Computer-Facilitated 5A's for Smoking Cessation: A Randomized Trial of Technology to Promote Provider Adherence

Effectiveness of a computer-facilitated intervention on improving provider delivery of tobacco treatment in a thoracic surgery and oncology outpatient setting: A pilot study

INTRODUCTION

Effective tobacco treatments are available but are often not delivered to individuals with an actual or potential diagnosis of thoracic malignancy. The specific aims of this study were to identify the prevalence of tobacco use and examine the effectiveness of the Clinical and community Effort Against Smoking and secondhand smoke Exposure (CEASE), a system-level computer-facilitated intervention, to improve provider delivery of tobacco treatment in a thoracic surgery and oncology outpatient setting.

METHODS

A pre-post-test design was used to assess the effectiveness of CEASE. A 3-step approach was used to integrate tobacco treatment into routine care: ask about tobacco use, assist with cessation, and refer to a quitline. An end-of-visit survey was conducted to collect prevalence of tobacco use and delivery of tobacco treatment. Descriptive statistics and Fisher's exact test were used for analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 218 individuals were enrolled; 105 participants were in usual care (UC) and 113 were in the CEASE group. Of those who enrolled, 27.6% were never smokers in UC and 27.7% in CEASE, 60% were former smokers in UC and 50% in CEASE, and 12.4% were current smokers in UC and 21.4% in CEASE. Significant differences were noted in delivery of tobacco treatment with 15.4% having received tobacco treatment in UC compared to 62.5% in CEASE (p<0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

A computer-facilitated intervention increased provider delivery of tobacco treatment in a thoracic surgery and oncology outpatient setting. This intervention provided a low-resource approach that has the potential to be scaled and implemented more broadly.

American College of Lifestyle Medicine Expert Consensus Statement: Lifestyle Medicine for Optimal Outcomes in Primary Care

OBJECTIVE

Identify areas of consensus on integrating lifestyle medicine (LM) into primary care to achieve optimal outcomes.

METHODS

Experts in both LM and primary care followed an a priori protocol for developing consensus statements. Using an iterative, online process, panel members expressed levels of agreement with statements, resulting in classification as consensus, near consensus, or no consensus.

RESULTS

The panel identified 124 candidate statements addressing: (1) Integration into Primary Care, (2) Delivery Models, (3) Provider Education, (4) Evidence-base for LM, (5) Vital Signs, (6) Treatment, (7) Resource Referral and Reimbursement, (8) Patient, Family, and Community Involvement; Shared Decision-Making, (9) Social Determinants of Health and Health Equity, and (10) Barriers to LM. After three iterations of an online Delphi survey, statement revisions, and removal of duplicative statements, 65 statements met criteria for consensus, 24 for near consensus, and 35 for no consensus. Consensus was reached on key topics that included LM being recognized as an essential component of primary care in patients of all ages, including LM as a foundational element of health professional education.

CONCLUSION

The practice of LM in primary care can be strengthened by applying these statements to improve quality of care, inform policy, and identify areas for future research.

Factors Associated with Smoking Cessation and the Receipt of Cessation Services in a Public, Safety-Net Primary Care System

BACKGROUND

Prevalence of smoking is high among patients receiving care in safety-net settings, and there is a need to better understand patient factors associated with smoking cessation and receipt of cessation services.

OBJECTIVE

To identify patient factors associated with smoking cessation attempts and receipt of cessation counseling and pharmacotherapy in a large safety-net health system.

DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis using EHR data in a safety-net system in San Francisco, CA.

PARTICIPANTS

We included 7384 adult current smokers who had at least three unique primary care encounters with documented smoking status between August 2019 and April 2022.

MAIN MEASURES

We assessed four outcomes using multivariate generalized estimating equation models: (1) any cessation attempt, indicating a transition in smoking status from "current smoker" to "former smoker"; (2) sustained cessation, defined as transition in smoking status from current smoker to former smokers for two or more consecutive visits; (3) receipt of smoking cessation counseling from healthcare providers; and (4) receipt of pharmacotherapy.

