Feasibility of Implementing a Hospital-Based "Opt-Out" Tobacco-Cessation Service

Clinician Views of Proactive Tobacco Treatment Programs: A Qualitative Evaluation

INTRODUCTION

Proactive tobacco treatment programs are an evidence-based strategy to recruit patients who smoke to make supported quit attempts. However, such programs are rarely implemented. We performed a qualitative assessment of clinicians to inform the creation of a proactive outreach program for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who smoke.

METHODS

Informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we conducted semi-structured interviews to assess clinician views of proactive outreach, including barriers, program structure, and the use of technology. Clinicians included primary and specialty care physicians, nurses and advanced practice providers, pharmacists, respiratory therapists, a psychologist, and relevant members of leadership. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using directed content analysis.

RESULTS

Clinicians in all roles identified that proactive outreach could be an effective use of resources to help patients with COPD who smoke quit with several advantages over the current state. Clinicians disagreed on the priority population (e.g., younger patients, sicker patients), and to some extent on whether proactive outreach is a clinical priority. Though they supported that technology could be part of the outreach program, most advocated for multiple avenues (phone calls, drop-in clinic, texting), as these patients were perceived to be low technology utilizers. The primary implementation barriers were competing priorities and cost, as well as unclear billing and staffing models.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians support proactive outreach for patients with COPD, but the optimal way to structure, staff, and fund such programs remains unclear. Health systems should leverage implementation strategies to speed uptake of these potentially life-saving programs.

Sustainability of an Opt-Out Electronic-Health Record-Based Tobacco Treatment Consult Service at a Large Safety-Net Hospital: A 6-Year Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Our safety-net hospital implemented a hospital-based tobacco treatment intervention in 2016. We previously showed the intervention, an "opt-out" Electronic Health Record (EHR)-based Best Practice Alert (BPA)+ order-set that triggers consultation to an inpatient Tobacco Treatment Consult (TTC) service for all patients who smoke, improves smoking abstinence. We now report on sustainability, 6 years after inception.

AIMS AND METHODS

We analyzed data collected between July 2016-June 2022 of patients documented as "currently smoking" in the EHR. Across the 6 years, we used Pearson's correlation analysis to compare Adoption (clinician acceptance of the BPA+ order-set, thus generating consultation to the TTC service); Reach (number of consultations completed by the TTC service); and Effectiveness (receipt of pharmacotherapy orders between patients receiving and not receiving consultations).

RESULTS

Among 39 558 adult admissions (July 2016-June 2022) with "currently smoking" status in the EHR for whom the BPA triggered, clinicians accepted the TTC order set on 50.4% (19 932/39 558), though acceptance varied across services (eg, Cardiology [71%] and Obstetrics-Gynecology 12%]). The TTC service consulted on 17% (6779/39 558) of patients due to staffing constraints. Consultations ordered (r = -0.28, p = .59) and completed (r = 0.45, p = .37) remained stable over 6-years. Compared to patients not receiving consultations, patients receiving consultations were more likely to receive pharmacotherapy orders overall (inpatient: 50.8% vs. 35.1%, p < .0001; at discharge: 27.1% vs. 10%, p < .0001) and in each year.

CONCLUSIONS

The "opt-out" EHR-based TTC service is sustainable, though many did not receive consultations due to resource constraints. Health care systems should elevate the priority of hospital-based tobacco treatment programs to increase reach to underserved populations.

IMPLICATIONS

Our study shows that opt-out approaches that utilize the EHR are a sustainable approach to providing evidence-based tobacco treatment to all hospitalized individuals who smoke, regardless of readiness to stop smoking and clinical condition.

Implementation, enrollment, and engagement in an opt-out telehealth pharmacist-assisted tobacco treatment program for patients seen in oncology outpatient clinics

OBJECTIVE

To describe the workflow, reach, cost, and self-reported quit rates for an opt-out tobacco treatment program (TTP) for patients seen in 43 oncology outpatient clinics.

