Changes in Veteran Tobacco Use Identified in Electronic Medical Records

Five-year survival following a non-small-cell lung cancer diagnosis among Veterans Health Administration patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE

Veterans with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder (SZ/BP) experience excess mortality due to several reasons, including cancer. We evaluated whether disparities exist in stage of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) diagnosis and survival between Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patients with and without SZ/BP.

METHOD

This retrospective evaluation used VHA data to identify patients newly diagnosed with NSCLC from 2005 to 2014. Bivariate analyses compared NSCLC stage at diagnosis by SZ/BP status. Kaplan-Meier and adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression analyses examined differences in survival by SZ/BP status. Meaningful differences were assessed using statistical significance, p < .01, and effect sizes of least 0.2 less/greater than 1.

RESULTS

The cohort included 64,269 VHA patients with newly diagnosed NSCLC. These included 1605 (2.5 %) patients with schizophrenia and 1099 (1.7 %) with bipolar disorder. Stage at diagnosis did not meaningfully differ between patients with and without SZ/BP. After adjusting for stage of diagnosis and other factors, schizophrenia, but not bipolar disorder, was associated with an increased risk of five-year all-cause mortality compared to no SZ/BP (schizophrenia: HR 1.22, 95 % CI 1.14-1.30; bipolar: HR 1.01, 95 % CI 0.94-1.10).

CONCLUSIONS

VHA patients diagnosed with NSCLC who had schizophrenia experienced greater mortality compared to those without SZ/BP, despite no meaningful differences between the two groups in stage of NSCLC at diagnosis. Further work to understand drivers of this difference (e.g., access to NSCLC treatment) and subsequent interventions are needed.

Receipt of Tobacco Treatment and One-Year Smoking Cessation Rates Following Lung Cancer Screening in the Veterans Health Administration

BACKGROUND

Implementation of effective smoking cessation interventions in lung cancer screening has been identified as a high-priority research gap, but knowledge of current practices to guide process improvement is limited due to the slow uptake of screening and dearth of data to assess cessation-related practices and outcomes under real-world conditions.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate cessation treatment receipt and 1-year post-screening cessation outcomes within the largest integrated healthcare system in the USA-the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). Design Observational study using administrative data from electronic medical records (EMR). Patients Currently smoking Veterans who received a first lung cancer screening test using low-dose CT (LDCT) between January 2014 and June 2018. Main Outcomes Tobacco treatment received within the window of 30 days before and 30 days after LDCT; 1-year quit rates based on EMR Smoking Health Factors data 6-18 months after LDCT. Key Results Of the 47,609 current smokers screened (95.3% male), 8702 (18.3%) received pharmacotherapy and/or behavioral treatment for smoking cessation; 531 (1.1%) received both. Of those receiving pharmacotherapy, only one in four received one of the most effective medications: varenicline (12.1%) or combination nicotine replacement therapy (14.3%). Overall, 5400 Veterans quit smoking-a rate of 11.3% (missing=smoking) or 13.5% (complete case analysis). Treatment receipt and cessation were associated with numerous sociodemographic, clinical, and screening-related factors.

CONCLUSIONS

One-year quit rates for Veterans receiving lung cancer screening in VHA are similar to those reported in LDCT clinical trials and cohort studies (i.e., 10-17%). Only 1% of Veterans received the recommended combination of pharmacotherapy and counseling, and the most effective pharmacotherapies were not the most commonly received ones. The value of screening within VHA could be improved by addressing these treatment gaps, as well as the observed disparities in treatment receipt or cessation by race, rurality, and psychiatric conditions.

Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion and access to primary-care based smoking cessation assistance among cancer survivors: an observational cohort study

Background

Smoking among cancer survivors can increase the risk of cancer reoccurrence, reduce treatment effectiveness and decrease quality of life. Cancer survivors without health insurance have higher rates of smoking and decreased probability of quitting smoking than cancer survivors with health insurance. This study examines the associations of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Medicaid insurance expansion with smoking cessation assistance and quitting smoking among cancer survivors seen in community health centers (CHCs).

