Effectiveness of a hospital-initiated smoking cessation programme: 2-year health and healthcare outcomes

Background

Tobacco-related illnesses are leading causes of death and healthcare use. Our objective was to determine whether implementation of a hospital-initiated smoking cessation intervention would reduce mortality and downstream healthcare usage.

Methods

A 2-group effectiveness study was completed comparing patients who received the ‘Ottawa Model’ for Smoking Cessation intervention (n=726) to usual care controls (n=641). Participants were current smokers, >17 years old, and recruited during admission to 1 of 14 participating hospitals in Ontario, Canada. Baseline data were linked to healthcare administrative data. Competing-risks regression analysis was used to compare outcomes between groups.

Results

The intervention group experienced significantly lower rates of all-cause readmissions, smoking-related readmissions, and all-cause emergency department (ED) visits at all time points. The largest absolute risk reductions (ARR) were observed for all-cause readmissions at 30 days (13.3% vs 7.1%; ARR, 6.1% (2.9% to 9.3%); p<0.001), 1 year (38.4% vs 26.7%; ARR, 11.7% (6.7% to 16.6%); p<0.001), and 2 years (45.2% vs 33.6%; ARR, 11.6% (6.5% to 16.8%); p<0.001). The greatest reduction in risk of all-cause ED visits was at 30 days (20.9% vs 16.4%; ARR, 4.5% (0.4% to 8.7%); p=0.03). Reduction in mortality was not evident at 30 days, but significant reductions were observed by year 1 (11.4% vs 5.4%; ARR 6.0% (3.1% to 9.0%); p<0.001) and year 2 (15.1% vs 7.9%; ARR, 7.3% (3.9% to 10.7%); p<0.001).

Conclusions

Considering the relatively low cost, greater adoption of hospital-initiated tobacco cessation interventions should be considered to improve patient outcomes and decrease subsequent healthcare usage.

Validation of the WHOQOL-BREF quality of life questionnaire for use with medical students

PURPOSE

The purpose of the present study was to validate the use of the abbreviated version of the World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL-BREF) questionnaire with medical students.

METHODS

A sample of 274 medical students in their fourth and fifth years of study (80% response rate) completed the WHOQOL-BREF instrument. The four-domain factor structure of the questionnaire was tested using confirmatory factor analysis. A variety of other tests of reliability and validity were conducted.

RESULTS

Goodness-of-fit indices from the confirmatory factor analysis were acceptable, and the factor structure of the WHOQOL-BREF was confirmed in this sample. Reliability was good, but three of the items showed strong ceiling effects.

CONCLUSION

The WHOQOL-BREF is valid to use with medical students to assess health-related quality of life. Some items, such as those inquiring about pain and medication, may not be suitable for medical students or young people in general.

The utility and predictive value of combinations of low penetrance genes for screening and risk prediction of colorectal cancer

Despite the fact that colorectal cancer (CRC) is a highly treatable form of cancer if detected early, a very low proportion of the eligible population undergoes screening for this form of cancer. Integrating a genomic screening profile as a component of existing screening programs for CRC could potentially improve the effectiveness of population screening by allowing the assignment of individuals to different types and intensities of screening and also by potentially increasing the uptake of existing screening programs. We evaluated the utility and predictive value of genomic profiling as applied to CRC, and as a potential component of a population-based cancer screening program. We generated simulated data representing a typical North American population including a variety of genetic profiles, with a range of relative risks and prevalences for individual risk genes. We then used these data to estimate parameters characterizing the predictive value of a logistic regression model built on genetic markers for CRC. Meta-analyses of genetic associations with CRC were used in building science to inform the simulation work, and to select genetic variants to include in logistic regression model-building using data from the ARCTIC study in Ontario, which included 1,200 CRC cases and a similar number of cancer-free population-based controls. Our simulations demonstrate that for reasonable assumptions involving modest relative risks for individual genetic variants, that substantial predictive power can be achieved when risk variants are common (e.g., prevalence > 20%) and data for enough risk variants are available (e.g., ~140–160). Pilot work in population data shows modest, but statistically significant predictive utility for a small collection of risk variants, smaller in effect than age and gender alone in predicting an individual’s CRC risk. Further genotyping and many more samples will be required, and indeed the discovery of many more risk loci associated with CRC before the question of the potential utility of germline genomic profiling can be definitively answered.

Metaphors for illness in contemporary media

Essayist Susan Sontag alerted us more than 20 years ago to the way in which clusters of metaphors attach themselves to our discussion of certain diseases, and the influence these metaphors exert on public attitudes to the diseases themselves and to those who experience them. This study of feature articles on five diseases-avian flu, cancer, diabetes, heart disease, and HIV/AIDS-published recently in the New York Times reveals distinct patterns of metaphor usage around each. While the metaphors used in relation to the diseases Sontag studied-cancer and HIV/AIDS-have become less emotive and more positively informative, the sensationalist connotations of the metaphor clusters that have formed around two diseases that were not on the agenda for wide public debate in her time-avian flu and diabetes-are hardly congruent with the serious intent of the articles in which they appeared. By contrast, discussion of heart disease involved very limited use of metaphor. The article ends with a call for journalists and medical professionals to become more aware of the impact of the metaphors they use and to collaborate in developing sets of metaphors that are factually informative and enhance communication between doctors and their patients.