in which tobacco users provided contact information for a six month follow-up telephone survey.

Results

A total of 564 tobacco using dental patients completed a six month follow-up survey. Among intervention patients, 55% reported receiving advice to quit tobacco, and 39% of control practice patients reported receiving advice to quit tobacco (p < 0.01). Six-month tobacco use quit rates were not significantly between the Intervention (9%) and Control (13%) groups, (p = 0.088).

Conclusion

Although we increased rates of cessation advice delivered in dental practices, this study shows no evidence that brief advice by dentist’s increases long-term abstinence in smokers.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00627185