Methods

Using electronic health record data from 337 primary care community health centers in 12 states that expanded Medicaid eligibility and 273 CHCs in 8 states that did not expand, we identified adult cancer survivors with a smoking status indicating current smoking within 6 months prior to ACA expansion in 2014 and ≥ 1 visit with smoking status assessed within 24-months post-expansion. Using an observational cohort propensity score weighted approach and logistic generalized estimating equation regression, we compared odds of quitting smoking, having a cessation medication ordered, and having ≥6 visits within the post-expansion period among cancer survivors in Medicaid expansion versus non-expansion states.

Results

Cancer survivors in expansion states had higher odds of having a smoking cessation medication order (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.54, 95%CI = 1.61-4.03) and higher odds of having ≥6 office visits than those in non-expansion states (aOR = 1.82, 95%CI = 1.22-2.73). Odds of quitting smoking did not differ significantly between patients in Medicaid expansion versus non-expansion states.

Conclusions

The increased odds of having a smoking cessation medication order among cancer survivors seen in Medicaid expansion states compared with those seen in non-expansion states provides evidence of the importance of health insurance coverage in accessing evidence-based tobacco treatment within CHCs. Continued research is needed to understand why, despite increased odds of having a cessation medication prescribed, odds of quitting smoking were not significantly higher among cancer survivors in Medicaid expansion states compared to non-expansion states.

Cost-effectiveness of a nurse-delivered, inpatient smoking cessation intervention

Randomized controlled trials have shown that inpatient tobacco cessation interventions are highly efficacious and cost-effective. However, the degree to which smoking interventions implemented in nonrandomized, real-world practice settings are effective, and consequently, cost-effective, remains unclear. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a nurse-delivered, inpatient smoking cessation intervention, Tobacco Tactics, compared with usual care within the context of an observational, real-world study design. In this quasi-experimental study, five Michigan hospitals (N = 1,370 patients) were assigned to implement either Tobacco Tactics or usual care during October 2011-May 2013. Statistical analysis was conducted during January 2017-February 2018. Controlling for confounding using stabilized inverse probability of treatment weights, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were generated. The per person cost of tobacco cessation services in the intervention group exceeded that of usual care ($175.52 vs. $67.80; p < .001). The intervention group had a higher propensity-adjusted self-reported quit rate compared to the control group (15.7% vs. 7.0%; p < .0001). The propensity-adjusted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $1,325 per quit (95% confidence interval: $751-$2,462), with 99.9% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness to pay of $5,000 per quit. The Tobacco Tactics intervention was found to be cost-effective and well within the range of incremental cost-per-quit findings from other studies of tobacco cessation interventions, which range from $918 to $23,200, adjusted for inflation.

Tobacco Cessation in Affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansion States Versus Non-expansion States

INTRODUCTION

Community health centers (CHCs) care for vulnerable patients who use tobacco at higher than national rates. States that expanded Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) provided insurance coverage to tobacco users not previously Medicaid-eligible, thereby potentially increasing their odds of receiving cessation assistance. We examined if tobacco users in Medicaid expansion states had increased quit rates, cessation medications ordered, and greater health care utilization compared to patients in non-expansion states.

METHODS

Using electronic health record (EHR) data from 219 CHCs in 10 states that expanded Medicaid as of January 1, 2014, we identified patients aged 19-64 with tobacco use status documented in the EHR within 6 months prior to ACA Medicaid expansion and ≥1 visit with tobacco use status assessed within 24 months post-expansion (January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2015). We propensity score matched these patients to tobacco users from 108 CHCs in six non-expansion states (n = 27 670 matched pairs; 55 340 patients). Using a retrospective observational cohort study design, we compared odds of having a quit status, cessation medication ordered, and ≥6 visits within the post-expansion period among patients in expansion versus non-expansion states.

RESULTS

Patients in expansion states had increased adjusted odds of quitting (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.35, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.28-1.43), having a medication ordered (aOR = 1.53, 95% CI: 1.44-1.62), and having ≥6 follow-up visits (aOR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.28-1.41) compared to patients from non-expansion states.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased access to insurance via the ACA Medicaid expansion likely led to increased quit rates within this vulnerable population.

