Provision of smoking care in NSW hospitals: opportunities for further enhancement

Smoking Cessation during the Second Half of Pregnancy Prevents Low Birth Weight among Australian Born Babies in Regional New South Wales

Smoking during pregnancy is a modifiable risk behavior of adverse health outcomes including low birth weight (LBW), and LBW is a key marker of newborns immediate and future health. This study aimed to examine the association between smoking cessation during the second half of pregnancy and LBW among babies born in Southern New South Wales Local Health District (SNSWLHD). Routinely collected perinatal data on singleton live births for the period 2011–2019 in five public hospitals of SNSWLHD were utilized. Multivariate logistic regression models were fitted to examine the association between smoking cessation during the second half of pregnancy and LBW. Analyses showed that mothers who ceased smoking during the second half of pregnancy were 44% less likely to have LBW babies (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.34, 0.94) compared to those who continued smoking throughout pregnancy. Mothers who reported an average daily dose of 1–10 or >10 cigarettes during the second half of pregnancy were significantly more likely to have babies with LBW than those who ceased smoking during the second half of pregnancy. Early identification of smoking behavior and promotion of smoking-cessation intervention for risk populations including pregnant women within the older age bracket (35–49 years) is imperative to reduce LBW.

Hospital Smoke-Free Policy: Compliance, Enforcement, and Practices. A Staff Survey in Two Large Public Hospitals in Australia

Background: Smoke-free hospital policies are becoming increasingly common to promote good health and quit attempts among patients who smoke. This study aims to assess: staff perceived enforcement and compliance with smoke-free policy; the current provision of smoking cessation care; and the characteristics of staff most likely to report provision of care to patients. Methods: An online cross-sectional survey of medical, nursing, and allied staff from two Australian public hospitals was conducted. Staff report of: patient and staff compliance with smoke-free policy; perceived policy enforcement; the provision of the 5As for smoking cessation (Ask, Assess, Advise, Assist, and Arrange follow-up); and the provision of stop-smoking medication are described. Logistic regressions were used to determine respondent characteristics related to the provision of the 5As and stop-smoking medication use during hospital admission. Results: A total of 805 respondents participated. Self-reported enforcement of smoke-free policy was low (60.9%), together with compliance for both patients (12.9%) and staff (23.6%). The provision of smoking cessation care was variable, with the delivery of the 5As ranging from 74.7% (ask) to 18.1% (arrange follow-up). Medical staff (odds ratio (OR) = 2.09, CI = 1.13, 3.85, p = 0.018) and full time employees (OR = 2.03, CI = 1.06, 3.89, p = 0.033) were more likely to provide smoking cessation care always/most of the time. Stop-smoking medication provision decreased with increasing age of staff (OR = 0.98, CI = 0.96, 0.99, p = 0.008). Conclusions: Smoke-free policy enforcement and compliance and the provision of smoking cessation care remains low in hospitals. Efforts to improve smoking cessation delivery by clinical staff are warranted.

Smoking, Quitting, and the Provision of Smoking Cessation Support: A Survey of Orthopaedic Trauma Patients

OBJECTIVE

This study investigates orthopaedic trauma patients smoking cessation history, intentions to quit, receipt of smoking cessation care during hospital admission, and patient-related factors associated with receipt of smoking cessation care.

METHODS

An online cross-sectional survey of orthopaedic trauma patients was conducted in 2 public hospitals in New South Wales, Australia. Prevalence of smoking and associated variables were described. Logistic regressions were used to examine whether patient characteristics were associated with receipt of smoking cessation care.

RESULTS

Eight hundred nineteen patients (response rate 73%) participated. More than 1 in 5 patients (21.8%) were current smokers (n = 175). Of the current smokers, more than half (55.3%) indicated making a quit attempt in the last 12 months and the majority (77.6%) were interested in quitting. More than a third of smokers (37.4%) were not advised to quit; 44.3% did not receive any form of nicotine replacement therapy; and 24.1% reported that they did not receive any of these 3 forms of smoking cessation care during their admission. Provision of care was not related to patient characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of smoking among the sample was high. Respondents were interested in quitting; however, the provision of care during admission was low. Smoking cessation interventions need to be developed to increase the provision of care and to promote quit attempts in this Australian population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Evaluating the efficacy of an integrated smoking cessation intervention for mental health patients: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

Smoking rates, and associated negative health outcomes, are disproportionately high among people with mental illness compared to the general population. Smoke-free policies within mental health hospitals can positively impact on patients’ motivation and self-efficacy to address their smoking. However, without post-discharge support, preadmission smoking behaviours typically resume. This protocol describes a randomised controlled trial that aims to assess the efficacy of linking mental health inpatients to community-based smoking cessation supports upon discharge as a means of reducing smoking prevalence.

Methods/Design

Eight hundred participants with acute mental illness will be recruited into the randomised controlled trial whilst inpatients at one of four psychiatric inpatient facilities in the state of New South Wales, Australia. After completing a baseline interview, participants will be randomly allocated to receive either: ‘Supported Care’, a multimodal smoking cessation intervention; or ‘Normal Care’, consisting of existing hospital care only. The ‘Supported Care’ intervention will consist of a brief motivational interview and a package of self-help material for abstaining from smoking whilst in hospital, and, following discharge, 16 weeks of motivational telephone-based counselling, 12 weeks of free nicotine replacement therapy, and a referral to the Quitline. Data will be collected at 1, 6 and 12 months post-discharge via computer-assisted telephone interview. The primary outcomes are abstinence from smoking (7-day point prevalence and prolonged cessation), and secondary outcomes comprise daily cigarette consumption, nicotine dependence, quit attempts, and readiness to change smoking behaviour.

