Tobacco use behaviors and views on engaging in clinical trials for tobacco cessation among individuals who experience homelessness

Background

Clinical trials that include contingency management for smoking cessation have shown promising results for short-term quitting, but none have explored this approach for long-term abstinence in people experiencing homelessness. We designed a clinical trial of an extended contingency management intervention for smoking cessation for people experiencing homelessness. This study has two aims: (1) to explore tobacco use behaviors, and views toward smoking cessation, and (2) to explore factors influencing acceptability of engaging in such a trial in a sample of adult smokers experiencing homelessness.

Methods

We administered a questionnaire to obtain information on tobacco use behaviors and conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 26 patients who had experienced homelessness and were patients at a safety net health clinic in San Francisco, California, where we planned to pilot the intervention. We obtained information on triggers for tobacco use, prior cessation experiences, attitudes toward cessation, attitudes toward engaging in a clinical trial for cessation, and factors that might influence participation in our proposed contingency management clinical trial. We analyzed transcripts using content analysis.

Results

Participants described the normative experiences of smoking, co-occurring substance use, and the use of tobacco to relieve stress as barriers to quitting. Despite these barriers, most participants had attempted to quit smoking and most were interested in engaging in a clinical trial as a method to quit smoking. Participants noted that desirable features of the trial include: receiving financial incentives to quit smoking, having a flexible visit schedule, having the study site be easily accessible, and having navigators with lived experiences of homelessness.

Conclusion

A patient-centric clinical trial design that includes incentives, flexible visits and navigators from the community may increase feasibility of engaging in clinical trials among individuals experiencing homelessness.

Contingency management to promote smoking cessation in people experiencing homelessness: Leveraging the electronic health record in a pilot, pragmatic randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Cigarette smoking is disproportionately high among people experiencing homelessness (PEH). Contingency management (CM) is a strategy that has shown considerable efficacy for smoking cessation and has been used in short-term studies of smoking abstinence in PEH. We describe a pilot, pragmatic randomized controlled trial protocol, which leverages an electronic health record (EHR) infrastructure to assess the feasibility and acceptability of an extended CM intervention to improve long-term abstinence in PEH.

METHODS

We will conduct the study at three safety-net clinics in San Francisco among 90 adults experiencing homelessness who smoke cigarettes currently and have a desire to quit. We will encourage all participants to receive smoking cessation services that include behavioral counseling and pharmacotherapy through their clinics. We will randomly assign participants to an extended CM intervention group with escalating incentives contingent on abstinence or to a control group with fixed incentives for attending study visits. We will use the EHR to recruit participants, track receipt of counseling and pharmacotherapy during clinical care, and communicate with providers on participants' progress. CM participants will get escalating incentives for demonstration of carbon monoxide-verified abstinence over 6 months, with a total possible earnings of $475. Control participants will receive a fixed incentive of $5 for attending study visits, totaling $125. We will conduct the carbon-monoxide verified abstinence assessments-which will determine CM incentive amounts-daily during week 1, bi-weekly through week 4, weekly through week 13, and monthly through week 24. Measures of feasibility and acceptability, both quantitative and qualitative, will include assessments of screening and recruitment, adherence to study visits, engagement in smoking cessation clinical care, retention, and participant satisfaction. One of the primary clinical outcomes will be biochemically verified 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 6 months. We will measure secondary outcomes, which will include 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 2 weeks, 3 and 12 months.

DISCUSSION

This trial will allow us to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a CM cessation intervention among PEH. The protocol's clinical setting and use of EHRs gives it significant potential for scalability. If found to be feasible, acceptable, and subsequently efficacious in a larger trial, the intervention could reduce tobacco-related health disparities by increasing long-term smoking abstinence among this vulnerable population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04982952. Registered on July 29, 2021.