IMPLICATIONS

CHCs care for vulnerable patients at higher risk of tobacco use than the general population. Medicaid expansion via the ACA provided insurance coverage to a large number of tobacco users not previously Medicaid-eligible. We found that expanded insurance coverage was associated with increased cessation assistance and higher odds of tobacco cessation. Continued provision of insurance coverage could lead to increased quit rates among high-risk populations, resulting in improvements in population health outcomes and reduced total health care costs.

Validity of Veterans Health Administration structured data to determine accurate smoking status

We compared smoking status from Veterans Health Administration (VHA) structured data with text in electronic health record (EHR) to assess validity. We manually abstracted the smoking status of 5,610 VHA patients. Only those with a smoking status found in both EHR text data and VHA structured data were included (n=5,289). We calculated agreement and kappa statistics to compare structured data vs. manually abstracted EHR text smoking status. We found a kappa statistic of 0.70 and total agreement of 81.1% between EHR text data and structured data for Current, Former, and Never smoking categories. Comparing EHR text data and structured data between Never and Ever smokers revealed a kappa statistic of 0.62 and total agreement of 89.1%. For comparison between Current and Never/Former smokers, the kappa statistic was 0.80 and total agreement was 90.2%. We found substantial and significant agreement between smoking status in EHR text data and structured data that may aid in future research.

Cost-effectiveness of real-world administration of tobacco pharmacotherapy in the United States Veterans Health Administration

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Cost-effectiveness studies in randomized clinical trials have shown that tobacco cessation pharmacotherapy is among the most cost-effective of health-care interventions. Clinical trial eligibility criteria and treatment protocols may not be followed in actual practice. This study aimed to determine whether tobacco cessation pharmacotherapy is cost-effective in real-world settings.

DESIGN

A retrospective analysis of costs and outcomes.

SETTING

Hospitals and clinics of the US Veterans Health Administration, USA.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 589 862 US veterans who screened positive for tobacco use in 2011.

INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR

Tobacco users who initiated smoking cessation pharmacotherapy in the 6 months after screening were compared with those who did not use pharmacotherapy in this period. Pharmacotherapy included nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion (if prescribed at 300 mg per day or specifically for tobacco cessation) or varenicline.

MEASURES

Effectiveness was determined from responses to a subsequent tobacco screening conducted between 7 and 18 months after the treatment observation period. Cost of medications and prescribing health-care encounters was determined for the period between initial and follow-up tobacco use screening. Multivariate fixed-effects regression was used to assess the effect of initial treatment status on cost and outcome while controlling for differences in case-mix with propensity weighting to adjust for confounding by indication.

FINDINGS

Thirteen per cent of participants received tobacco cessation pharmacotherapy within 6 months of initial screening. After an average of an additional 218.1 days' follow-up, those who initially received pharmacotherapy incurred $143.79 in additional treatment cost and had a 3.1% absolute increase in tobacco quit rates compared with those who were not initially treated. This represents an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $4705 per quit. The upper limit of the 99.9% confidence region was $5600 per quit. Without propensity adjustment, the cost-effectiveness ratio was $7144 per quit, with the upper limit of the 99.9% confidence region $9500/quit.

CONCLUSIONS

Tobacco cessation pharmacotherapy provided by the US Veterans Health Administration in 2011/12 was cost-effective in this real-world setting, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $4705 per quit.

Development of a Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) Questionnaire to Understand Veterans' Preferences for Tobacco Treatment in Primary Care

BACKGROUND

Providers often prescribe counseling and/or medications for tobacco cessation without considering patients' treatment preferences.

OBJECTIVE

The primary aims of this study are to describe (1) the development of a discrete choice experiment (DCE) questionnaire designed to identify the attributes and levels of tobacco treatment that are most important to veterans; and (2) the decision-making process in choosing between hypothetical tobacco treatments.

METHODS

We recruited current smokers who were already scheduled for a primary care appointment within a single Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system. Subjects were asked to rate the importance of selected treatment attributes and were interviewed during two rounds of pilot testing of initial DCE instruments. Key attributes and levels of the initial instruments were identified by targeted literature review; the instruments were iteratively revised after each round of pilot testing. Using a 'think aloud' approach, subjects were interviewed while completing DCE choice tasks. Constant comparison techniques were used to characterize the issues raised by subjects. Findings from the cognitive interviews were used to revise the initial DCE instruments.

