An electronic health record-based interoperable eReferral system to enhance smoking Quitline treatment in primary care

Cost-Effectiveness of a Comprehensive Primary Care Smoking Treatment Program

INTRODUCTION

Smoking is the leading preventable cause of death and disease in the U.S. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness from a healthcare system perspective of a comprehensive primary care intervention to reduce smoking rates.

METHODS

This pragmatic trial implemented electronic health record prompts during primary care visits and employed certified tobacco cessation specialists to offer proactive outreach and smoking cessation treatment to patients who smoke. The data, analyzed in 2022, included 10,683 patients in the smoking registry from 2017 to 2020. Pre-post analyses compared intervention costs to treatment engagement, successful self-reported smoking cessation, and acute health care utilization (urgent care, emergency department visits, and inpatient hospitalization). Cost per quality-adjusted life year was determined by applying conversion factors obtained from the tobacco research literature to the cost per patient who quit smoking.

RESULTS

Tobacco cessation outreach, medication, and counseling costs increased from $2.64 to $6.44 per patient per month, for a total post-implementation intervention cost of $500,216. Smoking cessation rates increased from 1.3% pre-implementation to 8.7% post-implementation, for an incremental effectiveness of 7.4%. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $628 (95% CI: $568, $695) per person who quit smoking, and $905 (95% CI: $822, $1,001) per quality-adjusted life year gained. Acute health care costs decreased by an average of $42 (95% CI: -$59, $145) per patient per month for patients in the smoking registry.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a comprehensive and proactive smoking cessation outreach and treatment program for adult primary care patients who smoke meets typical cost-effectiveness thresholds for healthcare.

Quitline usage does not improve rates of smoking cessation in orthopaedic trauma patients unless combined with nicotine replacement therapy

PURPOSE

The negative effects of smoking following traumatic orthopaedic injury can lead to serious complications and decreased quality of life. The widely available quitline could be easily implemented in the orthopaedic postoperative period to improve outcome, but the effectiveness of this intervention in this population is unknown. The goal of this study was to determine if active referral to a quitline would improve rates of smoking cessation in this population.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of a randomized control trial assessing the effectiveness of an inpatient intervention with varying intensities to promote smoking cessation. Participants were actively referred to the quitline as part of their intervention. Participants were surveyed at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months following their injury for 7-day abstinence, chemically confirmed with exhaled carbon monoxide monitoring.

RESULTS

Smoking quitline use alone does not independently improve 7-day abstinence. Quitline and nicotine use are synergistic (OR, 5.6 vs. 2.3 at 3 months in patients who used nicotine patch and quitline vs. patch; OR, 7.8 vs. 2.1 at 3 months in patients who used any NRT and quitline vs. NRT alone).

CONCLUSIONS

NRT use improves smoking cessation rates in orthopaedic trauma patients. Although smoking quitline use might not independently improve cessation rates in orthopaedic trauma patients postoperatively, concomitant use of NRT with quitline improves quit rates over NRT alone. Patients referred to quitline should be encouraged to use NRT.

Genomic medicine to reduce tobacco and related disorders: Translation to precision prevention and treatment

Genomic medicine can enhance prevention and treatment. First, we propose that advances in genomics have the potential to enhance assessment of disease risk, improve prognostic predictions, and guide treatment development and application. Clinical implementation of polygenic risk scores (PRSs) has emerged as an area of active research. The pathway from genomic discovery to implementation is an iterative process. Second, we provide examples on how genomic medicine has the potential to solve problems in prevention and treatment using two examples: Lung cancer screening and evidence-based tobacco treatment are both under-utilized and great opportunities for genomic interventions. Third, we discuss the translational process for developing genomic interventions from evidence to implementation by presenting a model to evaluate genomic evidence for clinical implementation, mechanisms of genomic interventions, and patient desire for genomic interventions. Fourth, we present potential challenges in genomic interventions including a great need for evidence in all diverse populations, little evidence on treatment algorithms, challenges in accommodating a dynamic evidence base, and implementation challenges in real world clinical settings. Finally, we conclude that research to identify genomic markers that are associated with smoking cessation success and the efficacy of smoking cessation treatments is needed to empower people of all diverse ancestry. Importantly, genomic data can be used to help identify patients with elevated risk for nicotine addiction, difficulty quitting smoking, favorable response to specific pharmacotherapy, and tobacco-related health problems.

Implementation planning for equitable tobacco treatment services: a mixed methods assessment of contextual facilitators and barriers in a large comprehensive cancer center

Tobacco use among cancer patients is associated with an increased mortality and poorer outcomes, yet two-thirds of patients continue using following diagnosis, with disproportionately higher use among racial/ethnic minority and low socioeconomic status patients. Tobacco treatment services that are effectively tailored and adapted to population characteristics and multilevel context specific to settings serving diverse patients are needed to improve tobacco cessation among cancer patients. We examined tobacco use screening and implementation needs for tobacco treatment services to inform equitable and accessible delivery within a large comprehensive cancer center in the greater Los Angeles region. We conducted a multi-modal, mixed methods assessment using electronic medical records (EMR), and clinic stakeholder surveys and interviews (guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research). Approximately 45% of patients (n = 11,827 of 26,030 total) had missing tobacco use history in their EMR. Several demographic characteristics (gender, age, race/ethnicity, insurance) were associated with greater missing data prevalence. In surveys (n = 32), clinic stakeholders endorsed tobacco screening and cessation services, but indicated necessary improvements for screening/referral procedures. During interviews (n = 13), providers/staff reported tobacco screening was important, but level of priority differed as well as how often and who should screen. Several barriers were noted, including patients' language/cultural barriers, limited time during visits, lack of smoking cessation training, and insurance coverage. While stakeholders indicated high interest in tobacco use assessment and cessation services, EMR and interview data revealed opportunities to improve tobacco use screening across patient groups. Implementing sustainable system-level tobacco cessation programs at institutions requires leadership support, staff training, on routine screening, and intervention and referral strategies that meet patients' linguistic/cultural needs.

A Clinical Decision Support System for Motivational Messaging and Tobacco Cessation Treatment for Parents: Pilot Evaluation of Use and Acceptance

BACKGROUND

Research is needed to identify how clinical decision support (CDS) systems can support communication about and engagement with tobacco use treatment in pediatric settings for parents who smoke. We developed a CDS system that identifies parents who smoke, delivers motivational messages to start treatment, connects parents to treatment, and supports pediatrician-parent discussion.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to assess the performance of this system in clinical practice, including receipt of motivational messages and tobacco use treatment acceptance rates.

METHODS

The system was evaluated at one large pediatric practice through a single-arm pilot study from June to November 2021. We collected data on the performance of the CDS system for all parents. Additionally, we surveyed a sample of parents immediately after the clinical encounter who used the system and reported smoking. Measures were: (1) the parent remembered the motivational message, (2) the pediatrician reinforced the message, and (3) treatment acceptance rates. Treatments included nicotine replacement therapy, quitline referral (phone counseling), and/or SmokefreeTXT referral (text message counseling). We described survey response rates overall and with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

During the entire study period, 8,488 parents completed use of the CDS: 9.3% (n = 786) reported smoking and 48.2% (n = 379) accepted at least one treatment. A total of 102 parents who smoke who used the system were approached to survey 100 parents (98% response rate). Most parents self-identified as female (84%), aged 25 to 34 years (56%), and Black/African American (94%), and had children with Medicaid insurance (95%). Of parents surveyed, 54% accepted at least one treatment option. Most parents recalled the motivational message (79%; 95% CI: 71-87%), and 31% (95% CI: 19-44%) reported that the pediatrician reinforced the motivational message.