METHODS

Between May 25, 2021, and December 31, 2022, adult patients (≥18 years) visiting clinics affiliated with the Medical University of South Carolina Hollings Cancer Center were screened for smoking status. Those currently smoking were referred to a telehealth pharmacy-assisted TTP. An attempt was made to contact referred patients by phone. Patients reached were offered free smoking cessation counseling and a 2-week starter kit of nicotine replacement medication. A random sample of 420 patients enrolled in the TTP were selected to participate in a telephone survey to assess smoking status 4 to 12 months after enrollment.

RESULTS

During the reference period 35,756 patients were screened and 9.3% were identified as currently smoking. Among the 3319 patients referred to the TTP at least once, 2393 (72.1%) were reached by phone, of whom 426 (12.8%) were ineligible for treatment, 458 (13.8%) opted out of treatment, and 1509 (45.5%) received treatment. More than 90% of TTP enrollees smoked daily, with an average of 13.1 cigarettes per day. Follow-up surveys were completed on 167 of 420 patients, of whom 23.4% to 33.5% reported not smoking; if all nonresponders to the survey are counted as smoking, the range of quit rates is 9.3% to 13.3%.

CONCLUSION

The findings demonstrate the feasibility of reaching and delivering smoking cessation treatments to patients from a diverse set of geographically dispersed oncology clinics.

Interactive voice response (IVR) for tobacco cessation: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To summarise the uses, outcomes and implementation of interactive voice response (IVR) as a tobacco cessation intervention.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review was conducted. Searches were performed on 3 May 2023. The strategies used keywords such as "tobacco cessation", "smoking reduction" and "interactive voice recording". Ovid MEDLINE ALL, Embase, APA PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched. Grey literature searches were also conducted.

STUDY SELECTION

Titles and abstracts were assessed by two independent reviewers. Studies were included if IVR was an intervention for tobacco cessation for adults; any outcomes were reported and study design was comparative. Any abstract included by either reviewer proceeded to full-text review. Full texts were reviewed by two independent reviewers.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were independently extracted by two reviewers using a standardised form. The Risk of Bias Tool for Randomised Trials and the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions tools were used to assess study quality.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Of 308 identified abstracts, 20 moderate-quality to low-quality studies were included. IVR was used standalone or adjunctly as a treatment, follow-up or risk-assessment tool across populations including general smokers, hospitalised patients, quitline users, perinatal women, patients with cancer and veteran smokers. Effective studies found that IVR was delivered more frequently with shorter follow-up times. Significant gaps in the literature include a lack of population diversity, limited implementation settings and delivery schedules, and limited patient and provider perspectives.

CONCLUSIONS

While the evidence is weak, IVR appears to be a promising intervention for tobacco cessation. However, pilot programmes and research addressing literature gaps are necessary.

Implementation of an "opt-out" tobacco treatment program in six hospitals in South Carolina

OBJECTIVE

Describe the screening, referral, and treatment delivery associated with an opt-out tobacco treatment program (TTP) implemented in six hospitals varying in size, rurality and patient populations.

METHODS

Between March 6, 2021 and December 17, 2021, adult patients (≥ 18 years) admitted to six hospitals affiliated with the Medical University of South Carolina were screened for smoking status. The hospitals ranged in size from 82 to 715 beds. Those currently smoking were automatically referred to one of two tobacco treatment options: 1) Enhanced care (EC) where patients could receive a bedside consult by a trained tobacco treatment specialist plus an automated post-discharge follow-up call designed to connect those smoking to the South Carolina Quitline (SCQL); or 2) Basic care (BC) consisting of the post-discharge follow-up call only. An attempt was made to survey patients at 6-weeks after hospitalization to assess smoking status.

