Effectiveness of telephone-based follow-up support delivered in combination with a multi-component smoking cessation intervention in family practice: a cluster-randomized trial

Barriers to smoking interventions in community healthcare settings: a scoping review

Smoking is one of the major causes of preventable death and is considered the greatest threat to global public health. While the prevalence of smoking has decreased, population growth has led to an increase in the absolute number of smokers. There are many proven smoking cessation interventions available to support smokers in their quit attempts. Most people who smoke, however, underutilize the treatments available to them. This scoping review aimed to identify the current barriers experienced by all stakeholders (smokers, service providers and policymakers) to existing evidence-based smoking cessation interventions in community healthcare settings. Five electronic databases (CINAHL, Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus and Web of Science) were searched for relevant literature. A total of 40 eligible articles from different countries published between 2015 and 2022 were included in the review and content analysis carried out to identify the key barriers to smoking cessation interventions. Seven key themes were found to be common to all stakeholders: (i) literacy, (ii) competing demands and priorities, (iii) time, (iv) access to product, (v) access to service, (vi) workforce and (vii) motivation/readiness. These themes were mapped to the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model. This study presents the effect the barriers within these themes have on current smoking cessation services and highlights priorities for future interventions.

Smoking cessation: health system challenges and opportunities

The systematic integration of evidence-based tobacco treatment has yet to be broadly viewed as a standard-of-care. The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control recommends the provision of support for tobacco cessation. We argue that the provision of smoking cessation services in clinical settings is a fundamental clinical responsibility and permits the opportunity to more effectively assist with cessation. The role of clinicians in prioritising smoking cessation is essential in all settings. Clinical benefits of implementing cessation services in hospital settings have been recognised for three decades-but have not been consistently provided. The Ottawa Model for Smoking Cessation has used an 'organisational change' approach to its introduction and has served as the basis for the introduction of cessation programmes in hospital and primary care settings in Canada and elsewhere. The significance of smoking cessation dwarfs that of many preventive interventions in primary care. Compelling evidence attests to the importance of providing cessation services as part of cancer treatment, but implementation of such programmes has been slow. We recognise that the provision of such services must reflect the realities and resources of a particular health system. In low-income and middle-income countries, access to treatment facilities pose unique challenges. The integration of cessation programmes with tuberculosis control services may offer opportunities; and standardisation of peri-operative care to include smoking cessation may not require additional resources. Mobile phones afford unique opportunities for interactive cessation programming. Health system change is fundamental to improving the provision of cessation services; clinicians can be powerful advocates for such change.

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.

Current practices and perceived barriers to tobacco-treatment delivery among healthcare professionals from 15 European countries. The EPACTT Plus project

INTRODUCTION

The latest evidence-based Guidelines for Treating Tobacco Dependence highlight the significant role of healthcare professionals in supporting smokers interested to quit. This study aimed to identify the current practices of healthcare professionals in Europe and perceived barriers in delivering tobacco treatment to their patients who smoke.

METHODS

In the context of EPACTT-Plus, collaborating institutions from 15 countries (Albania, Armenia, Belgium, Italy, France, Georgia, Greece, Kosovo, Romania, North Macedonia, Russia, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain, Ukraine) worked for the development of an accredited eLearning course on Tobacco Treatment Delivery available at http://elearning-ensp.eu/. In total, 444 healthcare professionals from the wider European region successfully completed the course from December 2018 to July 2019. Cross-sectional data were collected online on healthcare professionals’ current practices and perceived barriers in introducing tobacco-dependence treatment into their daily clinical life.

RESULTS

At registration, 41.2% of the participants reported having asked their patients if they smoked. Advise to quit smoking was offered by 47.1% of the participants, while 29.5% reported offering assistance to their patients who smoked in order to quit. From the total number of participants, 39.9% regarded the lack of patient compliance as a significant barrier. Other key barriers were lack of: interest from the patients (37.4%), healthcare professionals training (33.1%), community resources to refer patients (31.5%), and adequate time during their everyday clinical life (29.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

The identification of current practices and significant barriers is important to build evidence-based guidelines and training programs (online and/or live) that will improve the performance of healthcare professionals in offering tobacco-dependence treatment for their patients who smoke.

Impact of the ENSP eLearning platform on improving knowledge, attitudes and self-efficacy for treating tobacco dependence: An assessment across 15 European countries

INTRODUCTION

In 2018, the European Network for Smoking Cessation and Prevention (ENSP) released an update to its Tobacco Treatment Guidelines for healthcare professionals, which was the scientific base for the development of an accredited eLearning curriculum to train healthcare professionals, available in 14 languages. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of ENSP eLearning curriculum in increasing healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy (perceived behavioral control) and intentions in delivering tobacco treatment interventions in their daily clinical routines.