CONCLUSION

A CDS system to support parental tobacco use treatment in pediatric primary care enhanced motivational messaging about smoking cessation and evidence-based treatment initiation.

Sustained Effects of a Systems-Based Strategy for Tobacco Cessation Assistance

INTRODUCTION

Primary care settings that serve lower-income patients are critical for reducing tobacco-related disparities; however, tobacco-related care in these settings remains low. This study examined whether processes for the provision of tobacco cessation care are sustained 18 and 24 months after implementing a health system-level intervention consisting of electronic health record functionality changes and expansion of rooming staff roles.

METHODS

This nonrandomized stepped-wedge study included electronic health record data from adults with ≥1 primary care visit to 1 of 8 community-based clinics between August 2016 and September 2019. Generalized estimating equations methods were used to compute ORs of asking about tobacco use and among those who use tobacco, providing brief advice to quit and assessing readiness to quit, contrasting 18 and 24 months after implementation to both preimplementation (baseline) and 12 months after implementation. Using a 2-level model of patients clustered in clinics, outcomes were examined over time by clinic site. Analyses were conducted in 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 305,665 patient visits were evaluated. Significantly higher odds of all 3 outcomes were observed at 18 and 24 months than at baseline. The odds of asking about tobacco use increased, whereas the odds of advising to quit were similar at 18 and 24 months to those at 12 months. Odds of assessing readiness to quit decreased at 18 months (OR=0.71; 95% CI=0.63, 0.80) and 24 months (OR=0.46; 95% CI=0.40, 0.52). Performance varied significantly by clinical site.

CONCLUSIONS

Health system changes can have a sustained impact on tobacco assessment and the provision of brief advice among lower-income patients. Strategies to sustain assessment of readiness to quit are warranted.

Patient Engagement by the Tobacco Quitline After Electronic Referrals

INTRODUCTION

Referrals through the electronic health record (EHR) system provide an efficient evidence-based method to connect patients to the Tobacco Quitline. However, patients frequently do not respond to Quitline phone calls or accept services. The goal of this study was to characterize factors associated with successful engagement with Quitline following e-referrals by physicians in Maryland.

AIMS AND METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study with hierarchical data modeling. Data for 1790 patients e-referred in 2018-2019 by the University of Maryland Medical System (UMMS) were analyzed. Patients' engagement was assessed using a generalized estimating equation multivariable regression model for ordinal outcomes at two levels: Picking up a phone call from Quitline (1-800-QUIT-NOW) and enrollment in tobacco cessation programs.

RESULTS

Older age, female gender, black race, low socioeconomic status, and provider's skills were significantly associated with successful outcomes of Quitline referral. The engagement with Quitline was higher in black non-Hispanic patients compared to other racial/ethnic groups (phone call response odds ratio [OR] = 1.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.35% to 2.93% and service acceptance OR = 1.89, 95% CI = 1.28% to 2.79%). Patients residing in socioeconomically deprived areas were more likely to respond to Quitline phone calls compared to those from affluent neighborhoods (OR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.03% to 2.25%). Patients referred by faculty or attending physicians were more likely to respond compared to those referred by residents (OR = 1.23, 95% CI 1.04, 1.44, p = .0141).

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple factors impact successful engagement with Quitline. Additional means to improve Quitline engagement success may include focused messaging on tobacco cessation benefits to patients, and skillful counseling by the provider.

IMPLICATIONS

Implementation of the clinical decision support (CDS) tool for electronic referrals to the Tobacco Quitline at the UMMS was successful in providing evidence-based free service to elderly patients and socioeconomically disadvantaged racial and ethnic minorities. The CDS also served to engage physicians in conversation about tobacco use and cessation with every tobacco-using patient. Curricular content for physicians in training should be enriched to expand tobacco use and treatment.

The MOHMQuit (Midwives and Obstetricians Helping Mothers to Quit Smoking) Trial: protocol for a stepped-wedge implementation trial to improve best practice smoking cessation support in public antenatal care services

BACKGROUND

Smoking during pregnancy is the most important preventable cause of adverse pregnancy outcomes, yet smoking cessation support (SCS) is inconsistently provided. The MOMHQUIT intervention was developed to address this evidence-practice gap, using the Behaviour Change Wheel method by mapping barriers to intervention strategies. MOHMQuit includes systems, leadership and clinician elements. This implementation trial will determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of MOHMQuit in improving smoking cessation rates in pregnant women in public maternity care services in Australia; test the mechanisms of action of the intervention strategies; and examine implementation outcomes.

METHODS

A stepped-wedge cluster-randomised design will be used. Implementation of MOHMQuit will include reinforcing leadership investment in SCS as a clinical priority, strengthening maternity care clinicians' knowledge, skills, confidence and attitudes towards the provision of SCS, and clinicians' documentation of guideline-recommended SCS provided during antenatal care. Approximately, 4000 women who report smoking during pregnancy will be recruited across nine sites. The intervention and its implementation will be evaluated using a mixed methods approach. The primary outcome will be 7-day point prevalence abstinence at the end of pregnancy, among pregnant smokers, verified by salivary cotinine testing. Continuous data collection from electronic medical records and telephone interviews with postpartum women will occur throughout 32 months of the trial to assess changes in cessation rates reported by women, and SCS documented by clinicians and reported by women. Data collection to assess changes in clinicians' knowledge, skills, confidence and attitudes will occur prior to and immediately after the intervention at each site, and again 6 months later. Questionnaires at 3 months following the intervention, and semi-structured interviews at 6 months with maternity service leaders will explore leaders' perceptions of acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, adaptations and fidelity of delivery of the MOHMQuit intervention. Structural equation modelling will examine causal linkages between the strategies, mediators and outcomes. Cost-effectiveness analyses will also be undertaken.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide evidence of the effectiveness of a multi-level implementation intervention to support policy decisions; and evidence regarding mechanisms of action of the intervention strategies (how the strategies effected outcomes) to support further theoretical developments in implementation science.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12622000167763, registered February 2nd 2022.

A comprehensive electronic health record-enabled smoking treatment program: Evaluating reach and effectiveness in primary care in a multiple baseline design

Effective treatments for smoking cessation exist but are underused. Proactive chronic care approaches may enhance the reach of cessation treatment and reduce the prevalence of smoking in healthcare systems. This pragmatic study evaluated a population-based Comprehensive Tobacco Intervention Program (CTIP) implemented in all (6) adult primary care clinics in a Madison, Wisconsin, USA healthcare cooperative, assessing treatment reach, reach equity, and effectiveness in promoting smoking cessation. CTIP launched in 3 waves of 2 clinics each in a multiple baseline design. Electronic health record (EHR) tools facilitated clinician-delivered pharmacotherapy and counseling; guiding tobacco care managers in phone outreach to all patients who smoke; and prompting multimethod bulk outreach to all patients on a smoking registry using an opt-out approach. EHR data were analyzed to assess CTIP reach and effectiveness among 6894 adult patients between January 2018 and February 2020. Cessation treatment reach increased significantly after CTIP launch in 5 of 6 clinics and was significantly higher when clinics were active vs. inactive in CTIP [Odds Ratio (OR) range = 2.0-3.0]. Rates of converting from current to former smoking status were also higher in active vs. inactive clinics (OR range = 2.2-10.5). Telephone treatment reach was particularly high in historically underserved groups, including African-American, Hispanic, and Medicaid-eligible patients. Implementation of a comprehensive, opt-out, chronic-care program aimed at all patients who smoke was associated with increases in the rates of pharmacotherapy and counseling delivery and quitting smoking. Proactive outreach may help reduce disparities in treatment access.