KEY RESULTS

Of 7384 current adult smokers, 17.6% had made any cessation attempt, and of those 66.5% had sustained cessation. Most patients (81.1%) received counseling and 41.8% received pharmacotherapy. Factors associated with lower odds of any cessation attempt included being aged 45-64, non-Hispanic black, and experiencing homelessness. The factor associated with lower odds of sustained cessation was being male. Factors associated with lower odds of receiving counseling were being insured by Medicaid or being uninsured. Factors associated with lower odds of receiving pharmacotherapy included speaking languages other than English, being male, and identifying as racial and ethnic minorities.

CONCLUSIONS

Health system interventions could close the gap in access to smoking cessation services for unhoused and racial/ethnic minority patients in safety-net settings, thereby increasing cessation among these populations.

Implementation mapping for tobacco cessation in a federally qualified health center

Background

Implementation mapping (IM) is a promising five-step method for guiding planning, execution, and maintenance of an innovation. Case examples are valuable for implementation practitioners to understand considerations for applying IM. This pilot study aimed to determine the feasibility of using IM within a federally qualified health center (FQHC) with limited funds and a 1-year timeline.

Methods

An urban FQHC partnered with an academic team to employ IM for implementing a computerized strategy of tobacco cessation: the 5A's (Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, Arrange). Each step of IM was supplemented with theory-driven methods and frameworks. Data collection included surveys and interviews with clinic staff, analyzed via rapid data analysis.

Results

Medical assistants and clinicians were identified as primary implementers of the 5A's intervention. Salient determinants of change included the perceived compatibility and relative priority of 5A's. Performance objectives and change objectives were derived to address these determinants, along with a suite of implementation strategies. Despite indicators of adoptability and acceptability of the 5A's, reductions in willingness to adopt the implementation package occurred over time and the intervention was not adopted by the FQHC within the study timeframe. This is likely due to the strain of the COVID-19 pandemic altering health clinic priorities.

Conclusions

Administratively, the five IM steps are feasible to conduct with FQHC staff within 1 year. However, this study did not obtain its intended outcomes. Lessons learned include the importance of re-assessing barriers over time and ensuring a longer timeframe to observe implementation outcomes.

Feasibility of collecting computer-facilitated patient-reported tobacco use, interest, and preferences for smoking cessation in an outpatient thoracic surgery and oncology setting

INTRODUCTION

Effective strategies are needed to facilitate collection of tobacco use information and integrate smoking cessation treatment into the routine care of all high-risk patient populations to improve clinical outcomes. The objective of this study was to establish the feasibility of collecting computer-facilitated patient-reported tobacco use, identify patient interest and preferences for smoking cessation in an outpatient thoracic surgery and oncology setting with higher prevalence of tobacco use than the general population.

METHODS

A brief patient-administered tobacco screening survey was handed out on an iPad in the waiting room of a thoracic surgery and oncology practice setting to sequential patients with varying diagnoses. Tobacco use, household exposure to tobacco, and interest and preferences for smoking cessation treatment were recorded. Descriptive statistics and Pearson’s chi-squared test were used for analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 599 surveys administered, 594 (99%) were completed. Self-reported smoking status included 36.4% (n=218) never smokers, 53.3% (n=319) former smokers, and 10.4% (n=62) current smokers. Among current smokers, 45.2% (n=28) were interested in receiving smoking cessation treatment. Preferences for treatment included: 21.4% (n=6) who wanted Quitline only, 25% (n=7) medication alone, and 53.6% (n=15) combined Quitline plus medication. Current smokers (55.7%, n=34) were more likely to live in households with tobacco exposure compared to those with former (11.4%, n=36) or never smokers (8.3%, n=18) (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing a computer-facilitated system to screen for current smoking and provide smoking cessation services was feasible in the outpatient thoracic surgery and oncology setting. Almost half of the smokers indicated an interest in receipt of smoking cessation treatment. Household exposure was more frequent among current smokers, therefore routine screening for secondhand smoke exposure from other household members is an important consideration in developing smoking cessation treatment plans to mitigate health risks among vulnerable patient populations.