RESULTS

Smoking prevalence ranged from 14 to 49% across the six hospitals; 6,000 patients were referred to the TTP.The delivery of the bedside consult varied across the hospitals with the lowest in the Charleston hospitals which had the highest caseload of referred patients per specialist. Among patients who received a consult visit during their hospitalization, 50% accepted the consult, 8% opted out, 3% claimed not to be current smokers, and 38% were unavailable at the time of the consult visit. Most of those enrolled in the TTP were long-term daily smokers.Forty-three percent of patients eligible for the automated post-discharge follow-up call answered the call, of those, 61% reported smoking in the past seven days, and of those, 34% accepted the referral to theSCQL. Among the 986 of patients surveyed at 6-weeks after hospitalization quit rates ranged from 20%-30% based on duration of reported cessation and were similar between hospitals and for patients assigned to EC versus BC intervention groups.

CONCLUSION

Findings demonstrate the broad reach of an opt-out TTP. Elements of treatment delivery can be improved by addressing patient-to-staffing ratios, improving systems to prescribe stop smoking medications for patients at discharge and linking patients to stop smoking services after hospital discharge.

Evaluation of a hospital-initiated tobacco dependence treatment service: uptake, smoking cessation, readmission and mortality

BACKGROUND

The National Health Service in England aims to implement tobacco dependency treatment services in all hospitals by 2024. We aimed to assess the uptake of a new service, adapted from the Ottawa Model of Smoking Cessation, and its impact on 6-month quit rates and readmission or death at 1-year follow-up.

METHODS

We conducted a pragmatic service evaluation of a tobacco dependency service implemented among 2067 patients who smoked who were admitted to 2 acute hospitals in London, England, over a 12-month period from July 2020. The intervention consisted of the systematic identification of smoking status, automatic referral to tobacco dependence specialists, provision of pharmacotherapy and behavioural support throughout the hospital stay, and telephone support for 6 months after discharge. The outcomes were (i) patient acceptance of the intervention during admission, (ii) quit success at 6 months after discharge, (iii) death, or (iv) readmission up to 1 year following discharge. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the impact of a range of clinical and demographic variables on these outcomes.

RESULTS

The majority (79.4%) of patients accepted support at the first assessment. Six months after discharge, 35.1% of successfully contacted patients reported having quit smoking. After adjustment, odds of accepting support were 51-61% higher among patients of all non-White ethnicity groups, relative to White patients, but patients of Mixed, Asian, or Other ethnicities had decreased odds of quit success (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 0.32, 95%CI = 0.15-0.66). Decreased odds of accepting support were associated with a diagnosis of cardiovascular disease or diabetes; however, diabetes was associated with increased odds of quit success (AOR = 1.88, 95%CI = 1.17-3.04). Intention to make a quit attempt was associated with a threefold increase in odds of quit success, and 60% lower odds of death, compared to patients who did not intend to quit. A mental health diagnosis was associated with an 84% increase in the odds of dying within 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall quit rates were similar to results from Ottawa models implemented elsewhere, although outcomes varied by site. Outcomes also varied according to patient demographics and diagnoses, suggesting personalised and culturally tailored interventions may be needed to optimise quit success.

Integrating Smoking Cessation Into Low-Dose Computed Tomography Lung Cancer Screening: Results of the Ontario, Canada Pilot

INTRODUCTION

Low-dose computed tomography screening in high-risk individuals reduces lung cancer mortality. To inform the implementation of a provincial lung cancer screening program, Ontario Health undertook a Pilot study, which integrated smoking cessation (SC).

METHODS

The impact of integrating SC into the Pilot was assessed by the following: rate of acceptance of a SC referral; proportion of individuals who were currently smoking cigarettes and attended a SC session; the quit rate at 1 year; change in the number of quit attempts; change in Heaviness of Smoking Index; and relapse rate in those who previously smoked.