Electronic health record closed-loop referral ("eReferral") to a state tobacco quitline: a retrospective case study of primary care implementation challenges and adaptations

BACKGROUND

Health system change can increase the reach of evidence-based smoking cessation treatments. Proactive electronic health record (EHR)-enabled, closed-loop referral ("eReferral") to state tobacco quitlines increases the rates at which patients who smoke accept cessation treatment. Implementing such system change poses many challenges, however, and adaptations to system contexts are often required, but are understudied. This retrospective case study identified adaptations to eReferral EHR tools and implementation strategies in two healthcare systems.

METHODS

In a large clustered randomized controlled trial (C-RCT; NCT02735382) conducted in 2016-2017, 11 primary care clinics in two healthcare systems implemented quitline eReferral, starting with 1 pilot clinic per system followed by 2 phases of implementation (an experimental phase in 5-6 test clinics per system and then a system-wide dissemination phase in both systems). Adaptations were informed by stakeholder input from live trainings, follow-up calls and meetings in the first month after eReferral launch, emails, direct observation by researchers, and clinic staff survey responses. Retrospective, descriptive analysis characterized implementation strategy modifications and adaptations using the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Implementation Strategies (FRAME-IS). A pre- and post-implementation survey assessed staff ratings of eReferral acceptability and implementation barriers and facilitators.

FINDINGS

Major modifications to closed-loop eReferral implementation strategies included aligning the eReferral initiative with other high-priority health system objectives, modifying eReferral user interfaces and training in their use, modifying eReferral workflows and associated training, and maintaining and enhancing interoperability and clinician feedback functions. The two health systems both used Epic EHRs but used different approaches to interfacing with the quitline vendor and integrating eReferral into clinician workflows. Both health systems engaged in iterative refinement of the EHR alert prompting eReferral, the eReferral order, trainings, and workflows. Staff survey comments suggested moderate acceptability of eReferral processes and identified possible targets for future modifications in eReferral, including reducing clinician burden related to EHR documentation and addressing clinicians' negative beliefs about patient receptivity to cessation treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

System-wide implementation of tobacco quitline eReferral in primary care outpatient clinics is feasible but requires extensive coordination across stakeholders, tailoring to local health system EHR configurations, and sensitivity to system- and clinic-specific workflows.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov, NCT02735382 . Registered on 12 August 2016.

Implementing an EMR-Based Referral for Smoking Quitline Services with Additional Provider Education, a Cluster-Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Despite evidence of their effectiveness, free smoking quitlines are underused. The best way to educate providers about and encourage use of quitlines is not established. We examined if electronic medical record (EMR)-integrated best practices alerts (BPAs) with or without additional provider education resulted in increased quitline referrals.

METHODS

Waitlist-controlled, cluster-randomized trial of primary care practices assigned to three arms. Providers in participating sites received a new EMR-based BPA for quitline referral and additional education outreach visits, the BPA alone, or usual care. The study was conducted in 2 phases: phase 1 from April 17 to October 16, 2017, and phase 2 from November 9, 2017, to May 8, 2018. In phase 2, the usual-care sites were randomized to either of the two intervention arms. The unit of randomization was primary care practice site. All in-office, primary care provider visits with smokers were included. The primary outcome was referral to the quitline. Secondary outcomes included patient acceptance and enrollment in quitline services.

RESULTS

Twenty-two practice sites were enrolled. Smoking prevalence at sites ranged from 4.4 to 23%. In phase 1, the BPA-plus-education arm had 5636 eligible encounters and 405 referrals (referral rate 7.2%) while the BPA-only arm had 6857 eligible encounters and 623 referrals (referral rate 9.1%). The usual-care arm had 7434 encounters but no referrals. Comparing the BPA-plus arm to the BPA-only arm, the odds ratio of referral was 0.76 (CI 0.3-1.8). In phase 2, the combined BPA-plus-education sites had 8516 eligible encounters and 475 referrals (rate 5.6%). The BPA-only sites had 9134 eligible encounters and 470 referrals (rate 5.2%). The odds ratio comparing the 2 groups in phase 2 was 1.06 (0.5-2.2).

CONCLUSIONS

An EMR-based BPA can improve the number of referrals to quitline services, though more work is needed to improve providers' use of quitlines and low patient acceptance of services. Trial Registration NIH Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03229356.

Can inpatient pharmacists move the needle on smoking cessation? Evaluating reach and representativeness of a pharmacist-led opt-out smoking cessation intervention protocol for hospital settings

PURPOSE

Hospitalization affords an opportunity to reduce smoking, but fewer than half of patients who smoke receive evidence-based cessation treatment during inpatient stays. This study evaluated a pharmacist-led, electronic health record (EHR)-facilitated opt-out smoking cessation intervention designed to address this need.

METHODS

Analyses of EHR records for adult patients who smoked in the past 30 days admitted to an academic medical center in the upper Midwest were conducted using the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. The reach of a pharmacist-led, EHR-facilitated protocol for smoking cessation treatment was assessed by comparing patients' receipt of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and tobacco quitline referral before and after implementation. χ2 tests, t tests, and multiple logistic regression models were used to compare reach across patient demographic groups to assess treatment disparities and the representativeness of reach. Adoption of the program by hospital services was also assessed.

RESULTS

Of the 70 hospital services invited to implement the program, 88.6% adopted it and 78.6% had eligible admissions. Treatment reach increased as rates of delivering NRT rose from 43.6% of eligible patients before implementation to 50.4% after implementation (P < 0.0001) and quitline referral rates rose from 0.9% to 11.9% (P < 0.0001). Representativeness of reach by sex and ethnicity improved after implementation, although disparities by race and age persisted after adjustment for demographics, insurance, and primary diagnosis. Pharmacists addressed tobacco use for eligible patients in 62.5% of cases after protocol implementation.

CONCLUSION

Smoking cessation treatment reach and representativeness of reach improved after implementation of a proactive, pharmacist-led, EHR-facilitated opt-out smoking cessation treatment protocol in adult inpatient services.

Increased Reach and Effectiveness With a Low-Burden Point-of-Care Tobacco Treatment Program in Cancer Clinics

BACKGROUND

Tobacco cessation after a cancer diagnosis can extend patient survival by improving outcomes for primary cancer and preventing secondary cancers. However, smoking is often unaddressed in cancer care, highlighting the need for strategies to increase treatment reach and cessation. This study examined a low-burden, point-of-care tobacco treatment program (ELEVATE) featuring an electronic health record-enabled smoking module and decision support tools to increase the reach and effectiveness of evidence-based smoking cessation treatment.