Rate and correlates of tobacco treatment during a primary care visit for a largely urban and African American sample of smokers

Introduction

Evidence-based treatments for tobacco use are under-utilized and primary care visits may be an opportune time to address this gap. This study examined the rate at which primary care visits included tobacco use treatment and examined patient demographics, smoking characteristics, attitudes about tobacco use treatments, and comorbidities as correlates of treatment provision.

Methods

This prospective study assessed demographics, smoking characteristics, attitudes about tobacco use treatments, and comorbidities via interview prior to a primary care visit among 105 patients. One week following the appointment, 85 patients were reassessed for the tobacco use treatments they received during their appointment (i.e., asked about their tobacco use, advised to quit, and provided with a referral to a tobacco use treatment program or an FDA-approved tobacco use medication).

Results

93% of patients were asked about their tobacco use, 74% were advised to quit, 37% were provided with a referral for tobacco use treatment, and 27% received an FDA-approved medication (16% NRT, 11% varenicline or bupropion). Patients with higher quit motivation and who endorsed that medications can reduce cravings were more likely to report receiving tobacco use medication. Patients with a self-reported substance abuse history were less likely to report receiving tobacco use medications.

Conclusions

The provision of tobacco use medications within primary care remains low. Strategies to increase patient quit motivation and help patients understand that tobacco use medications can mitigate cravings may increase use. Strategies may also be needed to ensure that patients with comorbid substance abuse still receive tobacco use treatments.

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.

When primary care providers and smokers meet: a systematic review and metasynthesis

Primary Care Providers (PCPs) often deal with patients on daily clinical practice without knowing anything about their smoking status and willingness to quit. The aim of this metasynthesis is to explore the PCPs and patients who are smokers perspectives regarding the issue of smoking cessation within primary care settings. It relies on the model of meta-ethnography and follows thematic synthesis procedures. Twenty-two studies are included, reporting on the view of 580 participants. Three main themes emerge: (i) What lacks, (ii) Some expectations but no request, and (iii) How to address the issue and induce patients' motivation. Our results reveal a global feeling of a lack of legitimacy among PCPs when it comes to addressing the issue of tobacco and smoking cessation with their patients, even though they have developed creative strategies based on what is at the core of their practice, that is proximity, continuity, long-term and trustworthy relationship.

Shared Tobacco Cessation Curriculum Website for Health Professionals: Longitudinal Analysis of User and Utilization Data Over a Period of 15 Years

BACKGROUND

Because tobacco use is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, it is essential to prepare health care providers to assist patients with quitting smoking. Created in 1999, the "Rx for Change" tobacco cessation curriculum was designed to fill an educational gap in cessation training of health professional students. In 2004, a website was launched to host teaching materials and tools to support the efforts of educators and clinicians.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to characterize users and utilization of a website hosting shared teaching materials over a period of 15 years.

METHODS

Data from the Rx for Change website have been collected prospectively since its inception. In this study, end-user data were analyzed to determine user characteristics, how they heard about the website, intended use of the materials, and numbers of logins and file downloads over time.

RESULTS

Total number of website registrants was 15,576, representing all 50 states in the United States and 94 countries. The most represented discipline was pharmacy (6393/15,505, 41.2%), and nearly half of users were students or residents. The most common source of referral to the website was a faculty member or colleague (33.4%, 2591/7758), and the purpose of enhancing personal knowledge and skills was the most commonly cited intended use of the curricular materials. A total of 259,835 file downloads occurred during the 15-year period, and the most commonly downloaded file type was ancillary handouts.

CONCLUSIONS

The Rx for Change website demonstrated sustained use, providing immediate access to tobacco cessation teaching and practice tools for educators and clinicians over the first 15 years of its existence. The website has a broad interprofessional reach, and the consistent utilization over time and large number of downloads provide evidence for the feasibility and utility of a public-access website hosting teaching materials. The shared curriculum approach averts the need for educators to create their own materials for teaching tobacco cessation to students in the health professions.

Smoking cessation and shared decision-making practices about lung cancer screening among primary care providers

Objective

We describe primary care providers’ current practice patterns related to smoking cessation counseling and lung cancer screening (LCS).

Methods

Family, internal medicine, and pulmonary medicine providers from two medical centers were asked to complete an electronic survey to report their practice patterns.