The smoke-free home study: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial of a smoke-free home intervention in permanent supportive housing

Background

Formerly chronically homeless adults who live in permanent supportive housing (PSH) have high prevalence of smoking. It is uncommon to find smoke-free policies in PSH because of the concern that such policies contradict PSH’s harm reduction framework and could increase homelessness should residents lose their housing because of the policy. However, in the absence of such policies, non-smoking PSH residents face the harmful effects of secondhand smoke exposure while residents who smoke see increased risks from high rates of smoking throughout their residence. Our pilot work highlighted the feasibility and acceptability of an intervention designed to promote voluntary adoption of a smoke-free home. Here we report a protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial of the smoke-free home intervention for formerly chronically homeless residents in PSH.

Methods

The smoke-free home intervention provides face-to-face counseling and instruction to PSH residents on how to adopt a smoke-free home and offers training for PSH staff on how to refer residents to tobacco cessation services. We will randomize 20 PSH sites in the San Francisco Bay Area to either the intervention or wait-list control arms. We will enroll 400 PSH residents who smoke cigarettes in their housing unit and 120 PSH staff who work at the sites. At baseline, three- and six-months follow-up, we will ask residents to report their tobacco use and cessation behaviors and adoption of smoke-free homes. We will ask staff to answer questions on their knowledge, attitudes, practices, and barriers related to supporting residents’ smoking cessation. The primary outcome for PSH residents is adoption of smoke-free homes for 90 days or more at six-months follow-up, and the secondary outcome is point prevalence tobacco abstinence. The primary outcome for PSH staff is change in Smoking Knowledge Attitudes Practices survey score.

Discussion

Voluntary adoption of smoke-free homes is a promising approach for reducing exposure to secondhand smoke and reducing tobacco use among a population facing high rates of tobacco-related disease, and is aligned with PSH’s harm reduction framework. Findings from this study have the potential to inform adoption of tobacco control policies among vulnerable populations most at risk for smoking-related harms.

Trial registration

This study was registered with the U.S. National Institute of Health Clinical Trials register on April 22, 2021: NCT04855357.

Guest Support for Outdoor Smoke-Free Policies within a Homeless Shelter

Roughly 70-80% of adults experiencing homelessness smoke cigarettes. Smoke-free living/workplace policies are an empirically-supported tobacco control intervention. However, homeless shelters may be reluctant to implement smoke-free policies due to fears of it discouraging current/potential shelter guests from taking refuge there. The current study was meant to characterize guest support for on-property smoke-free policies within a homeless shelter with an extant indoor tobacco use ban amongst never smokers, former smokers, and current smokers to provide data on this point. Participants comprised a convenience sample of adult guests of a homeless shelter in Texas (N = 394, 28.2% women; 10.2% former; and 75.9% current smokers). Participant sociodemographics, smoking status, behavioral health diagnoses, and support for two versions of an on-property outdoor courtyard smoke-free policy (one partial, one complete) were assessed. Data were collected in two waves in a repeated cross-sectional design. Overall, 64.0% of participants supported a partial, and 32.0% a full smoking ban. Logistic regressions, controlling for wave of data collection, age, sex, and any additional significant predictors from a semi-adjusted model, examined associations between participant characteristics and policy support. Older participants (OR = 1.024, CI_0.95 = 1.005-1.044), non-veterans (OR = 2.523, CI_0.95 = 1.156-5.506), former smokers (OR = 2.730, CI_0.95 = 1.191-6.258), and those without severe mental illness (OR = 1.731, CI_0.95 = 1.061-2.824) had significantly greater odds of supporting a partial smoking ban. Relative to current smokers, never smokers (OR = 3.902, CI_0.95 = 2.133-7.137) and former smokers (OR = 8.257, CI_0.95 = 3.951-17.258) had significantly greater odds of supporting a complete smoking ban. The implementation of smoke-free living/workplace policies in homeless shelters may enjoy more support from guests-specifically, non-smokers-than anticipated by shelter administrators. Aside from reducing ambient smoke exposure for never and former smokers, these policies can help to reduce ubiquitous smoking cues for those who may want to quit, are undergoing a quit attempt, or are trying to maintain abstinence. Interventionists might partner with shelter guests, particularly smokers, to inform the roll-out of such policies for maximal acceptance and adoption.

