It Takes Two to Tango: Patients' and Providers' Perspectives in Tobacco Cessation and Head/Neck Cancer

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.

Cigarette smoking cessation, duration of smoking abstinence, and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma prognosis

BACKGROUND

Tobacco use is a major risk factor for developing head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). However, the prognostic associations with smoking cessation are limited. The authors assessed whether smoking cessation and increased duration of abstinence were associated with improved overall (OS) and HNSCC-specific survival.

METHODS

Clinicodemographic and smoking data from patients with HNSCC at Princess Margaret Cancer Center (2006-2019) were prospectively collected. Multivariable Cox and Fine and Gray competing-risk models were used to assess the impact of smoking cessation and duration of abstinence on overall mortality and HNSCC-specific/noncancer mortality, respectively.

RESULTS

Among 2482 patients who had HNSCC, former smokers (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58-0.87; p = .001; N = 841) had a reduced risk of overall mortality compared with current smokers (N = 931). Compared with current smokers, former smokers who quit >10 years before diagnosis (long-term abstinence; n = 615) had the most improved OS (aHR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.56-0.93; p = .001). The 5-year actuarial rates of HNSCC-specific and noncancer deaths were 16.8% and 9.4%, respectively. Former smokers (aHR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.54-0.95; p = .019) had reduced HNSCC-specific mortality compared with current smokers, but there was no difference in noncancer mortality. Abstinence for >10 years was associated with decreased HNSCC-specific death compared with current smoking (aHR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46-0.91; p = .012). Smoking cessation with a longer duration of quitting was significantly associated with reduced overall and HNSCC-specific mortality in patients who received primary radiation.

CONCLUSIONS

Smoking cessation before the time of diagnosis reduced overall mortality and cancer-specific mortality among patients with HNSCC, but no difference was observed in noncancer mortality. Long-term abstinence (>10 pack-years) had a significant OS and HNSCC-specific survival benefit.

Developing a Collaborative, Team-Based Smoking Cessation Treatment Program in an Outpatient Oncology Setting

PURPOSE

Because clinical specialists often lack time and training to address secondary health issues such as smoking cessation, the National Cancer Institute Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I) has mobilized cancer centers to develop systems for treating patients' tobacco dependence.

METHODS

One university-based cancer center was able to develop a program that formalized smoking treatment using a collaborative, multidisciplinary care team with overlapping expertise in cancer care, medication management, and tobacco cessation. Program planners delivered tobacco cessation services in the outpatient setting by automating identification of eligible patients using a tobacco registry in the electronic health records, directly involving oncology pharmacists in medication oversight, using dedicated tobacco treatment specialists to provide cessation services, and engaging oncologists through active communications protocols. Evaluators used Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model as the guiding framework for a qualitative assessment of program development and implementation. Evaluators also measured provider satisfaction and utilization of services, program reach, and smoking cessation outcomes 6 months post enrollment.

RESULTS

During the evaluation period (July 1, 2018-September 30, 2019), the smoking cessation program engaged 96% of eligible patients (n = 214 of 223 eligible); 82% of those enrolled in the program (n = 183). At 6-month follow-up, 29.1% of enrolled patients self-reported 30-day point prevalence abstinence (n = 53) and 34.9% (n = 64) reported 7-day point prevalence abstinence (intent-to-treat rates).

CONCLUSION

Using a team-based approach that leverages individual expertise and interprofessional collaboration to provide patient-centered treatment, a smoking cessation program can identify and treat eligible patients in specialty clinics.

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.