METHODS

This study included adult outpatient tobacco smokers (n=13,651) in medical oncology, internal medicine, and surgical oncology clinics from a large midwestern healthcare system. We examined reach and effectiveness of ELEVATE with 2 comparisons: (1) preimplementation versus postimplementation of ELEVATE and (2) ELEVATE versus usual care. Data were evaluated during 2 time periods: preimplementation (January through May 2018) and postimplementation (June through December 2018), with smoking cessation assessed at the last follow-up outpatient encounter during the 6 months after these periods.

RESULTS

The proportion of current tobacco smokers receiving cessation treatment increased from pre-ELEVATE to post-ELEVATE (1.6%-27.9%; difference, 26.3%; relative risk, 16.9 [95% CI, 9.8-29.2]; P<.001). Compared with 27.9% treatment reach with ELEVATE in the postimplementation time period, reach within usual care clinics ranged from 11.8% to 12.0% during this same period. The proportion of tobacco smokers who subsequently achieved cessation increased significantly from pre-ELEVATE to post-ELEVATE (12.0% vs 17.2%; difference, 5.2%; relative risk, 1.3 [95% CI, 1.1-1.5]; P=.002). Compared with 17.2% smoking cessation with ELEVATE in the postimplementation time period, achievement of cessation within usual care clinics ranged from 8.2% to 9.9% during this same period.

CONCLUSIONS

A low-burden, point-of-care tobacco treatment strategy increased tobacco treatment and cessation, thereby improving access to and the impact of evidence-based cessation treatment. Using implementation strategies to embed tobacco treatment in every healthcare encounter promises to engage more smokers in evidence-based treatment and facilitate smoking cessation, thereby improving care cancer for patients who smoke.

Reach and effectiveness of the NCI Cancer Moonshot-funded Cancer Center Cessation Initiative

Smoking cessation results in improved cancer treatment outcomes. However, the factors associated with successful implementation of cessation programs in cancer care settings are not well understood. This paper presents the reach the reach and effectiveness of cessation programs implemented in NCI-Designated Cancer Centers in the Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I). An observational, cross-sectional study was conducted among C3I Cancer Centers from July 1, 2019 and December 31, 2019 (N = 38). Reach was calculated as the proportion of patients reporting current smoking that received cessation treatment and was analyzed overall and by organizational characteristics. Smoking abstinence rates were determined by the proportion of participants self-reporting smoking abstinence in the previous 7 and 30 days at 6 months after treatment. On average, nearly 30% of patients who smoked received any cessation treatment. In-person counseling was most implemented but reached an average of only 13.2% of patients who smoked. Although less frequently implemented, average reach was highest for counseling provided via an interactive voice response system (55.8%) and telephone-based counseling (18.7%). Reach was higher at centers with more established programs, electronic health record referral systems, and higher smoking prevalence. At 6-month follow-up, about a fifth of participants on average had not smoked in the past 7 days (21.7%) or past 30 days (18.6%). Variations in reach by organizational characteristics suggest that leadership engagement and investment in technology-facilitated programs may yield higher levels of reach. Understanding which implementation and intervention strategies facilitate greater cessation treatment reach and effectiveness could lead to improved outcomes among cancer patients who smoke.

Digital Health Interventions to Enhance Prevention in Primary Care: Scoping Review

Background

Disease prevention is a central aspect of primary care practice and is comprised of primary (eg, vaccinations), secondary (eg, screenings), tertiary (eg, chronic condition monitoring), and quaternary (eg, prevention of overmedicalization) levels. Despite rapid digital transformation of primary care practices, digital health interventions (DHIs) in preventive care have yet to be systematically evaluated.

Objective

This review aimed to identify and describe the scope and use of current DHIs for preventive care in primary care settings.

Methods

A scoping review to identify literature published from 2014 to 2020 was conducted across multiple databases using keywords and Medical Subject Headings terms covering primary care professionals, prevention and care management, and digital health. A subgroup analysis identified relevant studies conducted in US primary care settings, excluding DHIs that use the electronic health record (EHR) as a retrospective data capture tool. Technology descriptions, outcomes (eg, health care performance and implementation science), and study quality as per Oxford levels of evidence were abstracted.

Results

The search yielded 5274 citations, of which 1060 full-text articles were identified. Following a subgroup analysis, 241 articles met the inclusion criteria. Studies primarily examined DHIs among health information technologies, including EHRs (166/241, 68.9%), clinical decision support (88/241, 36.5%), telehealth (88/241, 36.5%), and multiple technologies (154/241, 63.9%). DHIs were predominantly used for tertiary prevention (131/241, 54.4%). Of the core primary care functions, comprehensiveness was addressed most frequently (213/241, 88.4%). DHI users were providers (205/241, 85.1%), patients (111/241, 46.1%), or multiple types (89/241, 36.9%). Reported outcomes were primarily clinical (179/241, 70.1%), and statistically significant improvements were common (192/241, 79.7%). Results were summarized across the following 5 topics for the most novel/distinct DHIs: population-centered, patient-centered, care access expansion, panel-centered (dashboarding), and application-driven DHIs. The quality of the included studies was moderate to low.

Conclusions

Preventive DHIs in primary care settings demonstrated meaningful improvements in both clinical and nonclinical outcomes, and across user types; however, adoption and implementation in the US were limited primarily to EHR platforms, and users were mainly clinicians receiving alerts regarding care management for their patients. Evaluations of negative results, effects on health disparities, and many other gaps remain to be explored.

Implementation strategies for integrating tobacco cessation treatment in cancer care: A qualitative study

Purpose

The objective of this study was to determine how to optimize implementation of tobacco cessation treatment interventions in cancer care by (1) investigating the feasibility and acceptability of a multi-level approach to tobacco cessation treatment intervention, (2) identifying barriers and facilitators to implementation, and (3) eliciting additional strategies to improve implementation of the intervention.

Methods

We conducted qualitative interviews with oncologists (n = 15) from one large academic health center in the Southeastern United States. We asked about their knowledge, attitudes, and current practices regarding tobacco use screening and treatment. We also asked about two proposed strategies to support implementation of tobacco cessation treatment: (1) developing a registry of tobacco users in collaboration with the state-run tobacco cessation program, and (2) providing on-site tobacco cessation counseling from trained professionals.

Results

Oncologists saw addressing tobacco use as valuable; however, they felt restricted from consistently addressing tobacco use by multi-level barriers such as workload, electronic health record (EHR) design, patient anxiety, and low self-efficacy for treating tobacco dependence. Oncologists responded positively to on-site treatment and felt this strategy would increase treatment accessibility and enhance engagement. Reaction to developing a registry of tobacco users was mixed, with concerns regarding lack of oncologist involvement and patient privacy expressed. Other suggested strategies for supporting implementation of tobacco cessation treatment included reducing referral complexity, establishing financial or quality incentives for oncologists, and leveraging existing EHR tools to facilitate integration of cessation interventions into clinic workflows.

Conclusion

We identified several challenges to implementing tobacco use treatment in cancer care; however, we considered strategies to overcome these barriers that were viewed as feasible and acceptable. Our work highlights the importance of engaging stakeholders in implementation efforts. Future work should explore the impact of the implementation strategies identified in this study.