Harm reduction outcomes and practices in Housing First: A mixed-methods systematic review

BACKGROUND

Harm reduction is a central tenet of Housing First. As the intervention has been shown to stably house people experiencing chronic homelessness across the lifespan with complex behavioural health needs, it is critical to understand the harm reduction outcomes and practices in Housing First.

METHODS

A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was conducted of five databases: PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Google Scholar. Harm reduction outcomes and practices in Housing First were examined in four domains: substance-related harms, viral health, sexual health, and harm reduction service use.

RESULTS

A total of 35 articles were included in the review, 23 of which examined harm reduction outcomes and 12 of which investigated harm reduction practices in Housing First. Harm reduction outcome studies focused mostly on nonspecific substance use problems, with Housing First being found to have minimal effects in this domain. More severe harms, such as delirium tremens and substance use-related deaths, have been minimally explored, though preliminary evidence is promising. Viral health, sexual health, and harm reduction service use outcomes were the focus of few studies. Research on harm reduction practices highlighted that Housing First providers experience both flexibility and ambiguity in their work using a harm reduction approach, and the importance of empathetic working relationships for engagement in harm reduction work.

CONCLUSIONS

Harm reduction outcomes in Housing First remain underexamined and any conclusions of the intervention's impacts in this domain would be premature. Effective harm reduction practices in Housing First require strong working relationships between staff and tenants.

Policy Support for Smoke-Free and E-Cigarette Free Multiunit Housing

PURPOSE

Estimate public support for prohibiting multiunit housing (MUH) e-cigarette and cigarette use.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Data from an online panel survey.

SAMPLE

A Fall 2018 nationally representative sample of 3,415 (99.3% response rate) United States (US) adults 18-64 years old.

MEASURES

Policy support for prohibiting MUH smoking and e-cigarette use, sociodemographics, and tobacco perceptions and behaviors.

ANALYSIS

Weighted multivariate logistic regression examined predictors of support for prohibiting 1) cigarette use and 2) e-cigarette use in MUH.

RESULTS

Most respondents expressed support for prohibiting smoking (76.9%) and e-cigarette use (74.0%) in MUH. About 17% (n = 588) of the sample lived in MUH, and living in MUH was not predictive of support for either policy. For both cigarette and e-cigarette policies, current smokers (n = 630; OR = 0.44, p < 0.001; OR = 0.59, p < 0.01) and current e-cigarette users (n = 305; OR = 0.42, p < 0.001; OR = 0.22, p < 0.001) had lower odds of support. Notably, while most smokers supported prohibiting cigarette (51.4%) and e-cigarette use in MUH (51.1%), there was less support among current e-cigarette users for prohibiting cigarette (48.1%) and e-cigarette use in MUH (34.5%).

CONCLUSION

Majority support for prohibiting smoking and e-cigarette use in MUH is promising for policy adoption; however, lower support of both policies among e-cigarette users needs to be examined, as increasing use of e-cigarettes may be shifting social norms away from support for smoke free housing policies.

Smoke-Free Home Intervention in Permanent Supportive Housing: A Multifaceted Intervention Pilot

INTRODUCTION

Smoke-free homes (SFHs), the voluntary adoption of home smoking restrictions, are associated with reduced secondhand smoke exposure. However, SFHs are uncommon in permanent supportive housing (PSH) for formerly homeless adults, who have fivefold higher smoking rates than the general population. We pilot-tested a brief intervention to increase voluntary adoption of SFHs among PSH residents in the San Francisco Bay Area.