Results

Of 52 participating providers, most reported initiating three major components of a smoking cessation intervention often or very often: advise to quit (50, 96%), assess willingness to quit (47, 90%), and assist with counseling or pharmacotherapy (49, 94%). However, other components were less commonly initiated such as arranging follow‐ups (only 11 providers indicated recommending them often or very often, 21%) and less than half of providers reported that they often or very often recommend cessation counseling or pharmacotherapy of any type (except varenicline), though family medicine providers were more likely to recommend pharmacotherapy compared to the other specialists (p < 0.01). The majority of providers (47, 92%) reported that they engage in informed/shared decision‐making about LCS, although only about one‐third (17, 33%) indicated using a patient decision aid. Pulmonary medicine providers were more likely to use decision aids than providers from internal or family medicine (p < 0.04).

Conclusions

Within the context of LCS, primary care providers report often having conversations about smoking cessation with their patients who smoke, have no clear preference for type of treatment, and rarely use follow‐up calls or visits pertaining to quitting smoking. While many providers report engaging in shared decision‐making about LCS, few use a decision aid for this conversation.

Prediction of Smoking Abstinence in Women Living With Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection

BACKGROUND

This study examined whether baseline negative emotional states (depression and anxiety) would predict craving for cigarettes and other nicotine withdrawal symptoms in early abstinence and whether those emotional states and withdrawal symptoms would predict failure in quitting smoking at 3 months postquit among U.S. women living with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).

METHOD

The study is a secondary analysis of data from two smoking cessation studies of women living with HIV. Craving for cigarettes and other withdrawal symptoms were assessed weekly with a total of 229 observations during the first 4 weeks following quit day. Descriptive statistics were used to examine baseline characteristics of the participants. A random growth curve model was used to estimate between-person differences in a within-person trend of changes in the withdrawal symptoms. A binary logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of short-term smoking abstinence.

RESULTS

Baseline anxiety was a predictor of postquit nicotine withdrawal symptoms but baseline depression was not. Neither baseline anxiety nor depression predicted postquit craving for cigarettes. Participants who received an HIV-tailored smoking cessation intervention showed a greater decline in craving symptom than those who received an attention-controlled intervention. HIV-tailored intervention and less craving predicted smoking abstinence at 3-month follow-up.

DISCUSSION

Compared to an attention-controlled intervention, an HIV-tailored intervention effectively decreased craving for cigarette smoking after quitting-which effectively increased the rate of short-term smoking abstinence in women living with HIV.

Patterns of cigarette, e-cigarette, and cannabis use among adult smokers in primary care 2014-2015

BACKGROUND

Poly-use of tobacco, cannabis, and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) is an emerging problem in the general population. The current study investigated poly-use of these products and receipt of smoking cessation counseling in a primary care setting.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional secondary data analysis from a trial of a tablet intervention to increase provider delivery of the 5As (Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, Arrange follow-up), a brief counseling intervention for smoking cessation, in 3 diverse primary care clinics in San Francisco, CA from 2014 to 2015. Participants were currently smoking cigarettes (N = 601; mean age = 50.8; 38.1% female) and reported information on past 30-day cigarette and e-cigarette use and past 3-month cannabis use. We classified participants into 4 groups: (1) cigarette-only, (2) dual-use of cigarettes and e-cigarettes, (3) dual-use of cigarettes and cannabis, (4) poly-use of cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and cannabis, and examined correlates of use.

RESULTS

Only cigarette smoking was reported by 48.6% of participants, 30.4% reported use of cigarettes and cannabis, 10.5% reported use of cigarettes and e-cigarettes, and 10.5% reported use of cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and cannabis. Cigarette-only smokers did not differ from other groups by cigarette smoking behavior and motivation to quit. Patients reporting dual-use of cigarettes and e-cigarettes had a higher likelihood of receiving the Arrange step and all 5As compared to cigarette-only smokers.

CONCLUSIONS

Providers should screen for co-use of cigarettes and other nicotine/cannabis products and consider co-use when delivering smoking cessation treatment and evaluating treatment outcomes. Development of guidelines to help facilitate provider training is needed.