Perceived cessation treatment effectiveness, medication preferences, and barriers to quitting among light and moderate/heavy homeless smokers

Tobacco use characteristics, treatment preferences, and motivation to quit among adults accessing a day shelter in Oklahoma City

Background

Smoking rates are exceptionally high among adults experiencing homelessness (AEH). Research is needed to inform treatment approaches in this population.

Methods

Participants (n=404) were adults who accessed an urban day shelter and reported current smoking. Participants completed surveys regarding their sociodemographic characteristics, tobacco and substance use, mental health, motivation to quit smoking (MTQS), and smoking cessation treatment preferences. Participant characteristics were described and compared by MTQS.

Results

Participants who reported current smoking (N=404) were primarily male (74.8%); White (41.4%), Black (27.8%), or American Indian/Alaska Native (14.1%) race; and 10.7% Hispanic. Participants reported a mean age of 45.6 (SD=11.2) years, and they smoked an average of 12.6 (SD=9.4) cigarettes per day. Most participants reported moderate or high MTQS (57%) and were interested in receiving free cessation treatment (51%). Participants most frequently selected the following options as among the top 3 treatments that offered the best chance of quitting: Nicotine replacement therapy (25%), money/gift cards for quitting (17%), prescription medications (17%), and switching to e-cigarettes (16%). Craving (55%), stress/mood (40%), habit (39%), and being around other smokers (36%) were frequently identified as the most challenging aspects of quitting. Low MTQS was associated with White race, lack of religious participation, lack of health insurance, lower income, greater cigarettes smoked per day, and higher expired carbon monoxide. Higher MTQS was associated with sleeping unsheltered, cell phone ownership, higher health literacy, more years of smoking, and interest in free treatment.

Discussion

Multi-level, multi-component interventions are needed to address tobacco disparities among AEH.

Smoking Cessation Rate and Its Predictors among Heavy Smokers in a Smoking-Free Hospital in Taiwan

Smoking poses critical risks for heart disease and cancers. Heavy smokers, defined as smoking more than 30 pack-year, are the most important target for smoking cessation. This study aimed to obtain the cessation rate and its predictors among heavy smokers. We collected data from heavy smokers who visited a smoking-free hospital in Taiwan during 2017. All patients were prescribed either varenicline or nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for smoking cessation, and their smoking status was followed for six months. Successful smoking cessation was defined by self-reported no smoking over the preceding seven days (7-day point abstinence). In total, 280 participants with a mean aged of 53.5 years were enrolled, and 42.9% of participants successfully stopped smoking in 6 months. The results revealed that quitters were older, with hypertension, fewer daily cigarettes, and being prescribed with varenicline. Multiple logistic regressions analyses identified that fewer daily cigarettes and being prescribed with varenicline were predictors of successful smoking cessation. Therefore, we suggest that varenicline use may help heavy smokers in smoking cessation.

Smoking Cessation Treatment for Parents Who Are Light or Very Light Smokers in the Pediatric Setting

BACKGROUND

The percentage of US smokers who smoke <10 cigarettes per day has increased, yet it is not known how often light parental smokers are offered and accept cessation assistance in pediatric offices.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of parent interview data collected April to October 2017 at 10 pediatric practices participating in a cluster-randomized controlled trial of the Clinical Effort Against Secondhand Smoke Exposure (CEASE) intervention.

RESULTS

Forty percent of 725 usual care control (UCC) group smokers smoked lightly (<10 cigarettes per day); of these 58% smoked very lightly (<5 per day). Compared to heavier smokers in UCC practices, light and very light smokers in UCC practices were more likely to have made a recent quit attempt (P < .001), yet less likely to have used cessation medication (P = .001). In intervention practices, compared to heavier smokers, light (P = .04) and very light (P < .01) smokers were less likely to be asked if they smoke and very light smokers were less likely to be advised to quit (P = .02) and to receive a nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) prescription (P < .01). However, light smokers (P < .001), very light smokers (P < .001), and light smokers who use e-cigarettes (P = .01) were more likely to receive assistance (NRT or quitline enrollment) in intervention versus UCC practices.

CONCLUSIONS

The CEASE intervention increased assistance to light and very light smokers, yet heavier smokers received more assistance than light smokers. Improving cessation interventions for light and very light smokers is warranted.