A Study Protocol for Increasing Access to Smoking Cessation Treatments for Low-Income Minority Smokers

Background: Smoking rates among low-income patients are double those of the general population. Access to health care is an essential social determinant of health. Federally qualified health care centers (FQHC) are government-supported and community-based centers to increase access to health care for non-insured and underinsured patients. However, barriers to implementation impact adherence and sustainability of evidence-based smoking cessation within FQHC settings. To address this implementation barrier, our multi-disciplinary team proposes Mi QUIT CARE (Mile Square QUIT Community-Access-Referral-Expansion) to establish the acceptability, feasibility, and capacity of an FQHC system to deliver an evidence-based and multi-level intervention to increase patient engagement with a state tobacco quitline. Methods: A mixed-method approach, rooted in an implementation science framework of RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance), will be used in this hybrid effectiveness-implementation design. We aim to evaluate the efficacy of a novel delivery system (patient portal) for increasing access to smoking cessation treatment. In preparation for a future randomized clinical trial of Mi QUIT CARE, we will conduct the following developmental research: (1) Examine the burden of tobacco among patient populations served by our partner FQHC, (2) Evaluate among FQHC patients and health care providers, knowledge, attitudes, barriers, and facilitators related to smoking cessation and our intervention components, (3) Evaluate the use of tailored communication strategies and patient navigation to increase patient portal uptake among patients, and (4) To test the acceptability, feasibility, and capacity of the partner FQHC to deliver Mi QUIT CARE. Discussion: This study provides a model for developing and implementing smoking and other health promotion interventions for low-income patients delivered via patient health portals. If successful, the intervention has important implications for addressing a critical social determinant of cancer and other tobacco-related morbidities. Trial Registration: U.S. National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials, NCT04827420, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04827420.

Characteristics of Patients Engaging in Quitline Counseling After an Electronic Referral

INTRODUCTION

Proactive, electronic referral of primary care patients to quitlines has great potential to provide evidence-based tobacco-cessation assistance to tobacco users. However, the quitline contact rates and engagement of individuals beyond 1 counseling call are poor. This study examines the characteristics of electronically referred patients who engage with the quitline.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included 2,407 primary care patients who reported using tobacco and accepted an electronic referral to the quitline. Outcomes included contact, enrollment, and receipt of ≥2 counseling sessions from the quitline. All measures were assessed from the electronic health record. The association of patient characteristics and outcomes was evaluated using logistic regression modeling with generalized estimating equation methods. Data were collected in 2016‒2018 and were analyzed in 2020.

RESULTS

Among 2,407 referred patients, 794 (33.0%) were contacted; of those, 571 enrolled (71.9%); and of those, 240 (42.0%) engaged in ≥2 quitline counseling sessions. In multivariable analyses, older adults (aged 50-64 and ≥65 years) were significantly more likely to be contacted (OR=2.32, 95% CI=1.6, 3.4) and to receive ≥2 counseling sessions (OR=2.34, 95% CI=1.2, 4.7) than those aged 18-34 years. Those with both Medicare and Medicaid insurance coverage were more likely than those with Medicaid only to be contacted (OR=1.71, 95% CI=1.4, 2.2), to enroll (OR=1.84, 95% CI=1.2, 2.9), and to receive ≥2 counseling sessions (OR=1.83, 95% CI=1.2, 2.9).

CONCLUSIONS

The current quitline phone-based approach is less likely to engage younger adults and those with Medicaid coverage; however, there is a need to improve quitline engagement across all patients. Identification and testing of alternative engagement approaches are needed.

Effectiveness of a multicomponent strategy for implementing guidelines for treating tobacco use in Vietnam Commune Health Centers

INTRODUCTION

Strategies are needed to increase implementation of evidence-based tobacco dependence treatment (TDT) in health care systems in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs).

METHODS

We conducted a two-arm cluster randomized controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of two strategies for implementing TDT guidelines in community health centers (n=26) in Vietnam. Arm 1 included training and a tool kit (e.g., reminder system) to promote and support delivery of the 4As (Ask about tobacco use, Advise to quit, Assess readiness, Assist with brief counseling) (Arm 1). Arm 2 included Arm 1 components plus a system to refer smokers to a community health worker (CHW) for more intensive counseling (4As+R). Provider surveys were conducted at baseline, six- and 12-months to assess the hypothesized effect of the strategies on provider and organizational-level factors. The primary outcome was provider adoption of the 4As.

RESULTS

Adoption of the 4As increased significantly across both study arms (all p<.001). Perceived organizational priority for TDT, compatibility with current workflow, and provider attitudes, norms and self-efficacy related to TDT also improved significantly across both arms. In Arm 2 sites, 41% of smokers were referred to a CHW for additional counseling.

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrated the effectiveness of a multicomponent and multilevel strategy (i.e., provider and system) for implementing evidence-based TDT in the Vietnam public health system. Combining provider-delivered brief counseling with opportunities for more in-depth counseling offered by a trained CHW may optimize outcomes and offers a potentially scalable model for increasing access to TDT in health care systems like Vietnam.

IMPLICATIONS

Improving implementation of evidence-based tobacco dependence treatment (TDT) guidelines is a necessary step towards reducing the growing burden of non-communicable disease (NCDs) and premature death in LMICs. The findings provide new evidence on the effectiveness of multilevel strategies for adapting and implementing TDT into routine care in Vietnam, and offers a potentially scalable model for meeting FCTC Article 14 goals in other LMICs with comparable public health systems. The study also demonstrates that combining provider-delivered brief counseling with referral to a community health worker for more in-depth counseling and support can optimize access to evidence-based treatment for tobacco use.