METHODS

We conducted a quasi-experimental pre-post design study with 444 healthcare professionals, invited by 20 collaborating institutions from 15 countries (Albania, Armenia, Belgium, Italy, France, Georgia, Greece, Kosovo, Romania, North Macedonia, Russia, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain, Ukraine), which completed the eLearning course between December 2018 and July 2019.

RESULTS

Healthcare professionals' self-reported knowledge improved after the completion of each module of the eLearning program. Increases in healthcare professionals' self-efficacy in delivering tobacco treatment interventions (p<0.001) were also documented. Significant improvements were documented in intentions to address tobacco use as a priority, document tobacco use, offer support, provide brief counselling, give written material, discuss available medication, prescribe medication, schedule dedicated appointment to develop a quit plan, and be persistent in addressing tobacco use with the patients (all p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

An evidence-based digital intervention can be effective in improving knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy and intentions on future delivery of tobacco-treatment interventions.

Telephone counselling for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Telephone services can provide information and support for smokers. Counselling may be provided proactively or offered reactively to callers to smoking cessation helplines.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of telephone support to help smokers quit, including proactive or reactive counselling, or the provision of other information to smokers calling a helpline.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the ICTRP for studies of telephone counselling, using search terms including 'hotlines' or 'quitline' or 'helpline'. Date of the most recent search: May 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials which offered proactive or reactive telephone counselling to smokers to assist smoking cessation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We pooled studies using a random-effects model and assessed statistical heterogeneity amongst subgroups of clinically comparable studies using the I2 statistic. In trials including smokers who did not call a quitline, we used meta-regression to investigate moderation of the effect of telephone counselling by the planned number of calls in the intervention, trial selection of participants that were motivated to quit, and the baseline support provided together with telephone counselling (either self-help only, brief face-to-face intervention, pharmacotherapy, or financial incentives).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 104 trials including 111,653 participants that met the inclusion criteria. Participants were mostly adult smokers from the general population, but some studies included teenagers, pregnant women, and people with long-term or mental health conditions. Most trials (58.7%) were at high risk of bias, while 30.8% were at unclear risk, and only 11.5% were at low risk of bias for all domains assessed. Most studies (100/104) assessed proactive telephone counselling, as opposed to reactive forms.Among trials including smokers who contacted helplines (32,484 participants), quit rates were higher for smokers receiving multiple sessions of proactive counselling (risk ratio (RR) 1.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.61; 14 trials, 32,484 participants; I2 = 72%) compared with a control condition providing self-help materials or brief counselling in a single call. Due to the substantial unexplained heterogeneity between studies, we downgraded the certainty of the evidence to moderate.In studies that recruited smokers who did not call a helpline, the provision of telephone counselling increased quit rates (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.35; 65 trials, 41,233 participants; I2 = 52%). Due to the substantial unexplained heterogeneity between studies, we downgraded the certainty of the evidence to moderate. In subgroup analysis, we found no evidence that the effect of telephone counselling depended upon whether or not other interventions were provided (P = 0.21), no evidence that more intensive support was more effective than less intensive (P = 0.43), or that the effect of telephone support depended upon whether or not people were actively trying to quit smoking (P = 0.32). However, in meta-regression, telephone counselling was associated with greater effectiveness when provided as an adjunct to self-help written support (P < 0.01), or to a brief intervention from a health professional (P = 0.02); telephone counselling was less effective when provided as an adjunct to more intensive counselling. Further, telephone support was more effective for people who were motivated to try to quit smoking (P = 0.02). The findings from three additional trials of smokers who had not proactively called a helpline but were offered telephone counselling, found quit rates were higher in those offered three to five telephone calls compared to those offered just one call (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.44; 2602 participants; I2 = 0%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that proactive telephone counselling aids smokers who seek help from quitlines, and moderate-certainty evidence that proactive telephone counselling increases quit rates in smokers in other settings. There is currently insufficient evidence to assess potential variations in effect from differences in the number of contacts, type or timing of telephone counselling, or when telephone counselling is provided as an adjunct to other smoking cessation therapies. Evidence was inconclusive on the effect of reactive telephone counselling, due to a limited number studies, which reflects the difficulty of studying this intervention.

From Good to Great: The Role of Performance Coaching in Enhancing Tobacco-Dependence Treatment Rates

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine the incremental effect of performance coaching, delivered as part of a multicomponent intervention (Ottawa Model for Smoking Cessation [OMSC]), in increasing rates of tobacco-dependence treatment by primary care clinicians.