Interventions to reduce tobacco use in people experiencing homelessness

BACKGROUND

Populations experiencing homelessness have high rates of tobacco use and experience substantial barriers to cessation. Tobacco-caused conditions are among the leading causes of morbidity and mortality among people experiencing homelessness, highlighting an urgent need for interventions to reduce the burden of tobacco use in this population.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether interventions designed to improve access to tobacco cessation interventions for adults experiencing homelessness lead to increased numbers engaging in or receiving treatment, and whether interventions designed to help adults experiencing homelessness to quit tobacco lead to increased tobacco abstinence. To also assess whether tobacco cessation interventions for adults experiencing homelessness affect substance use and mental health.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO for studies using the terms: un-housed*, homeless*, housing instability, smoking cessation, tobacco use disorder, smokeless tobacco. We also searched trial registries to identify unpublished studies. Date of the most recent search: 06 January 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials that recruited people experiencing homelessness who used tobacco, and investigated interventions focused on the following: 1) improving access to relevant support services; 2) increasing motivation to quit tobacco use; 3) helping people to achieve abstinence, including but not limited to behavioral support, tobacco cessation pharmacotherapies, contingency management, and text- or app-based interventions; or 4) encouraging transitions to long-term nicotine use that did not involve tobacco. Eligible comparators included no intervention, usual care (as defined by the studies), or another form of active intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods. Tobacco cessation was measured at the longest time point for each study, on an intention-to-treat basis, using the most rigorous definition available. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for smoking cessation for each study where possible. We grouped eligible studies according to the type of comparison (contingent reinforcement in addition to usual smoking cessation care; more versus less intensive smoking cessation interventions; and multi-issue support versus smoking cessation support only), and carried out meta-analyses where appropriate, using a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model. We also extracted data on quit attempts, effects on mental and substance-use severity, and meta-analyzed these outcomes where sufficient data were available.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 10 studies involving 1634 participants who smoked combustible tobacco at enrolment. One of the studies was ongoing. Most of the trials included participants who were recruited from community-based sites such as shelters, and three included participants who were recruited from clinics. We judged three studies to be at high risk of bias in one or more domains. We identified low-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, that contingent reinforcement (rewards for successful smoking cessation) plus usual smoking cessation care was not more effective than usual care alone in promoting abstinence (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.16 to 2.77; 1 trial, 70 participants). We identified very low-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias and imprecision, that more intensive behavioral smoking cessation support was more effective than brief intervention in promoting abstinence at six-month follow-up (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.69; 3 trials, 657 participants; I² = 0%). There was low-certainty evidence, limited by bias and imprecision, that multi-issue support (cessation support that also encompassed help to deal with other challenges or addictions) was not superior to targeted smoking cessation support in promoting abstinence (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.61; 2 trials, 146 participants; I² = 25%). More data on these types of interventions are likely to change our interpretation of these data. Single studies that examined the effects of text-messaging support, e-cigarettes, or cognitive behavioral therapy for smoking cessation provided inconclusive results. Data on secondary outcomes, including mental health and substance use severity, were too sparse to draw any meaningful conclusions on whether there were clinically-relevant differences. We did not identify any studies that explicitly assessed interventions to increase access to tobacco cessation care; we were therefore unable to assess our secondary outcome 'number of participants receiving treatment'.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to assess the effects of any tobacco cessation interventions specifically in people experiencing homelessness. Although there was some evidence to suggest a modest benefit of more intensive behavioral smoking cessation interventions when compared to less intensive interventions, our certainty in this evidence was very low, meaning that further research could either strengthen or weaken this effect. There is insufficient evidence to assess whether the provision of tobacco cessation support and its effects on quit attempts has any effect on the mental health or other substance-use outcomes of people experiencing homelessness. Although there is no reason to believe that standard tobacco cessation treatments work any differently in people experiencing homelessness than in the general population, these findings highlight a need for high-quality studies that address additional ways to engage and support people experiencing homelessness, in the context of the daily challenges they face. These studies should have adequate power and put effort into retaining participants for long-term follow-up of at least six months. Studies should also explore interventions that increase access to cessation services, and address the social and environmental influences of tobacco use among people experiencing homelessness. Finally, studies should explore the impact of tobacco cessation on mental health and substance-use outcomes.