Strategies to improve smoking cessation rates in primary care

BACKGROUND

Primary care is an important setting in which to treat tobacco addiction. However, the rates at which providers address smoking cessation and the success of that support vary. Strategies can be implemented to improve and increase the delivery of smoking cessation support (e.g. through provider training), and to increase the amount and breadth of support given to people who smoke (e.g. through additional counseling or tailored printed materials).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of strategies intended to increase the success of smoking cessation interventions in primary care settings. To assess whether any effect that these interventions have on smoking cessation may be due to increased implementation by healthcare providers.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and trial registries to 10 September 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs (cRCTs) carried out in primary care, including non-pregnant adults. Studies investigated a strategy or strategies to improve the implementation or success of smoking cessation treatment in primary care. These strategies could include interventions designed to increase or enhance the quality of existing support, or smoking cessation interventions offered in addition to standard care (adjunctive interventions). Intervention strategies had to be tested in addition to and in comparison with standard care, or in addition to other active intervention strategies if the effect of an individual strategy could be isolated. Standard care typically incorporates physician-delivered brief behavioral support, and an offer of smoking cessation medication, but differs across studies. Studies had to measure smoking abstinence at six months' follow-up or longer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome - smoking abstinence - was measured using the most rigorous intention-to-treat definition available. We also extracted outcome data for quit attempts, and the following markers of healthcare provider performance: asking about smoking status; advising on cessation; assessment of participant readiness to quit; assisting with cessation; arranging follow-up for smoking participants. Where more than one study investigated the same strategy or set of strategies, and measured the same outcome, we conducted meta-analyses using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects methods to generate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 81 RCTs and cRCTs, involving 112,159 participants. Fourteen were rated at low risk of bias, 44 at high risk, and the remainder at unclear risk. We identified moderate-certainty evidence, limited by inconsistency, that the provision of adjunctive counseling by a health professional other than the physician (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.55; I2 = 44%; 22 studies, 18,150 participants), and provision of cost-free medications (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.76; I2 = 63%; 10 studies,7560 participants) increased smoking quit rates in primary care. There was also moderate-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias, that the addition of tailored print materials to standard smoking cessation treatment increased the number of people who had successfully stopped smoking at six months' follow-up or more (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.59; I2 = 37%; 6 studies, 15,978 participants). There was no clear evidence that providing participants who smoked with biomedical risk feedback increased their likelihood of quitting (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.41; I2 = 40%; 7 studies, 3491 participants), or that provider smoking cessation training (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.41; I2 = 66%; 7 studies, 13,685 participants) or provider incentives (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.34; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 2454 participants) increased smoking abstinence rates. However, in assessing the former two strategies we judged the evidence to be of low certainty and in assessing the latter strategies it was of very low certainty. We downgraded the evidence due to imprecision, inconsistency and risk of bias across these comparisons. There was some indication that provider training increased the delivery of smoking cessation support, along with the provision of adjunctive counseling and cost-free medications. However, our secondary outcomes were not measured consistently, and in many cases analyses were subject to substantial statistical heterogeneity, imprecision, or both, making it difficult to draw conclusions. Thirty-four studies investigated multicomponent interventions to improve smoking cessation rates. There was substantial variation in the combinations of strategies tested, and the resulting individual study effect estimates, precluding meta-analyses in most cases. Meta-analyses provided some evidence that adjunctive counseling combined with either cost-free medications or provider training enhanced quit rates when compared with standard care alone. However, analyses were limited by small numbers of events, high statistical heterogeneity, and studies at high risk of bias. Analyses looking at the effects of combining provider training with flow sheets to aid physician decision-making, and with outreach facilitation, found no clear evidence that these combinations increased quit rates; however, analyses were limited by imprecision, and there was some indication that these approaches did improve some forms of provider implementation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that providing adjunctive counseling by an allied health professional, cost-free smoking cessation medications, and tailored printed materials as part of smoking cessation support in primary care can increase the number of people who achieve smoking cessation. There is no clear evidence that providing participants with biomedical risk feedback, or primary care providers with training or incentives to provide smoking cessation support enhance quit rates. However, we rated this evidence as of low or very low certainty, and so conclusions are likely to change as further evidence becomes available. Most of the studies in this review evaluated smoking cessation interventions that had already been extensively tested in the general population. Further studies should assess strategies designed to optimize the delivery of those interventions already known to be effective within the primary care setting. Such studies should be cluster-randomized to account for the implications of implementation in this particular setting. Due to substantial variation between studies in this review, identifying optimal characteristics of multicomponent interventions to improve the delivery of smoking cessation treatment was challenging. Future research could use component network meta-analysis to investigate this further.

Achieving Equity in the Reach of Smoking Cessation Services Within the NCI Cancer Moonshot-Funded Cancer Center Cessation Initiative

Background: Ensuring equitable access to smoking cessation services for cancer patients is necessary to avoid increasing disparities in tobacco use and cancer outcomes. In 2017, the Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I) funded National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated Cancer Centers to integrate evidence-based smoking cessation programs into cancer care. We describe the progress of C3I Cancer Centers in expanding the reach of cessation services across cancer populations.

Methods: Cancer centers (n=17) reported on program characteristics and reach (the proportion of smokers receiving evidence-based cessation treatment) for two 6-month periods. Reach was calculated overall and by patient gender, race, ethnicity, and age.

Results: Average reach increased from 18.5% to 25.6% over 1 year. Reach increased for all racial/ethnic groups, and in particular for American Indian/Alaska Native (6.6–24.7%), Asian/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (7.3–19.4%), and black (18.8–25.9%) smokers. Smaller gains in reach were observed among Hispanic smokers (19.0–22.8%), but these were similar to gains among non-Hispanic smokers (18.9–23.9%). By age group, smokers aged 18–24 years (6.6–14.5%) and >65 years (16.1–24.5%) saw the greatest increases in reach.

Conclusion: C3I Cancer Centers achieved gains in providing smoking cessation services to cancer patients who smoke, thereby reducing disparities that had existed across important subgroups. Taking a population-based approach to integrating tobacco treatment into cancer care has potential to increase reach equity. Implementation strategies including targeted and proactive outreach to patients and interventions to increase providers' adoption of evidence-based smoking cessation treatment may advance reach even further.

eHealth Technologies for Screening, Diagnosis, and Management of Viral Hepatitis: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Chronic viral hepatitis is a leading cause of worldwide liver-related morbidity and mortality, despite the availability of effective treatments that reduce or prevent complications in most patients. Electronic-health (eHealth) technologies have potential to intervene along the whole cascade of care. We aimed to summarize available literature on eHealth interventions with respect to conventional screening, diagnostic and treatment outcomes in chronic hepatitis B (HBV) and hepatitis C (HCV).

METHODS

We systematically reviewed MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and international conference abstracts, including studies published from 2009 - 2020. Overall 80 studies were included, covering electronic medical record (EMR) interventions (n=39), telemedicine (n=20), mHealth (n=5), devices (n=4), clinical decision support (n=3), web-based (n=5), social media (n=1) and electronic communication (n=3).

RESULTS

Compared to standard care, EMR alerts increase screening rates in eligible populations including birth cohort screening in HCV, universal HCV screening in Emergency Departments, ethnic groups with high HBV prevalence, and HBV screening prior to immunosuppression. Direct messaging alerts to providers and automated testing may have a greater effect. No significant difference was found in sustained virological response outcomes between telemedicine and face-to-face management for community, rural and prison cohorts in HCV in the direct acting antiviral era of treatment, with higher patient satisfaction in telemedicine groups.

CONCLUSIONS

EMR alerts significantly increase screening rates in eligible cohorts in both chronic HBV and HCV. Telemedicine is equally efficacious to face-to-face care in HCV treatment. Other eHealth technologies show promise; however rigorous studies are lacking.

Electronic referrals to the tobacco Quitline: implementation strategies in a large health system to optimize delivery of tobacco cessation to patients

Electronic referrals provide an efficient solution for clinicians to connect patients to free tobacco cessation services, such as the tobacco Quitline. However, strategic planning is necessary for the successful adoption of this method across the health care system. The purpose of this study was to develop an implementation strategy for electronic referrals to the tobacco Quitline in a large health system. A clinical decision support tool created a closed-loop e-referral pathway between the electronic health record system and the Quitline. Multilevel strategies were developed to implement the e-referral process across the entire health system, including leadership buy-in, Epic tip sheets, newsletters, training for practice champions and staff, physician educator, patient-focused advertisements, and video clips distribution by the Maryland Department of Health Center for Tobacco Prevention and Control. The implementation of a system-wide e-referral pathway for tobacco cessation involved continuous clinician education and training, systematic quality control, and engaging "champion" clinicians. Postimplementation data analysis revealed that 1,790 e-referrals were received by the Quitline in 2018-2019, of which 18% accepted follow-up services, 18% declined, and 64% were not reached after multiple attempts. Among 322 patients who accepted Quitline services, 55% requested nicotine replacement therapy. Overall, 282 clinicians referred patients, including 107 primary care physicians and 175 specialists; 62 clinicians e-referred 72% patients, thereby emerging as "tobacco champions." The e-referral process is an efficient method for tobacco users to receive a cessation referral from clinicians. Sustainability can be achieved through leadership buy-in, physician ease of use, patient motivation, information technology supports, and reminders.