METHODS

In a cluster-randomized controlled trial, 15 primary care practices were randomly assigned to 1 of the following active-treatment conditions: OMSC or OMSC plus performance coaching (OMSC+). All practices received support to implement the OMSC. In addition, clinicians in the OMSC+ group participated in a 1.5-hour skills-based coaching session and received an individualized performance report. All clinicians and a cross-sectional sample of their patients were surveyed before and 4 months after introduction of the interventions. The primary outcome measure was rates of tobacco-dependence treatment strategy (Ask, Advise, Assist, Arrange) delivery. Secondary outcomes were patient quit attempts and smoking abstinence measured at 6 months' follow-up.

RESULTS

Primary care clinicians (166) and patients (1,990) were enrolled in the trial. Clinicians in the OMSC+ group had statistically greater rates of delivery for Ask (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.69; 95% CI, 1.05-2.72), Assist (AOR = 1.64; 95% CI, 1.08-2.49), and Arrange (AOR = 2.01; 95% CI, 1.22-3.31). Sensitivity analysis found that the rate of delivery for Advise was greater only among those clinicians who attended the coaching session (AOR = 1.65; 95% CI, 1.10-2.49; P = .02). No differences were documented between groups for cessation outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Performance coaching significantly increased rates of tobacco-dependence treatment by primary care clinicians when delivered as part of a multicomponent intervention.

Training General Practitioners in Evidence-Based Tobacco Treatment: An Evaluation of the Tobacco Treatment Training Network in Crete (TiTAN-Crete) Intervention

BACKGROUND

Rates of tobacco treatment delivery in primary care are suboptimal.

AIMS

We report on the effectiveness of the TiTAN Crete intervention on rates of patient-reported 4As (ask, advise, assist, arrange) tobacco treatment and general practitioner's (GP) knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy, and intentions.

METHODS

A quasi-experimental pilot study with pre-post evaluation was conducted in Crete, Greece (2015-2016). GPs ( n = 24) intervention and control group and a cross-sectional sample of their patients ( n = 841) were surveyed before the implementation of the intervention. GPs in the intervention group received training, practice, and patient tools to support the integration of the 4As treatment into clinical routines. Intervention group GPs ( n = 14) and a second cross-sectional sample of patients ( n = 460) were surveyed 4 months following the intervention to assess changes in outcomes of interest. Multilevel modeling was used to analyze data.

RESULTS

Among GPs exposed to the intervention, significant increases in knowledge, self-efficacy, and rates of 4As delivery were documented between the pre- and postassessment and compared with those of the control group. Specifically, the adjusted odds ratios (AORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for 4As delivery between the pre-and postassessment among GPs exposed to the TiTAN intervention were as follows: Ask AOR 3.66 (95% CI [2.61, 5.14]); Advise AOR 4.21 (95% CI [3.02, 5.87]); Assist AOR 13.10 (95% CI [8.83, 19.42]) and Arrange AOR 4.75 (95% CI [2.67, 8.45]).

CONCLUSION

We found significant increases in rates at which GPs delivered evidence-based tobacco treatment following exposure to the TiTAN intervention. Future research should examine methods for supporting broader dissemination of well-designed training interventions in general practice.

Factors associated with rates of tobacco treatment delivery by General Practitioners in Greece: Missed opportunities for prevention?

INTRODUCTION

This study investigates the clinic-, provider- and patient-level factors associated with delivery of 4 (Ask, Advise, Assist, Arrange) elements of the 5As approach to smoking cessation in general practice in Greece.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of data derived from a quasi-experimental study (The TiTAN Crete study) among general practitioners (GPs) in Crete, Greece in 2015–2016. Twenty-four GPs and a cross-sectional sample of 1301 smokers from their practices were surveyed. This paper reports on the results of the multi-level modelling conducted to examine predictors of 4As delivery.

RESULTS

Our analysis found clinic characteristics, including the presence of an electronic medical record, being located in a rural setting, and being in private practice were significantly associated with increased rates of tobacco treatment delivery. Female GPs were more likely than males to arrange follow-up (AOR 3.38, 95%CI 1.11, 10.35). Our analysis found a variety of patient-level factors were positively associated with tobacco treatment delivery, including: longer smoking history; presence of a smoking related illness; readiness to quit smoking; and symptoms or a diagnosis of anxiety, depression or other mental health illness. Other patient-level factors were negatively associated with tobacco treatment delivery, including level of education and reason for visit. Patients seen in clinic for episodic care were less likely to be ‘asked’ (AOR 0.22, 95%CI 0.12, 0.39), ‘advised’ (AOR 0.22, 95%CI 0.13, 0.38), and receive ‘assistance’ (AOR 0.36, 95%CI 0.19, 0.66) compared to patients seen in clinic for a medical examination.