Understanding the Associations between Smoking-Related Risk Perception, Interest in Quitting Smoking, and Interest in Lung Cancer Screening among Homeless Adult Smokers

Individuals experiencing homelessness smoke cigarettes at high rates, suffer a disproportionate incidence of lung cancer, but are unlikely to be screened to enhance early detection. Understanding correlates of lung cancer screening (LCS) interest within this vulnerable group may lend insight into prevention and treatment efforts and reduce their smoking-related morbidity and mortality. This study sought to understand how risk perception and interest in quitting smoking relate to LCS interest among homeless adults. Participants comprised a convenience sample of CO-verified current smokers (N = 310; 72.6% men, M_age = 43 + 11.7) from a homeless shelter in Dallas, TX. Participants self-reported risk perception, interest in quitting smoking, and interest in LCS. The average risk perception was 6.7 + 3.2 (range 0-10), 74.8% (n = 232) agreed or strongly agreed with interest in LCS, and 65.8% (n = 204) were interested in quitting smoking. Greater interest in quitting smoking, but not greater risk perception, was associated with greater interest in LCS (adjusted OR: 1.968, (95% CI: 1.213, 3.191), p = 0.006). Risk perception and interest in quitting smoking did not interact in their association with interest in LCS. Results suggest that homeless smokers with an interest in quitting may be receptive to LCS: a diagnostic tool by which cancers can be caught at earlier stages and prior to metastasis. However, few in the current sample would be eligible for LCS based on current guidelines; results have implications for altered screening practices among chronic smokers experiencing homelessness.

Measures of dependence in menthol and nonmenthol smokers - A comprehensive narrative review

Introduction. More than a decade ago, concerns were raised that menthol in cigarettes might enhance addiction to smoking. This article provides a comprehensive review of published studies examining cigarette dependence among menthol and nonmenthol smokers. The purpose of the review is to evaluate the scientific evidence to determine if menthol increases cigarette dependence. Materials and Methods. The published literature was searched in 2019 for studies that provide evidence on cigarette dependence among menthol compared to nonmenthol smokers. Included in this review are published studies that compare menthol and nonmenthol smokers based on widely accepted and validated measures of dependence, or other established predictors of dependence (age of smoking initiation [first cigarette]/age of progression [regular/daily smoking]) and indicators of dependence (smoking frequency, cigarettes smoked per day, time to first cigarette after waking, night waking to smoke, smoking duration). Results and Conclusion. Based on a review of the available studies, including those with adjusted results and large representative samples, reliable and consistent empirical evidence supports a conclusion that menthol smokers are not more dependent than nonmenthol smokers and thus menthol in cigarettes does not increase dependence.

Smoking amongst adults experiencing homelessness: a systematic review of prevalence rates, interventions and the barriers and facilitators to quitting and staying quit

Background

To date, there has been no review of the research evidence examining smoking cessation among homeless adults. The current review aimed to: (i) estimate smoking prevalence in homeless populations; (ii) explore the efficacy of smoking cessation and smoking reduction interventions for homeless individuals; and (iii) describe the barriers and facilitators to smoking cessation and smoking reduction.

Method

Systematic review of peer-reviewed research. Data sources included electronic academic databases. Search terms: ‘smoking’ AND ‘homeless’ AND ‘tobacco’, including adult (18+ years) smokers accessing homeless support services.

Results

Fifty-three studies met the inclusion criteria (n = 46 USA). Data could not be meta-analysed due to large methodological inconsistencies and the lack of randomised controlled trials. Smoking prevalence ranged from 57% to 82%. Although there was no clear evidence on which cessation methods work best, layered approaches with additions to usual care seemed to offer modest enhancements in quit rates. Key barriers to cessation exist around the priority of smoking, beliefs around negative impact on mental health and substance use, and environmental influences.

Conclusions

Homeless smokers will benefit from layered interventions which support many of their competing needs. To best understand what works, future recommendations include the need for consensus on the reporting of cessation outcomes.

Financial Incentives for Smoking Abstinence in Homeless Smokers: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction

Three-quarters of homeless people smoke cigarettes. Financial incentives for smoking abstinence have appeared promising in nonexperimental studies of homeless smokers, but randomized controlled trial (RCT) data are lacking.

Methods

We conducted a pilot RCT of financial incentives for homeless smokers. Incentive arm participants (N = 25) could earn escalating $15-$35 rewards for brief smoking abstinence (exhaled carbon monoxide <8 parts per million) assessed 14 times over 8 weeks. Control arm participants (N = 25) were given $10 at each assessment regardless of abstinence. All participants were offered nicotine patches and counseling. The primary outcome was a repeated measure of brief smoking abstinence across 14 assessments. The secondary outcome was brief abstinence at 8 weeks. Exploratory outcomes were self-reported 1-day and 7-day abstinence from (1) any cigarette and (2) any puff of a cigarette. Other outcomes included 24-hour quit attempts, nicotine patch use, counseling attendance, and changes in alcohol and drug use.