RESULTS

A total of 7768 individuals were recruited predominantly through primary care physician referral. Of these, 4463 were currently smoking and were risk assessed and referred to SC services, irrespective of screening eligibility: 3114 (69.8%) accepted referral to an in-hospital SC program, 431 (9.7%) to telephone quit lines, and 50 (1.1%) to other programs. In addition, 4.4% reported no intention to quit and 8.5% were not interested in participating in a SC program. Of the 3063 screen-eligible individuals who were smoking at baseline low-dose computed tomography scan, 2736 (89.3%) attended in-hospital SC counseling. The quit rate at 1 year was 15.5% (95% confidence interval: 13.4%-17.7%; range: 10.5%-20.0%). Improvements were also observed in Heaviness of Smoking Index (p < 0.0001), number of cigarettes smoked per day (p < 0.0001), time to first cigarette (p < 0.0001), and number of quit attempts (p < 0.001). Of those who reported having quit within the previous 6 months, 6.3% had resumed smoking at 1 year. Furthermore, 92.7% of the respondents reported satisfaction with the hospital-based SC program.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of these observations, the Ontario Lung Screening Program continues to recruit through primary care providers, to assess risk for eligibility using trained navigators, and to use an opt-out approach to referral for cessation services. In addition, initial in-hospital SC support and intensive follow-on cessation interventions will be provided to the extent possible.

Implementation of an "Opt-Out" Tobacco Treatment Program in Six Hospitals in South Carolina

Objective

To describe the implementation an opt-out tobacco treatment program (TTP) in 6 diverse hospitals located in different regions of South Carolina.

Methods

Between March 8, 2021 and December 17, 2021, adult patients (≥ 18 years) admitted to 6 hospitals affiliated with the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) were screened for their cigarette status. Patients who smoked cigarettes were referred to an TTP offering a brief bedside consult and automated post-discharge follow-up calls with an opportunity to receive a referral to the South Carolina Quitline (SCQL). The hospitals included in this study ranged in size from 82 to 715 beds with diverse patient populations. Herein, we report on the results of screening and referring patients to the TTP, delivery of smoking cessation treatments, and patient smoking status assessed in a sample of patients followed 6-weeks after discharge from the hospital.

Results

Smoking prevalence ranged from 14-49% across the 6 hospitals. Among eligible patients reached, 85.6% accepted the bedside consult. Only 3.4% of patients reached were deemed ineligible because they claimed not to be currently smoking cigarettes. The automated post-discharge follow-up calls were answered by 43% of patients, with about a third of those who had relapsed back to smoking accepting the offer of a referral to the SCQL. Overall, about half of the 6,000 patients referred to the TTP received some type of treatment. Self-reported smoking abstinence rates assessed 6-weeks after discharge were similar across the five acute care hospitals ranging from about 20-30%.

Conclusion

The findings demonstrate the broad reach of implementing an opt-out TTP for patients in hospitals of varying size, rurality and patient populations.

Optimizing the Implementation of Tobacco Treatment for People with HIV: A Pilot Study

People with HIV (PWH) have higher rates of tobacco use compared to their societal counterparts and are disproportionately affected by tobacco-related morbidity and mortality. A needs assessment was conducted to assess provider beliefs and opinions on tobacco treatment barriers and treatment approaches. The results highlighted a disconnect between the known importance of quitting smoking and barriers in linking patients to treatment, such as lack of patient interest and other patient issues being a higher priority. Using this assessment data, a treatment delivery approach, Proactive Outreach with Medication Opt-out for Tobacco Treatment Engagement (PrOMOTE), was devised and piloted. PrOMOTE consisted of an outpatient clinical pharmacist trained in tobacco treatment proactively contacting patients for counseling and to prescribe smoking cessation pharmacotherapy (varenicline or dual nicotine replacement therapy (NRT)) using an opt-out approach. The pilot was conducted with 10 PWH and patient reach and opt-out rates were evaluated. Of the 10 patients contacted, 7 were reached and none opted out of the pharmacotherapy prescription (varenicline = 6; NRT = 1). Providers know the importance of smoking cessation for PWH but encounter several barriers to implementing treatment. Using PrOMOTE methods to deliver tobacco treatment increased the reach and pharmacotherapy acceptance rate of PWH who smoke.

Integrating Social Determinants of Health With Tobacco Treatment for Individuals With Opioid Use Disorder: Feasibility and Acceptability Study of Delivery Through Text Messaging

Background

Individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) have a high prevalence of smoking and frequently experience unmet social determinants of health (SDOH), which may be barriers to smoking cessation. Hospitalization is an opportunity to encourage smoking cessation. Unfortunately, many clinicians do not provide tobacco treatment to support the maintenance of cessation achieved during hospitalization. Interventions are required to support these high-risk individuals after hospital discharge.