AIMS AND METHODS

We pilot-tested a brief intervention to increase voluntary adoption of SFHs among PSH residents in the San Francisco Bay Area. Rest of the methods, PSH residents (n = 100) and staff (n = 62) from 15 PSH sites participated in the intervention between October 2017 and February 2018. Research staff provided counseling to PSH residents on how to adopt an SFH and trained PSH staff on how to counsel residents on smoking cessation. The primary outcome was self-reported voluntary adoption of an SFH for ≥90 days, and the secondary outcome was carbon monoxide-verified PPA at 6-month follow-up. PSH staff completed the Smoking Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices survey at baseline and 3-month follow-up.

RESULTS

At 6 months, 31.3% of PSH residents had adopted an SFH (vs. 13.0% at baseline) and 16.9% reported carbon monoxide-verified PPA. A positive attitude toward an SFH policy was associated with increased odds of SFH adoption (adjusted odds ratio = 8.68, 95% confidence interval: 2.42, 31.17). Voluntary SFH adoption was associated with increased PPA (adjusted odds ratio = 26.27, 95% confidence interval: 3.43, 201.30). PSH staff reported improved attitudes toward and self-efficacy in delivering cessation care, and decreased barriers to discussing smoking cessation among PSH residents between baseline and 3-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

In this single-arm study, a brief intervention increased SFH adoption and PPA among PSH residents.

IMPLICATIONS

To date, few interventions have addressed SFHs and their association with tobacco use among PSH residents. A "ground-up" approach that relies on buy-in from residents and that promotes voluntary SFHs is an innovative way to increase smoke-free living environments in PSH. This approach could pave a pathway for smoke-free policy implementation in these sites. PSH can play a role in reducing the burden of tobacco use by empowering its residents to adopt voluntary SFHs, which could increase smoking cessation among residents.

Developing Tobacco Control Interventions in Permanent Supportive Housing for Formerly Homeless Adults

Smoke-free policies are effective population-based strategies to reduce tobacco use yet are uncommon in permanent supportive housing (PSH) for formerly homeless individuals who have high rates of smoking. In this study, we partnered with six supportive housing agencies in the San Francisco Bay Area to examine the implementation of smoke-free policies and cessation services. We administered a questionnaire and conducted in-depth, semistructured interviews with agency directors (n = 6), property management staff (n = 23), and services staff (n = 24) from 23 PSH sites on the barriers to implementing tobacco control interventions. All properties restricted smoking in indoor shared areas, but only two had policies restricting smoking in living areas. While there was staff consensus that smoke-free policies were important to reduce tobacco-related harm, participants disagreed on whether smoke-free policies were aligned with PSH's harm reduction framework. Residents' comorbid mental illness and substance use and the lack of appropriate enforcement tools were barriers to implementation. Using these formative findings, we present a framework for a toolkit of strategies to increase implementation of smoke-free policies and cessation interventions in PSH. Successful implementation of indoor smoke-free policies in PSH will require concurrent cessation services to support smoking cessation efforts and address the mental health and substance use needs of residents.

Responses to Graphic Warning Labels among Low-income Smokers

Objective: Graphic warning labels (GWLs) are effective in communicating tobacco-related harms. Methods: In this mixed-methods study, we used purposive sampling to recruit 100 low-income smokers in the San Francisco Bay Area between October 2017 and February 2018 to participate in an intervention promoting smoke-free homes. We presented the 2009 Food and Drug Administration-proposed GWLs and explored perceptions of affect, efficacy, and appeal using questionnaires at baseline, 3- and 6-months follow-up. Because of participants' interest in this topic, we subsequently conducted a qualitative sub-study among 20 participants exploring perceived efficacy of GWLs on smoking cessation. Results: In all, 87.3% and 59.2% agreed that GWLs were useful and would motivate cessation behaviors, respectively, at baseline. We found that the most common responses were shock (61.8%) and disgust (55.3%), whereas anger (29.0%) and annoyance (19.7%) were less common. Participants also reported that GWLs unequivocally illustrating smoking's harmful effects were more appealing than non-specific images, as were images that depicted positive cessation-related effects. Conclusions: GWLs appear to be an important health communication among low-income smokers. Future studies on GWLs should examine the association of negative affect and cessation among this population.