Results

Compared to control, incentive arm participants were more likely to achieve brief abstinence overall (odds ratio 7.28, 95% confidence interval 2.89 to 18.3) and at 8 weeks (48% vs. 8%, p = .004). Similar effects were seen for 1-day abstinence, but 7-day puff abstinence was negligible in both arms. Incentive arm participants made more quit attempts (p = .03). Nicotine patch use and counseling attendance were not significantly different between the groups. Alcohol and drug use did not change significantly in either group.

Conclusions

Among homeless smokers, financial incentives increased brief smoking abstinence and quit attempts without worsening substance use. This approach merits further development focused on promoting sustained abstinence.

Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02565381).

Implications

Smoking is common among homeless people, and conventional tobacco treatment strategies have yielded modest results in this population. This pilot RCT suggests that financial incentives may be a safe way to promote brief smoking abstinence and quit attempts in this vulnerable group of smokers. However, further development is necessary to translate this approach into real-world settings and to promote sustained periods of smoking abstinence.

Harm reduction treatment for smoking (HaRT-S): findings from a single-arm pilot study with smokers experiencing chronic homelessness

Background: Smoking prevalence and mortality is 5 times higher for the chronically homeless versus general population. Unfortunately, traditional smoking cessation treatment does not optimally engage this population. In a preliminary study, smokers experiencing chronic homelessness suggested providers avoid giving advice to quit and instead use a more compassionate, nonjudgmental style to discuss a broader menu of patient-driven options, including safer nicotine use. Most had negative perceptions of smoking cessation medications; however, 76% expressed interest in a switchover to electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). Methods: Using a community-based participatory research approach, we codeveloped harm-reduction treatment for smoking (HaRT-S) together with people with lived experience of chronic homelessness and smoking and a community-based agency that serves them. In HaRT-S, interventionists embody a compassionate, advocacy-oriented "heart-set" and deliver manualized components: a) participant-led tracking of smoking-related outcomes, b) elicitation of harm-reduction goals and progress made toward them, c) discussion of relative risks of nicotine delivery systems, and d) distribution and instructions on use of safer nicotine products. We then conducted a single-arm, 14-week pilot of HaRT-S (N = 44). Results: Participants rated procedures "totally acceptable/effective," which was reflected in 26% overrecruitment within a 4-month period and 70% retention at the 14-week follow-up. For each week in the study, participants experienced an 18% increase in odds of reporting 7-day, biochemically verified, point-prevalence abstinence. All participants reporting abstinence used ENDS. Participants evinced reductions in cigarette dependence (-45%), frequency (-29%), and intensity (-78%; ps < .05). Participants who used ENDS experienced an additional 44% reduction in smoking intensity and a 1.2-point reduction in dependence compared to participants who did not. Conclusions: Harm-reduction counseling plus ENDS shows promise for smokers experiencing chronic homelessness. Randomized controlled trials are needed to establish the efficacy of this approach in decreasing smoking-related harm and improving health-related quality of life for this marginalized and disproportionately affected population.

Subsistence difficulties are associated with more barriers to quitting and worse abstinence outcomes among homeless smokers: evidence from two studies in Boston, Massachusetts

Background

Three-quarters of homeless people smoke cigarettes. Competing priorities for shelter, food, and other subsistence needs may be one explanation for low smoking cessation rates in this population. We analyzed data from two samples of homeless smokers to examine the associations between subsistence difficulties and 1) smoking cessation readiness, confidence, and barriers in a cross-sectional study, and 2) smoking abstinence during follow-up in a longitudinal study.

Methods

We conducted a survey of homeless smokers (N = 306) in 4/2014–7/2014 and a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) for homeless smokers (N = 75) in 10/2015–6/2016 at Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program. In both studies, subsistence difficulties were characterized as none, low, or high based on responses to a 5-item scale assessing the frequency of past-month difficulty finding shelter, food, clothing, a place to wash, and a place to go to the bathroom. Among survey participants, we used linear regression to assess the associations between subsistence difficulty level and readiness to quit, confidence to quit, and a composite measure of perceived barriers to quitting. Among RCT participants, we used repeated-measures logistic regression to examine the association between baseline subsistence difficulty level and carbon monoxide-defined brief smoking abstinence assessed 14 times over 8 weeks of follow-up. Analyses adjusted for demographic characteristics, substance use, mental illness, and nicotine dependence.

