Prevalence and predictors of quitline enrollment following hospital referral in real-world clinical practice

Hospital-based tobacco treatment for inpatients with a history of cancer

OBJECTIVE

To describe treatment engagement and outcomes of patients who smoke with cancer and received tobacco cessation treatment during hospitalization.

METHOD

We analyzed treatment engagement and cessation outcomes for hospitalized patients who smoke with a current or former history of cancer receiving treatment from an inpatient tobacco treatment service between July, 2018 to October, 2019.

RESULTS

The service treated 407 inpatients. Patients had an overall high level of interest in quitting (7.6, 0-10 scale). One in three accepted cessation pharmacotherapies during hospitalization or at discharge (35%) and/or referral to the state tobacco quitline (37%). Of 189 patients reached at one-month post-discharge, 73 (39%) reported tobacco abstinence (18% intent to treat-ITT-quit rate); 35.5% had used cessation pharmacotherapy and 6.5% had engaged in quitline counseling. Of 151 patients reached at 6 months post-discharge, 29% reported abstinence (11%, ITT).

CONCLUSION

Inpatients with a history of cancer are interested in quitting. Post-discharge quit rates and pharmacotherapy use were high but quitline use was low. Hospitalization is an under-utilized, prime treatment opportunity and teachable moment for people with a history of cancer who continue to use tobacco.

Characteristics of Patients Engaging in Quitline Counseling After an Electronic Referral

INTRODUCTION

Proactive, electronic referral of primary care patients to quitlines has great potential to provide evidence-based tobacco-cessation assistance to tobacco users. However, the quitline contact rates and engagement of individuals beyond 1 counseling call are poor. This study examines the characteristics of electronically referred patients who engage with the quitline.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included 2,407 primary care patients who reported using tobacco and accepted an electronic referral to the quitline. Outcomes included contact, enrollment, and receipt of ≥2 counseling sessions from the quitline. All measures were assessed from the electronic health record. The association of patient characteristics and outcomes was evaluated using logistic regression modeling with generalized estimating equation methods. Data were collected in 2016‒2018 and were analyzed in 2020.

RESULTS

Among 2,407 referred patients, 794 (33.0%) were contacted; of those, 571 enrolled (71.9%); and of those, 240 (42.0%) engaged in ≥2 quitline counseling sessions. In multivariable analyses, older adults (aged 50-64 and ≥65 years) were significantly more likely to be contacted (OR=2.32, 95% CI=1.6, 3.4) and to receive ≥2 counseling sessions (OR=2.34, 95% CI=1.2, 4.7) than those aged 18-34 years. Those with both Medicare and Medicaid insurance coverage were more likely than those with Medicaid only to be contacted (OR=1.71, 95% CI=1.4, 2.2), to enroll (OR=1.84, 95% CI=1.2, 2.9), and to receive ≥2 counseling sessions (OR=1.83, 95% CI=1.2, 2.9).

CONCLUSIONS

The current quitline phone-based approach is less likely to engage younger adults and those with Medicaid coverage; however, there is a need to improve quitline engagement across all patients. Identification and testing of alternative engagement approaches are needed.

Increasing treatment enrollment among smokers who are not motivated to quit: a randomized clinical trial

There is a significant research-to-practice gap with respect to reaching underserved populations with evidence-based tobacco cessation treatments. Increasing enrollment in evidence-based treatments is necessary to reduce tobacco use and tobacco-related health inequities. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate whether Motivation And Problem Solving (MAPS), a flexible, holistic counseling/navigation approach delivered via phone, and proactive provision of Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) would improve Quitline enrollment among a sample of low SES smokers who were not motivated to quit. In a 3×2 factorial design, cigarette smokers (N = 603) were randomized to one of six treatment conditions (Standard Treatment, MAPS-6, or MAPS-12 by NRT or no NRT). Results indicated that both MAPS-6 and MAPS-12 increased Quitline enrollment compared to Standard Treatment (ps < .03). There were no differences between MAPS conditions. NRT did not increase Quitline enrollment. MAPS is an effective intervention with the potential to be disseminated and implemented in healthcare and community settings to increase the reach of evidence-based interventions for tobacco cessation.

Improving access to cancer information and supportive care services: A systematic review of mechanisms applied to link people with cancer to psychosocial supportive care services

OBJECTIVE

Previous research has described the low uptake of psychosocial support services in people living with cancer. While characteristics of individuals using services have been examined, mechanisms applied to link individuals to support services are less frequently considered. This review aims to identify the mechanisms used to link people with cancer to support services and assess their impact.

METHODS

Systematic searches of Pubmed, CINAHL, EMBASE and PsycINFO were conducted up to May 2020. Studies reporting service use associated with mechanisms to link adults with cancer to support services targeting emotional, informational, practical or social support needs were eligible. Eligible study designs included controlled trials, pre-post designs and observational studies. Study quality was assessed and a narrative synthesis of findings undertaken.

RESULTS

A total of 10 papers (from 8,037 unique titles) were eligible. Testing the feasibility of the linkage mechanism was the primary aim in five (50%) studies. Three linkage mechanisms were identified: (a) outreach from the support service; (b) clinician recommendation/referral; (c) mailed invitation. Outreach was the most successful in connecting people with cancer to services (52%-90% use); clinician recommendation/referral was least successful (3%-28%). The impact of different linkage mechanisms for different demographic groups was not assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

Outreach from services shows the most potential for increasing access to support services. However, the limited number of studies and limitations in the types of support services people with cancer were linked to, demonstrated the need for further work in this area. Identifying mechanisms that are effective for underserved, high-needs patient groups is also needed.