Objective

This study aimed to test the feasibility and acceptability of a 28-day SMS text messaging program tailored to individuals with OUD, which provides smoking cessation support and addresses unmet SDOH needs.

Methods

From July to December 2019, we enrolled 25 individuals who were hospitalized with tobacco dependence and OUD at our large safety net hospital. The SMS text messaging program was initiated during hospitalization and continued for 28 days. Participants were enrolled in either the ready to quit within 30 days or the not ready to quit within 30 days program based on their readiness to quit. Automated SMS text messages were sent twice daily for 4 weeks. The topics included health and cost benefits of quitting, both general and opioid specific (16 messages); managing mood and stress (8 messages); motivation, coping strategies, and encouragement (18 messages); addressing medication misconceptions (5 messages); links to resources to address substance use (2 messages providing links to the Massachusetts Substance Use Helpline and Boston Medical Center resources), tobacco dependence (1 message providing a link to the Massachusetts Quitline), and unmet SDOH needs (6 messages assessing SDOH needs with links to resources if unmet SDOH needs were identified). Questionnaires and interviews were conducted at baseline and at 2 and 4 weeks after enrollment.

Results

The participants were 56% (14/25) female, 36% (9/25) African American, 92% (23/25) unemployed, and 96% (24/25) Medicaid insured. Approximately 84% (21/25) activated the program, and none of the participants unsubscribed. Approximately 57% (12/21) completed either the 2- or 4-week questionnaires. Program satisfaction was high (overall mean 6.7, SD 0.8, range 1-7). Many perceived that the SMS text messaging program provided social support, companionship, and motivation to stop smoking. Messages about the health benefits of quitting were well received, whereas messages on how quitting cigarettes may prevent relapse from other substances had mixed views, highlighting the importance of tailoring interventions to patient preferences.

Conclusions

SMS text messaging to promote smoking cessation and address SDOH needs may be an effective tool for improving quit rates and health outcomes in individuals with tobacco dependence and OUD. Our study adds to the growing body of evidence that SMS text messaging approaches are feasible and acceptable for providing tobacco treatment to all individuals who smoke, even among low-income populations who have OUD and are not ready to quit.

Proposing a Model of Proactive Outreach to Advance Clinical Research and Care Delivery for Patients Who Use Tobacco

There are evidence-based treatments for tobacco dependence, but inequities exist in the access to and reach of these treatments. Traditional models of tobacco treatment delivery are "reactive" and typically provide treatment only to patients who are highly motivated to quit and seek out tobacco treatment. Newer models involve "proactive" outreach, with benefits that include increasing access to tobacco treatment, prompting quit attempts among patients with low motivation, addressing health disparities, and improving population-level quit rates. However, the definition of "proactive" is not clear, and adoption has been slow. This commentary introduces a comprehensive yet flexible model of proactive outreach and describes how proactive outreach can optimize clinical research and care delivery in these domains: (1) identifying the population, (2) offering treatment, and (3) delivering treatment. Dimensions relevant to each domain are the intensity of proactive outreach (low to high) and the extent to which proactive outreach activities rely on human interaction or are facilitated by information technology (IT). Adoption of the proposed proactive outreach model could improve the precision and rigor with which tobacco cessation research and tobacco treatment programs report data, which could have a positive effect on care delivery and patient outcomes.