Results

Subsistence difficulties were common in both study samples. Among survey participants, greater subsistence difficulties were associated with more perceived barriers to quitting (p < 0.001) but not with cessation readiness or confidence. A dose-response relationship was observed for most barriers, particularly psychosocial barriers. Among RCT participants, greater baseline subsistence difficulties predicted less smoking abstinence during follow-up in a dose-response fashion. In adjusted analyses, individuals with the highest level of subsistence difficulty had one-third the odds of being abstinent during follow-up compared to those without subsistence difficulties (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.11–0.93) despite making a similar number of quit attempts.

Conclusions

Homeless smokers with greater subsistence difficulties perceive more barriers to quitting and are less likely to do so despite similar readiness, confidence, and attempts. Future studies should assess whether addressing subsistence difficulties improves cessation outcomes in this population.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02565381.

Content analysis of homeless smokers' perspectives on established and alternative smoking interventions

BACKGROUND

Cigarette smoking is 5 times more prevalent among homeless individuals than in the general population, and homeless individuals are disproportionately affected by smoking-related morbidity and mortality. Homeless smokers report interest in changing their smoking behavior; however, established smoking cessation interventions are neither desirable to nor highly effective for most members of this population. The aim of this study was to document homeless smokers' perceptions of established smoking interventions as well as self-generated, alternative smoking interventions to elucidate points for intervention enhancement.

METHODS

Participants (N=25) were homeless smokers who responded to semistructured interviews regarding smoking and nicotine use as well as experiences with established and alternative smoking interventions. Conventional content analysis was used to organize data and identify themes.

RESULTS

Participants appreciated providers' initiation of conversations about smoking. They did not, however, feel simple advice to quit was a helpful approach. Instead, they suggested providers use a nonjudgmental, compassionate style, offer more support, and discuss a broader menu of options, including nonabstinence-based ways to reduce smoking-related harm and improve health-related quality of life. Most participants preferred engaging in their own self-defined, alternative smoking interventions, including obtaining nicotine more safely (e.g., vaping, using smokeless tobacco) and using behavioral (e.g., engaging in creative activities and hobbies) and cognitive strategies (e.g., reminding themselves about the positive aspects of not smoking and the negative consequences of smoking). Abrupt, unaided quit attempts were largely unsuccessful.

CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority of participants with the lived experience of homelessness and smoking were uninterested in established smoking cessation approaches. They did, however, have creative ideas about alternative smoking interventions that providers may support to reduce smoking-related harm and enhance quality of life. These ideas included providing information about the relative risks of smoking and the relative benefits of alternative strategies to obtaining nicotine and avoiding smoking.

Cigarette Purchasing Patterns, Readiness to Quit, and Quit Attempts Among Homeless Smokers

Introduction

Cigarette purchasing patterns may be linked with greater readiness to make a quit attempt and more quit attempts among domiciled samples. However, little is known about the cigarette purchasing patterns of homeless smokers or their potential relations to quitting intention and behaviors. This study redressed this gap among a convenience sample of homeless adult smokers from a large shelter in Dallas, Texas.

Methods

Participants (N = 207; Mage = 43; 71.5% male) smoked ≥100 cigarettes over the lifetime and endorsed current daily smoking. Variables assessed included cigarette dependence (time to first cigarette of the day), monthly income, quantity of cigarettes most recently purchased, average money spent on cigarettes weekly, readiness/motivation to quit smoking, and the number intentional quit attempts lasting ≥24h in the past year. Regression analyses were conducted to characterize associations of cigarette purchasing patterns with readiness to quit and quit attempts controlling for sex, age, cigarette dependence, and income.

Results

Most participants purchased cigarettes by the pack (61.4%), and more than half the sample spent ≤$20 on cigarettes per week. Results indicated that spending less money per week on cigarettes was associated with greater readiness to quit (P = .016), even when controlling for income, cigarette dependence, and other covariates. Stratified analyses indicated that this association was significant only for homeless smokers reporting no regular monthly income.

Conclusions

Homeless daily smokers with no reported income who spend little money on cigarettes may make particularly apt targets for cessation interventions due to potential associations with quitting motivation.

Implications

Adults who are homeless smoke at greater rates and quit at lower rates than domiciled adults, leading to significant smoking-related health disparities among this group. Findings suggest that cigarette purchasing patterns are linked with readiness to quit smoking among smokers who are homeless. Results elucidate one of the myriad factors that contribute to tobacco-related disparities among this group and findings may have implications for cessation interventions in homeless shelters and other contexts where resources are limited.