Smoking Treatment: A Report Card on Progress and Challenges

The impact of tobacco smoking treatment is determined by its reach into the smoking population and the effectiveness of its interventions. This review evaluates the reach and effectiveness of pharmacotherapy and psychosocial interventions for smoking. Historically, the reach of smoking treatment has been low, and therefore its impact has been limited, but new reach strategies such as digital interventions and health care system changes offer great promise. Pharmacotherapy tends to be more effective than psychosocial intervention when used clinically, and newer pharmacotherapy strategies hold great promise of further enhancing effectiveness. However, new approaches are needed to advance psychosocial interventions; progress has stagnated because research and dissemination efforts have focused too narrowly on skill training despite evidence that its core content may be inconsequential and the fact that its mechanisms are either unknown or inconsistent with supporting theory. Identifying effective psychosocial content and its mechanisms of action could greatly enhance the effectiveness of counseling, digital, and web interventions.

Closed-Loop Electronic Referral From Primary Care Clinics to a State Tobacco Cessation Quitline: Effects Using Real-World Implementation Training

INTRODUCTION

Patients who use tobacco are too rarely connected with tobacco use treatment during healthcare visits. Electronic health record enhancements may increase such referrals in primary care settings. This project used the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework to assess the implementation of a healthcare system change carried out in an externally valid manner (executed by the healthcare system).

METHODS

The healthcare system used their standard, computer-based training approach to implement the electronic health record and clinic workflow changes for electronic referral in 30 primary care clinics that previously used faxed quitline referral. Electronic health record data captured rates of assessment of readiness to quit and quitline referral 4 months before implementation and 8 months (May-December 2017) after implementation. Data, analyzed from October 2018 to June 2019, also reflected intervention reach, adoption, and maintenance.

RESULTS

For reach and effectiveness, from before to after implementation for electronic referral, among adult patients who smoked, assessment of readiness to quit increased from 24.8% (2,126 of 8,569) to 93.2% (11,163 of 11,977), quitline referrals increased from 1.7% (143 of 8,569) to 11.3% (1,351 of 11,977), and 3.6% were connected with the quitline after implementation. For representativeness of reach, electronic referral rates were especially high for women, African Americans, and Medicaid patients. For adoption, 52.6% of staff who roomed at least 1 patient who smoked referred to the quitline. For maintenance, electronic referral rates fell by approximately 60% over 8 months but remained higher than pre-implementation rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Real-world implementation of an electronic health record-based electronic referral system markedly increased readiness to quit assessment and quitline referral rates in primary care patients. Future research should focus on implementation methods that produce more consistent implementation and better maintenance of electronic referral.

Health informatics and health equity: improving our reach and impact

Health informatics studies the use of information technology to improve human health. As informaticists, we seek to reduce the gaps between current healthcare practices and our societal goals for better health and healthcare quality, safety, or cost. It is time to recognize health equity as one of these societal goals-a point underscored by this Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association Special Focus Issue, "Health Informatics and Health Equity: Improving our Reach and Impact." This Special Issue highlights health informatics research that focuses on marginalized and underserved groups, health disparities, and health equity. In particular, this Special Issue intentionally showcases high-quality research and professional experiences that encompass a broad range of subdisciplines, methods, marginalized populations, and approaches to disparities. Building on this variety of submissions and other recent developments, we highlight contents of the Special Issue and offer an assessment of the state of research at the intersection of health informatics and health equity.

Evidence-based smoking cessation treatment: a comparison by healthcare system

BACKGROUND

A systems-level approach to smoking cessation treatment may optimize healthcare provider adherence to guidelines. Institutions such as the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) are unique in their systematic approach, but comparisons of provider behavior in different healthcare systems are limited.

METHODS

We surveyed general medicine providers and specialists in a large academic health center (AHC) and its affiliated VHA in the Mid-South in 2017 to determine the cross-sectional association of healthcare system in which the provider practiced (exposure: AHC versus VHA) with self-reported provision of evidence-based smoking cessation treatment (delivery of counseling plus smoking cessation medication or referral) at least once in the past 12 months (composite outcome). Multivariable logistic regression with adjustment for specialty was performed in 2017-2019.

RESULTS

Of 625 healthcare providers surveyed, 407 (65%) responded, and 366 (59%) were analyzed. Most respondents practiced at the AHC (273[75%] vs VHA 93[25%]) and were general internists (215[59%]); pulmonologists (39[11%]); hematologists/oncologists (69[19%]); and gynecologists (43[12%]). Most respondents (328[90%]) reported the primary outcome. The adjusted odds of evidence-based smoking cessation treatment were higher among VHA vs. AHC healthcare providers (aOR = 4.3; 95% CI 1.3-14.4; p = .02). Health systems differed by provision of individual treatment components, including smoking cessation medication use (98% VHA vs. 90% AHC, p = 0.02) and referral to smoking cessation services (91% VHA vs. 65% AHC p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

VHA healthcare providers were significantly more likely to provide evidence-based smoking cessation treatment compared to AHC healthcare providers. Healthcare systems' prioritization of and investment in smoking cessation treatment is critical to improving providers' adherence to guidelines.

Who are we missing with EHR-based smoking cessation treatments? A descriptive study of patients who smoke and do not regularly visit primary care clinics

Introduction

Most tobacco treatment efforts target healthcare settings, because about 75% of smokers in the United States visit a primary care provider annually. Yet, 25% of patients may be missed by such targeting.

Aims

To describe patients who smoke but infrequently visit primary care – their characteristics, rates of successful telephone contact, and acceptance of tobacco treatment.

Methods

Tobacco Cessation Outreach Specialists ‘cold-called’ those without a primary care visit in the past year, offering tobacco dependence treatment. Age, sex, insurance status, race, ethnicity, electronic health record (EHR) patient-portal status and outreach outcomes were reported.

Results

Of 3,407 patients identified as smokers in a health system registry, 565 (16.6%) had not seen any primary care provider in the past year. Among 271 of those called, 143 (53%) were successfully reached and 33 (23%) set a quit date. Those without visits tended to be younger, male, some-day versus every-day smokers (42 vs. 44 years, P = 0.004; 48% vs. 40% female, P = 0.0002, and 21% vs. 27% some-day, P = 0.003), and less active on the EHR patient portal (33% vs. 40%, P = 0.001).

Conclusions

A substantial proportion of patients who smoke are missed by traditional tobacco treatment interventions that require a primary care visit, yet many are receptive to quit smoking treatment offers.

Quitting the quitline: a qualitative study of patient experience of electronic referrals to quitlines

BACKGROUND

The use of electronic referrals (eReferrals) to state quitlines (QLs) for tobacco-using patients is a promising approach for addressing smoking cessation on a large scale. However, QL contact, enrollment, and completion rates are low. The purpose of this study was to examine the eReferral to QL process from the patient's perspective in order to inform strategies for improving QL engagement.

METHODS

We conducted interviews with 55 patients who agreed to an eReferral at a primary care visit to 1 of 8 safety-net community health centers in Cuyahoga County, Ohio (September 2017-August 2018). Interviews were designed to explore the experiences of three subgroups of patients who subsequently: 1) declined participation in the QL; 2) were unreachable by the QL; or 3) were enrolled in or had completed the QL program. Analysis was guided by a phenomenological approach designed to identify emergent themes.