RESULTS

Most subjects completed the DCE questionnaire without difficulty and considered two or more attributes in choosing between treatments. Two common patterns of decision-making emerged during the cognitive interviews: (1) counting 'pros' and 'cons' of each treatment alternative; and (2) using a 'rule-out' strategy to eliminate a given treatment choice if it included an undesirable attribute. Subjects routinely discounted the importance of certain attributes and, in a few cases, focused primarily on a single 'must-have' attribute.

CONCLUSION

Cognitive interviews provide valuable insights into the comprehension and interpretation of DCE attributes, the decision processes used by veterans during completion of choice tasks, and underlying reasons for non'-compensatory decision-making.

Effectiveness of tobacco cessation pharmacotherapy in the Veterans Health Administration

INTRODUCTION

In 2003, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) implemented a directive that cessation pharmacotherapy be made available to all who use tobacco and are interested in quitting. Despite the efficacy of cessation pharmacotherapy shown in clinical trials, the generalisability of the results in real-world settings has been challenged. Hence, the specific aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of cessation pharmacotherapies in the VHA.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used VHA's electronic medical record data to compare quit rates among those who use tobacco and who did vs. did not receive any type of cessation pharmacotherapy. Included were 589 862 Veterans identified as current tobacco users during fiscal year 2011 who had not received cessation pharmacotherapy in the prior 12 months. Following a 6-month period to assess treatment, quit rates among those who were treated versus untreated were compared during the 7-18 months (12 months) post-treatment follow-up period. The estimated treatment effect was calculated from a logistic regression model adjusting for inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs) and covariates. Marginal probabilities of quitting were also obtained among those treated versus untreated.

RESULTS

Adjusting for IPTWs and covariates, the odds of quitting were 24% higher among those treated versus untreated (OR=1.24, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.25, p<0.001). The marginal probabilities of quitting were 16.7% for the untreated versus 19.8% for the treated based on the weighted model.

CONCLUSION

The increased quit rates among Veterans treated support the effectiveness and continuation of the VHA tobacco cessation pharmacotherapy policy.

Validating the use of veterans affairs tobacco health factors for assessing change in smoking status: accuracy, availability, and approach

BACKGROUND

Accurate smoking status is key for research purposes, but can be costly and difficult to measure. Within the Veteran's Health Administration (VA), smoking status is recorded as part of routine care as "health factors" (HF)-fields that researchers can query through the electronic health record (EHR). Many researchers are interested in using these fields to track changes in smoking status over time, however the validity of this measure for assessing change is unknown. The primary goal of this project was to examine whether HFs can be used to accurately measure change in tobacco status over time, with secondary goals of assessing the optimum timeframe for assessment and variation in accuracy by site.

METHODS

Secondary analysis of the Veterans VICTORY study, a pragmatic smoking cessation randomized controlled trial conducted from 2009 to 2011. Eligible subjects were identified via the EHR using a past 90-day HF indicating current tobacco use (for example: "CURRENT SMOKER", "CURRENTLY USES TOBACCO"). Participants were surveyed at 1 year to determine prolonged smoking abstinence. We identified HFs for tobacco status within +/- 120 days of the follow-up survey mailing date and recorded the temporally closest HF. Among subjects with both measures, we compared the two for agreement using kappa statistics and concordance.

RESULTS

1713 subjects (33%) had both follow-up survey and HF data, 1594 (31%) had only a survey response, 790 (15%) had only HF and 1026 (20%) had neither. For subjects with both measures, there was 90% concordance and moderate agreement (Kappa 0.48, 95%CI 0.41-0.55, Sensitivity 54.4, 95%CI 41.1-67.7, Specificity 94.3, 95%CI 87.5-100.0).

CONCLUSIONS

We found high concordance but only moderate agreement by kappa statistics between HFs and survey data. The difference is likely accounted for by the natural history of quit attempts, in which patients cycle in and out of quit attempts. HFs appear to provide an accurate measure of population level quit behavior utilizing data collected in the course of clinical care.