Rates of Smoking Cessation at 6 and 12 Months after a Clinical Tobacco Smoking Cessation Intervention in Head and Neck Cancer Patients in Northern Ontario, Canada

Smoking during cancer treatment is associated with reduced treatment response and cancer recurrence in patients with tobacco-related cancers. The purpose of this study was to examine smoking characteristics in head and neck cancer patients (n = 503) with a history of smoking and examine the impact of an intensive clinical tobacco intervention to patients who were currently smoking. All participants completed an interviewer-administered questionnaire at study enrollment which examined smoking behaviours, motivations to quit, and strategies used to cessate smoking. Follow-up assessments were completed at 6- and 12-months which monitored whether patients had quit smoking, remained cessated, or continued to smoke since study recruitment. For those who were currently smoking (n = 186, 37.0%), an intensive clinical tobacco intervention that utilized the 3A's-Ask, Advise, Arrange-and the Opt-Out approach was offered to assist with smoking cessation at their new patient visit and followed-up weekly during their head and neck radiation therapy for 7 weeks. At 6 months, 23.7% (n = 41) of those who were smoking successfully quit; 51.2% quit 'cold turkey' (defined as using no smoking cessation assistance, aids or pharmacotherapy to quit), while 34.9% used pharmacotherapy (varenicline (Champix)) to quit. On average, it took those who were smoking 1-5 attempts to quit, but once they quit they remained cessated for the duration of the study. Although the head and neck cancer patients in this study reported high levels of nicotine dependence, many were able to successfully cessate.

Tobacco Treatment Outcomes for Hospital Patients With and Without Mental Health Diagnoses

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of mental health conditions is higher in cigarette smokers than nonsmokers. However, those with diagnosed mental health disorders are understudied within general inpatient hospital settings. This study seeks to evaluate how having a mental health diagnosis influences response to a brief opt-out inpatient tobacco treatment intervention.

METHODS

Data included 4,153 admitted patients who completed a tobacco treatment visit. Post-discharge self-reported abstinence was obtained via response to an automated call 1-month after discharge. Mental health co-morbidities were assessed by reviewing electronic medical records. Logistic regression was used to assess associations between having a mental health diagnosis and patients' smoking history, interest in quitting smoking, and post-discharge abstinence.

RESULTS

Overall 34.1% of patients were diagnosed with mental health disorders, most commonly depression or substance use disorders. Patients with a diagnosed mental health disorder were more likely to report a history of long-term heavy smoking and were less likely to express an interesting in remaining abstinent from smoking after hospitalization. An intent-to-treat analysis using logistic regression analysis found lower rates of self-reported smoking abstinence in those with a mental health disorder compared to those without (9 vs. 13.2%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with a history of mental health diagnoses, such as depression or substance use disorders, was associated with lower rates of smoking abstinence in patients after hospitalization. Hospital based opt-out smoking cessation programs have shown to be generally effective and efficient. However, certain subpopulations may require tailored intervention in order to improve treatment outcomes. Future research is needed to develop brief, effective tobacco treatment for hospital patients with comorbid mental health diagnoses.

Rapid Cycle Evaluation and Adaptation of an Inpatient Tobacco Treatment Service at a U.S. Safety-Net Hospital

Background

To address disparities in smoking rates, our safety-net hospital implemented an inpatient tobacco treatment intervention: an “opt-out” electronic health record (EHR)-based Best Practice Alert + order-set, which triggers consultation to a Tobacco Treatment Consult (TTC) service for all hospitalized patients who smoke cigarettes. We report on development, implementation, and adaptation of the intervention, informed by a pre-implementation needs assessment and two rapid-cycle evaluations guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) compilation.

Methods

We identified stakeholders affected by implementation and conducted a local needs assessment starting 6 months-pre-launch. We then conducted two rapid-cycle evaluations during the first 6 months post-implementation. The CFIR informed survey and interview guide development, data collection, assessment of barriers and facilitators, and selection of ERIC strategies to implement and adapt the intervention.

Results

Key themes were: (1) Understanding the hospital's priority to improving tobacco performance metrics was critical in gaining leadership buy-in (CFIR Domain: Outer setting; Construct: External Policy and Incentives). (2) CFIR-based rapid-cycle evaluations allowed us to recognize implementation challenges early and select ERIC strategies clustering into 3 broad categories (conducting needs assessment; developing stakeholder relationships; training and educating stakeholders) to make real-time adaptations, creating an acceptable clinical workflow. (3) Minimizing clinician burden allowed the successful implementation of the TTC service. (4) Demonstrating improved 6-month quit rates and tobacco performance metrics were key to sustaining the program.