RESULTS

Reasons for QL program non-completion included changing life circumstances and events making cessation unviable; misunderstandings about the QL; discomfort with telephonic counseling; perceived lack of time for counseling; cell phone barriers; and having already quit smoking. We found that some individuals who were no longer engaged with the QL still desired continued support from the QL.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants intentionally and unintentionally disengage from the QL for a wide variety of reasons, several of which are mediated by low socioeconomic status. Integrating QL care with community-based resources that address these mediators could be a promising strategy.

Pragmatic Application of the RE-AIM Framework to Evaluate the Implementation of Tobacco Cessation Programs Within NCI-Designated Cancer Centers

Tobacco cessation after cancer diagnosis leads to better patient outcomes. However, tobacco treatment services are frequently unavailable in cancer care settings, and multilevel implementation challenges can impede uptake of new programs. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) dedicated Cancer Moonshot funding through the Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I) for NCI-Designated Cancer Centers to implement or enhance the implementation of tobacco treatment services. We examined a pragmatic application of the RE-AIM framework (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) to evaluate tobacco treatment programs implemented within Cancer Centers funded through C3I. Using three C3I-funded Centers as examples, we describe how each RE-AIM construct was operationalized to evaluate the implementation of a wide range of cessation services (e.g., tobacco use screening, counseling, Quitline referral, pharmacotherapy) in this heterogeneous group of cancer care settings. We discuss the practical challenges encountered in assessing RE-AIM constructs in real world situations, including using the electronic health record (EHR) to aid in assessment. Reach and effectiveness evaluation required that Centers define the setting(s) where cessation services were implemented (to determine the “denominator”), enumerate the patient population, report current patient tobacco use, patient engagement in tobacco treatment, and 6-month cessation outcomes. To reduce site heterogeneity, increase data accuracy, and reduce burden, reach was frequently captured via standardized EHR enhancements that improved the identification of current smokers and tobacco treatment referrals. Effectiveness was determined by cessation outcomes (30-day point prevalence abstinence at 6-months post-engagement) assessed through a variety of data collection approaches. Adoption was measured by the characteristics and proportion of targeted cancer care settings and clinicians engaged in cessation service delivery. Implementation was assessed by examining the delivery of tobacco screening assessments and intervention components across sites, and provider-level implementation consistency. Maintenance assessments identified whether tobacco treatment services continued in the setting after implementation and documented the sustainability plan and organizational commitment to continued delivery. In sum, this paper demonstrates a pragmatic approach to using RE-AIM as an evaluation framework that yields relevant outcomes on common implementation metrics across widely differing tobacco treatment approaches and settings.

Design and Pilot Implementation of an Electronic Health Record-Based System to Automatically Refer Cancer Patients to Tobacco Use Treatment

Continued tobacco use after cancer diagnosis is detrimental to treatment and survivorship. The current reach of evidence-based tobacco treatments in cancer patients is low. As a part of the National Cancer Institute Cancer Center Cessation Initiative, the Mayo Clinic Cancer Center designed an electronic health record (EHR, Epic^©)-based process to automatically refer ambulatory oncology patients to tobacco use treatment, regardless of intent to cease tobacco use(“opt out”). The referral and patient scheduling, accomplished through a best practice advisory (BPA) directed to staff who room patients, does not require a co-signature from clinicians. This process was piloted for a six-week period starting in July of 2019 at the Division of Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. All oncology patients who were tobacco users were referred for tobacco treatment by the rooming staff (n = 210). Of these, 150 (71%) had a tobacco treatment appointment scheduled, and 25 (17%) completed their appointment. We conclude that an EHR-based “opt-out” approach to refer patients to tobacco dependence treatment that does not require active involvement by clinicians is feasible within the oncology clinical practice. Further work is needed to increase the proportion of scheduled patients who attend their appointments.

Effectiveness of an Opt-Out Electronic Heath Record-Based Tobacco Treatment Consult Service at an Urban Safety Net Hospital

BACKGROUND

To address the burden of tobacco use in underserved populations, our safety net hospital developed a tobacco treatment intervention consisting of an "opt-out" electronic health record-based best practice alert + order set, which triggers consultation to an inpatient tobacco treatment consult (TTC) service for all hospitalized smokers.

RESEARCH QUESTION

We sought to understand if the intervention would increase patient-level outcomes (receipt of tobacco treatment during hospitalization and at discharge; 6-month smoking abstinence) and improve hospital-wide performance on tobacco treatment metrics.

DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted two retrospective quasi-experimental analyses to examine effectiveness of the TTC service. Using a pragmatic design and multivariable logistic regression, we compared patient-level outcomes of receipt of nicotine replacement therapy and 6-month quit rates between smokers seen by the service (n = 505) and eligible smokers not seen because of time constraints (n = 680) between July 2016 and December 2016. In addition, we conducted an interrupted time series analysis to examine the effect of the TTC service on hospital-level performance measures, comparing reported Joint Commission measure rates for inpatient (Tob-2) and postdischarge (Tob-3) tobacco treatment preimplementation (January 2015-June 2016) vs postimplementation (July 2016-December 2017) of the intervention.

RESULTS

Compared with inpatient smokers not seen by the TTC service, smokers seen by the TTC service had higher odds of receiving nicotine replacement during hospitalization (260 of 505 [51.5%] vs 244 of 680 [35.9%]; adjusted ORs [AOR], 1.93 [95% CI, 1.5-2.45]) and at discharge (164 of 505 [32.5%] vs 84 of 680 [12.4%]; AOR, 3.41 [95% CI, 2.54-4.61]), as well as higher odds of 6-month smoking abstinence (75 of 505 [14.9%] vs 68 of 680 [10%]; AOR, 1.48 [95% CI, 1.03-2.12]). Hospital-wide, the intervention was associated with a change in slope trends for Tob-3 (P < .01), but not for Tob-2.

INTERPRETATION

The "opt-out" electronic health record-based TTC service at our large safety net hospital was effective at improving both patient-level outcomes and hospital-level performance metrics, and could be implemented at other safety net hospitals that care for hard-to-reach smokers.

Health System Implementation of a Tobacco Quitline eReferral

BACKGROUND

Proactive referrals through electronic orders (eReferrals) can increase patient connection with tobacco quitlines. More information is needed on "real-world" implementation of electronic health record tools to promote tobacco cessation while minimizing provider burden.

OBJECTIVES

This paper examines the health system implementation of an eReferral to a tobacco quitline without best practice alerts in primary care, specialty, and hospital settings in an academic health system.

METHODS

This is a prospective implementation study of a health system tobacco eReferral to a state quitline that was completed with an approach to minimize provider cognitive burden. Data are drawn from electronic health record data at University of California, Davis Health Systems (March 2013-February 2016).

RESULTS

Over 3 years, 16,083 encounters with smokers resulted in 1,137 eReferral orders (7.1%). Treatment reach was 1.6% for quitline services and 2.3% for outpatient group classes. While the group classes were offered to outpatient smokers, the eReferral order was included in an outpatient order set and eventually an automated inpatient discharge order set; no provider alerts were implemented. Referrals were sustained and doubled after inpatient order set implementation. Among all first time eReferral patients, 12.2% had a 6 to 12 month follow-up visit at which they were documented as nonsmoking.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates a quitline eReferral order can be successfully implemented and sustained with minimal promotion, without provider alerts and in conjunction with group classes. Reach and effectiveness were similar to previously described literature.