Evaluation of Tobacco Control Policies in San Francisco Homeless Housing Programs

BACKGROUND

The 2014 Surgeon General's Report noted that high smoking rates in vulnerable populations such as the homeless have been a persistent public health problem; smoking prevalence among individuals experiencing homelessness exceeds 70%. Historically, service providers for the homeless have not enacted comprehensive tobacco control policies.

METHOD

We conducted a qualitative study of homeless housing programs in San Francisco. Administrators representing 9 of the city's 11 homeless service agencies were interviewed to assess institutional smoking-related policies and cessation programs and perceived barriers and receptivity to instituting tobacco control interventions.

RESULTS

Respondents indicated that although most programs had adopted smoke-free grounds and some had eliminated evidence of staff smoking, the smoking status of clients was assessed only when required by funders. None of the programs offered smoking cessation interventions. Most administrators were receptive to adopting policies that would promote a tobacco-free culture; however, they noted that their clients had unique challenges that made traditional smoking cessation programs unfeasible.

CONCLUSIONS

Homeless housing programs in San Francisco have not yet adopted a tobacco-free culture. Existing policies were created in response to external mandates, and smoking cessation programs may need to be modified in order to effectively reach clients.

Tobacco Cessation Behaviors Among Older Homeless Adults: Results From the HOPE HOME Study

INTRODUCTION

Tobacco-attributable deaths contribute significantly to the increased mortality observed among homeless adults aged 50 years or more. Little is known about the epidemiology of tobacco use among older homeless individuals. This longitudinal cohort study examines smoking behaviors and factors associated with smoking cessation among homeless individuals aged 50 years or more.

METHODS

We recruited a prospective cohort of 350 homeless individuals sampled from the community in Oakland, California. At 6 months follow-up, participants reported their cigarette quit attempts and 30-day abstinence. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine factors associated with making a quit attempt at follow-up, hypothesizing that heavier smokers would be less likely to make a quit attempt.

RESULTS

Of the 272 ever-smokers, 229 (84.2%) were current smokers (quit ratio 15.8). Among current smokers at enrollment who had a follow-up interview at 6 months, 43.6% (n = 71) reported making a quit attempt during the follow-up. Of those who reported making a quit attempt, 14.3% (n = 10) reported 30-day abstinence at follow-up. Among those who had reported making a quit attempt at follow-up, 22.5% had used nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Staying in shelters (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.0-5.8) was associated with higher odds of making a quit attempt at follow-up. Higher cigarette consumption was associated with lower odds of making a quit attempt (AOR = 0.9, 95% CI = 0.8-0.9).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study of tobacco use in older homeless adults, rates of quit attempts were similar to that observed in the general population, but successful quitting was lower.

IMPLICATIONS

The current study is among the first studies to focus specifically on tobacco use and cessation behaviors among older homeless adults. The high prevalence of smoking and the low rates of successful quitting highlight numerous opportunities to intervene to increase quitting rates among this population. Among these, increasing access to smoke-free living environments and identifying effective cessation therapies will be critical to reducing tobacco-related disease burden among older homeless adults.

Analysis of Driving Factors of Willingness to Use and Willingness to Pay for Existing Pharmacological Smoking Cessation Aids Among Young and Middle-Aged Adults in Germany

BACKGROUND

Smoking cessation is a challenging task with a high risk of relapse. Depending on the choice of medication and duration of therapy, the costs of using a smoking cessation aid can be high. Additionally, these costs are not covered by health insurance in Germany. Information on willingness to use (WTU) and willingness to pay (WTP) for smoking cessation aids is valuable for developing different smoking cessation strategies.

OBJECTIVES

The study analyses WTU and WTP for three pharmacological smoking cessation aids (nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion and varenicline) among young and middle-aged adults in Germany and attempts to determine their major driving factors.

METHODS

Two cross-sectional internet-based surveys of smokers over 18 years of age were conducted in 2014 and 2015 in Germany. Respondents were asked about smoking-related issues and WTU and WTP for each therapy. The contingent valuation method with payment cards was used to measure WTP. Descriptive statistics, logistical regression and accelerated failure-time regression models were performed.

RESULTS

The total sample size is 505. Half of the respondents are willing to use NRT and one-third are willing to use bupropion and/or varenicline. WTU induces positive WTP; however, the magnitude of WTP is beneath the market price. WTU significantly increases with a higher addiction level and if smokers have previously heard about the therapy.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates different points to be considered for policy development. Promotion information and improving awareness about medication aids might increase WTU, and development of monetary incentives for young smokers could create a better chance for successful smoking cessation.