Conclusions

Rapid-cycle evaluations to gather pre-implementation and early-implementation data, focusing on modifiable barriers and facilitators, allowed us to develop and refine the intervention to improve acceptability, adoption, and sustainability, enabling us to improve tobacco performance metrics in a short timeline. Future directions include spreading rapid-cycle evaluations to promote implementation of inpatient tobacco treatment programs to other settings and assessing long-term sustainability and return on investment of these programs.

Associations between cancer diagnosis and patients' responses to an inpatient tobacco treatment intervention

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of a chronic illness, such as cancer may influence health behavior changes, such as smoking cessation. The present analyses examine associations between a cancer diagnosis (i.e., yes or no) and response to an opt-out smoking cessation bedside intervention provided to hospitalized patients. It was hypothesized that patients with a past or present cancer diagnosis would report higher motivation and engagement with quitting smoking, and higher rates of smoking abstinence after hospital discharge, compared to those without a cancer diagnosis.

METHODS

Chart review was conducted on 5287 inpatients who accepted bedside treatment from a counselor and opted-in to automated follow-up calls from July 2014 to December 2019.

RESULTS

At the time of inpatient assessment, those with a past or present cancer diagnosis (n = 419, 7.9%) endorsed significantly higher levels of importance of quitting than those without a cancer diagnosis (3.92/5 vs. 3.77/5), and were more likely to receive smoking cessation medication upon discharge (17.9% vs. 13.3%). Follow-up data from 30-days post-discharge showed those with a cancer diagnosis endorsed higher rates of self-reported abstinence (20.5%) than those without a cancer diagnosis (10.3%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Being hospitalized for any reason provides an opportunity for smokers to consider quitting. Having a previous diagnosis of cancer appears to increase intention to quit and lead to higher rates of smoking cessation in patients who are hospitalized compared to patients without cancer. Future research needs to work toward optimizing motivation for smoking cessation while admitted to a hospital and on improving quit rates for all admitted patients, regardless of diagnosis.

Cigarette-smoking characteristics and interest in cessation in patients with head-and-neck cancer

Purpose

Many patients diagnosed with head-and-neck cancer are current or former smokers. Despite the well-known adverse effects of smoking, continuation of smoking during cancer treatment is associated with reduced efficacy of that treatment and with cancer recurrence. In the present study, we examined smoking characteristics in patients with head-and-neck cancer near the time of cancer treatment.

Methods

A prospective cohort of patients with head-and-neck cancer who attended a dental oncology clinic before receiving cancer treatment at a regional cancer centre were invited to participate in a study that involved completing an interviewer-administered questionnaire to assess smoking characteristics, intention to quit, motivation to quit, and strategies perceived to potentially aid in successful cessation.

Results

The study enrolled 493 ever-smokers, with a response rate of 96.1% and a self-reported current smoker rate of 37.1% (n = 183). Most of the current smokers reported high nicotine dependence, with 84.7% (n = 155) indicating a time to first cigarette of 30 minutes or less. Most had previously attempted to quit smoking (77.0%), and many had prior unsuccessful quit attempts before resuming smoking again. Most were interested in quitting smoking (85.8%), and many (70.5%) were seriously considering quitting smoking within the subsequent 30 days.

Conclusions

Patients with head-and-neck cancer reported high nicotine dependence and high interest in cessation opportunities near the time of treatment for cancer. Those results might provide support for provision of smoking cessation opportunities.

Physician-directed smoking cessation using patient "opt-out" approach in the emergency department: A pilot program

OBJECTIVE

Using a physician-directed, patient "opt-out" approach to prescriptive smoking cessation in the emergency department (ED) setting, we set out to describe patient actions as they related to smoking cessation behaviors.

METHODS

A convenience sample of smokers at 2 Pennsylvania hospital EDs who met inclusion/exclusion criteria were approached to participate in a brief intervention known as screening, treatment initiation, and referral (STIR) counseling that included phone follow-up. Demographic information, current smoking status, and specific physician prescription and follow-up recommendations were collected. Approximately 3 months later, patients were contacted to determine current smoking status and actions taken since their ED visit.