CONCLUSIONS

Providers are significantly more frequently delivering tobacco treatment to a sub-group of high-risk patients compared to other tobacco users in their clinical practice. This results in missed opportunities for early intervention and disease prevention.

Interactive Voice Response Calls to Promote Smoking Cessation after Hospital Discharge: Pooled Analysis of Two Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Hospitalization offers smokers an opportunity to quit smoking. Starting cessation treatment in hospital is effective, but sustaining treatment after discharge is a challenge. Automated telephone calls with interactive voice response (IVR) technology could support treatment continuance after discharge.

OBJECTIVE

To assess smokers' use of and satisfaction with an IVR-facilitated intervention and to test the relationship between intervention dose and smoking cessation.

DESIGN

Analysis of pooled quantitative and qualitative data from the intervention groups of two similar randomized controlled trials with 6-month follow-up.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 878 smokers admitted to three hospitals. All received cessation counseling in hospital and planned to stop smoking after discharge.

INTERVENTION

After discharge, participants received free cessation medication and five automated IVR calls over 3 months. Calls delivered messages promoting smoking cessation and medication adherence, offered medication refills, and triaged smokers to additional telephone counseling.

MAIN MEASURES

Number of IVR calls answered, patient satisfaction, biochemically validated tobacco abstinence 6 months after discharge.

KEY RESULTS

Participants answered a median of three of five IVR calls; 70% rated the calls as helpful, citing the social support, access to counseling and medication, and reminders to quit as positive factors. Older smokers (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.20-1.54 per decade) and smokers hospitalized for a smoking-related disease (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.21-2.23) completed more calls. Smokers who completed more calls had higher quit rates at 6-month follow-up (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.30-1.70, for each additional call) after multivariable adjustment for age, sex, education, discharge diagnosis, nicotine dependence, duration of medication use, and perceived importance of and confidence in quitting.

CONCLUSIONS

Automated IVR calls to support smoking cessation after hospital discharge were viewed favorably by patients. Higher IVR utilization was associated with higher odds of tobacco abstinence at 6-month follow-up. IVR technology offers health care systems a potentially scalable means of sustaining tobacco cessation interventions after hospital discharge.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers NCT01177176, NCT01714323.

Increasing Rates of Tobacco Treatment Delivery in Primary Care Practice: Evaluation of the Ottawa Model for Smoking Cessation

PURPOSE

We report on the effectiveness of the Ottawa Model for Smoking Cessation (OMSC), a multicomponent knowledge translation intervention, in increasing the rate at which primary care providers delivered smoking cessation interventions using the 3 A's model-Ask, Advise, and Act, and examine clinic-, provider-and patient-level determinants of 3 A's delivery.

METHODS

We examined the effect of the knowledge translation intervention in 32 primary care practices in Ontario, Canada, by assessing a cross-sectional sample of patients before the implementation of the OMSC and a second cross-sectional sample following implementation. We used 3-level modeling (clinic, clinician, patient) to examine the main effects and predictors of 3 A's delivery.

RESULTS

Four hundred eighty-one primary care clinicians and more than 3,500 tobacco users contributed data to the evaluation. Rates of delivery of the 3 A's increased significantly following program implementation (Ask: 55.3% vs 71.3%, P <.001; Advise: 45.5% vs 63.6%, P <.001; Act: 35.4% vs 54.4%, P <.001). The adjusted odds ratios (AOR) for the delivery of 3 A's between the pre- and post-assessments were AOR = 1.94; (95% CI, 1.61-2.34) for Ask, AOR = 1.92; (95% CI, 1.60-2.29) for Advise, and AOR = 2.03; (95% CI, 1.71-2.42) for Act. The quality of program implementation and the reason for clinic visit were associated with increased rates of 3 A's delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of the OMSC was associated with increased rates of smoking cessation treatment delivery. High quality implementation of the OMSC program was associated with increased rates of 3 A's delivery.