Discussion

If shown to be effective, the study will provide evidence in support of systemic changes in the provision of smoking cessation care to patients following discharge from psychiatric inpatient facilities.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ANZTCN: ACTRN12612001042831. Date registered: 28 September 2012.

An audit of the prevalence of recorded nicotine dependence treatment in an Australian psychiatric hospital

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the prevalence of recorded smoking status, nicotine dependence assessment, and nicotine dependence treatment provision; and to examine the patient characteristics associated with the recording of smoking status.

METHOD

A retrospective systematic medical record audit was conducted of all psychiatric inpatient discharges over a six-month period (1 September 2005 to 28 February 2006), at a large Australian psychiatric hospital, with approximately 2,000 patient discharges per year. A one-page audit tool identifying patient characteristics and prevalence of recorded nicotine dependence treatment, and requiring ICD-10-AM diagnoses coding was used.

RESULTS

From 1,012 identified discharges, 1,000 medical records were available for audit (99%). Documentation of smoking status most frequently occurred on the admission form (28.8%) and diagnoses summary (41.6%). Documentation of nicotine dependence was not found in any record, and recording of any nicotine dependence treatment was negligible (0-0.5%). The rate of recorded smoking status on discharge summaries was 6%. Patients with a diagnosis of alcohol, cannabis, sedative use disorders or asthma were twice as likely to have their smoking status recorded compared to those who did not have these diagnoses.

CONCLUSIONS

Mental health services, by failing to diagnose and document treatment for nicotine dependence, do not conform to current clinical practice guidelines, despite nicotine dependence being the most commonly diagnosed psychiatric disorder.

IMPLICATIONS

Considerable system change and staff support is required to provide an environment where a primary prevention approach such as smoking care can be sustained.

Total smoking bans in psychiatric inpatient services: a survey of perceived benefits, barriers and support among staff

BACKGROUND

The introduction of total smoking bans represents an important step in addressing the smoking and physical health of people with mental illness. Despite evidence indicating the importance of staff support in the successful implementation of smoking bans, limited research has examined levels of staff support prior to the implementation of a ban in psychiatric settings, or factors that are associated with such support. This study aimed to examine the views of psychiatric inpatient hospital staff regarding the perceived benefits of and barriers to implementation of a successful total smoking ban in mental health services. Secondly, to examine the level of support among clinical and non-clinical staff for a total smoking ban. Thirdly, to examine the association between the benefits and barriers perceived by clinicians and their support for a total smoking ban in their unit.

METHODS

Cross-sectional survey of both clinical and non-clinical staff in a large inpatient psychiatric hospital immediately prior to the implementation of a total smoking ban.

RESULTS

Of the 300 staff, 183 (61%) responded. Seventy-three (41%) of total respondents were clinical staff, and 110 (92%) were non-clinical staff. More than two-thirds of staff agreed that a smoking ban would improve their work environment and conditions, help staff to stop smoking and improve patients' physical health. The most prevalent clinician perceived barriers to a successful total smoking ban related to fear of patient aggression (89%) and patient non-compliance (72%). Two thirds (67%) of all staff indicated support for a total smoking ban in mental health facilities generally, and a majority (54%) of clinical staff expressed support for a ban within their unit. Clinical staff who believed a smoking ban would help patients to stop smoking were more likely to support a smoking ban in their unit.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a clear need to more effectively communicate to staff the evidence that consistently applied smoking bans do not increase patient aggression. There is also a need to communicate the benefits of smoking bans in aiding the delivery of smoking cessation care, and the benefits of both smoking bans and such care in aiding patients to stop smoking.

Providing nicotine dependence treatment to psychiatric inpatients: the views of Australian nurse managers

The prevalence of smoking in psychiatric settings remains high. This study aims to describe the views of nurse managers in psychiatric inpatient settings regarding the provision of nicotine dependence treatment, and whether there were associations between such views and the provision of nicotine dependence treatment. A cross-sectional survey was mailed to all public psychiatric inpatient units in New South Wales, Australia, for completion by nurse managers. Of the identified 131 service units, 123 completed questionnaires were returned (94%). Patient-related factors were considered to have a high level of influence on the provision of nicotine dependence treatment: patients requesting assistance to quit (58%), patients being receptive to interventions (52%), and patient health improving with quitting (45%). Units where the respondent reported that nicotine dependence treatment was as important as other roles were more likely to provide nicotine dependence treatment compared to units whose respondents did not hold this view (OR = 0.257, d.f. = 1, P < 0.01). While the results indicate strong support for the provision of nicotine dependence treatment, this support appears qualified by perceived patient readiness to quit, suggesting care is provided selectively rather than systematically. Positioning smoking as an addiction requiring treatment within a traditional curative approach may lead to a health service more conducive to the routine provision of nicotine dependence treatment.