The Stop Smoking Before Surgery Program: Impact on Awareness of Smoking-Related Perioperative Complications and Smoking Behavior in Northern Canadian Communities

Objective: This study aimed to examine the impact of a Stop Smoking Before Surgery (SSBS) program in a health authority where responsibility for surgical services is shared by health professionals in regional centers and outlying communities. Methods: A between-subjects, pre-post mixed method program evaluation was conducted. Elective surgery patients at 2 Northern Canadian hospitals were recruited and surveyed at 2 time points: pre-SSBS implementation (n = 150) and 1 year post-SSBS implementation (n = 90). In addition, semistructured interviews were conducted with a purposeful sample of participants (n = 18). Results: Participants who received information about stopping smoking before surgery post-SSBS implementation were more likely than expected to have reduced their smoking, χ²(1, 89) = 10.62, P = .001, and had a significantly higher Awareness of Smoking-Related Perioperative Complications score than those that were advised to quit smoking prior to SSBS implementation (U = 1288.0, P < .001). Being advised by a health care professional was the second strongest predictor of whether or not participants reduced their smoking before surgery post-SSBS implementation. However, there was no significant change in the number of participants who reported being advised to quit smoking before surgery between groups. Conclusion: Providing surgery-specific resources to increase awareness of and support for surgery-specific smoking cessation had limited success in this rural context. Additional strategies are needed to ensure that every surgical patient who smokes receives information about the benefits of quitting for surgery and is aware of available cessation resources.

Behavioral Interventions to Enhance Smoking Cessation

In the United States, the rate of cigarette smoking has significantly declined over the past 2 decades, but much more work is needed, as almost 20% of adults still smoke and smoking continues to be the leading preventable cause of death. Furthermore, rates of smoking in certain subpopulations have remained relatively stable and have historically been neglected in smoking cessation research. Pharmacotherapy (both prescription and over-the-counter) and behavioral support are known to aid cessation, and their combination is more effective than either alone. There are significant barriers to access, use, and adherence, however, especially with pharmacotherapy. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to provide an update and overview of the numerous behavioral approaches that have been used to enhance smoking cessation. The research described can be classified into the type of approach used, the setting in which it is delivered, and the population targeted. Regardless of the classification, all the approaches attempt to provide smokers with the information, motivation, and behavioral skills thought to be necessary for achieving initial cessation and sustained abstinence. Recommendations for future research on behavioral smoking cessation are also included.

Sustained care intervention and postdischarge smoking cessation among hospitalized adults: a randomized clinical trial

IMPORTANCE

Health care systems need effective models to manage chronic diseases like tobacco dependence across transitions in care. Hospitalizations provide opportunities for smokers to quit, but research suggests that hospital-delivered interventions are effective only if treatment continues after discharge.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether an intervention to sustain tobacco treatment after hospital discharge increases smoking cessation rates compared with standard care.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A randomized clinical trial compared sustained care (a postdischarge tobacco cessation intervention) with standard care among 397 hospitalized daily smokers (mean age, 53 years; 48% were males; 81% were non-Hispanic whites) who wanted to quit smoking after discharge and received a tobacco dependence intervention in the hospital; 92% of eligible patients and 44% of screened patients enrolled. The study was conducted from August 2010 through November 2012 at Massachusetts General Hospital.

INTERVENTIONS

Sustained care participants received automated interactive voice response telephone calls and their choice of free smoking cessation medication (any type approved by the US Food and Drug Administration) for up to 90 days. The automated telephone calls promoted cessation, provided medication management, and triaged smokers for additional counseling. Standard care participants received recommendations for postdischarge pharmacotherapy and counseling.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was biochemically confirmed past 7-day tobacco abstinence at 6-month follow-up after discharge from the hospital; secondary outcomes included self-reported tobacco abstinence.

RESULTS

Smokers randomly assigned to sustained care (n = 198) used more counseling and more pharmacotherapy at each follow-up assessment than those assigned to standard care (n = 199). Biochemically validated 7-day tobacco abstinence at 6 months was higher with sustained care (26%) than with standard care (15%) (relative risk [RR], 1.71 [95% CI, 1.14-2.56], P = .009; number needed to treat, 9.4 [95% CI, 5.4-35.5]). Using multiple imputation for missing outcomes, the RR for 7-day tobacco abstinence was 1.55 (95% CI, 1.03-2.21; P = .04). Sustained care also resulted in higher self-reported continuous abstinence rates for 6 months after discharge (27% vs 16% for standard care; RR, 1.70 [95% CI, 1.15-2.51]; P = .007).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among hospitalized adult smokers who wanted to quit smoking, a postdischarge intervention providing automated telephone calls and free medication resulted in higher rates of smoking cessation at 6 months compared with a standard recommendation to use counseling and medication after discharge. These findings, if replicated, suggest an approach to help achieve sustained smoking cessation after a hospital stay.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01177176.