RESULTS

One hundred six patients were approached and 7 (6.6%) opted out of the intervention. Patients who did not opt out were evaluated for appropriate use of smoking cessation-related medications; 35 (35.4%) opted out of the prescription(s) and 6 (6.1%) were not indicated. Twenty-one (21.2%) patients opted out of ambulatory referral follow-ups with primary care and/or tobacco treatment program; one (1.0%) was not indicated for referral. Nineteen (32.8%) patients who received prescription(s) for smoking cessation-related medications initially also followed the prescription(s). Seventeen (22.1%) patients participated in referral follow-up.

CONCLUSION

In this small ED pilot, using the STIR concepts in an opt-out method, few smokers opted out of the smoking cessation intervention. About one-third of the patients declined prescriptions for smoking cessation-related medications and less than one-quarter declined ambulatory referrals for follow-up. These findings support a willingness of patients to participate in STIR and the benefits of intervention in this setting.

An observational study of system-level changes to improve the recording of very brief advice for smoking cessation in an inpatient mental health setting

BACKGROUND

Smoking prevalence among people with psychosis remains high. Providing Very Brief Advice (VBA) comprising: i) ASK, identifying a patient's smoking status ii) ADVISE, advising on the best way to stop and iii) ACT (OFFER), offering a referral to specialist smoking cessation support, increases quit attempts in the general population. We assessed whether system-level changes in a UK mental health organisation improved the recording of the provision of ASK, ADVISE, ACT (OFFER) and consent to referral to specialist smoking cessation support (ACT (CONSENT)).

METHODS

We conducted a study using a regression discontinuity design in four psychiatric hospitals with patients who received treatment from an inpatient psychosis service over 52 months (May 2012-September 2016). The system-level changes to facilitate the provision of VBA comprised: A) financially incentivising recording smoking status and offer of support (ASK and ACT (OFFER)); B) introduction of a comprehensive smoke-free policy; C) enhancements to the patient electronic healthcare record (EHCR) which included C1) a temporary form to record the financial incentivisation of ASK and ACT (OFFER) C2) amendments to how VBA was recorded in the EHCR and C3) the integration of a new electronic national referral system in the EHCR. The recording of ASK, ADVISE, ACT (OFFER/CONSENT) were extracted using a de-identified psychiatric case register.

RESULTS

There were 8976 admissions of 5434 unique individuals during the study period. Following A) financial incentive, the odds of recording ASK increased (OR: 1.56, 95%CI: 1.24-1.95). Following B) comprehensive smoke-free policy, the odds of recording ADVICE increased (OR: 3.36, 95%CI: 1.39-8.13). Following C1) temporary recording form, the odds of recording ASK (OR:1.99, 95%CI:1.59-2.48) and recording ACT (OFFER) increased (OR: 4.22, 95%CI: 2.51-7.12). Following C3) electronic referral system, the odds of recording ASK (OR:1.79, 95%CI: 1.31-2.43) and ACT (OFFER; OR: 1.09, 95%CI: 0.59-1.99) increased. There was no change in recording VBA outcomes following C2) amendments to VBA recording.

CONCLUSIONS

Financial incentives and the recording of incentivised outcomes, the comprehensive smoke-free policy, and the electronic referral system, were associated with increases in recording individual VBA elements, but other changes to the EHCR were not. System-level changes may facilitate staff recording of VBA provision in mental health settings.

Considering Systemic Barriers to Treating Tobacco Use in Clinical Settings in the United States

The Comorbidity Workgroup of the Tobacco Treatment Research Network, within the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, previously highlighted the need to provide tobacco treatment to patients diagnosed with comorbid physical and mental health conditions. Yet, systemic barriers in the United States health care system prevent many patients who present for medical treatment from getting the evidence-based tobacco treatment that they need. The identified barriers include insufficient training in the epidemiologic impact of tobacco use, related disorders, and pharmacological and behavioral treatment approaches; misunderstanding among clinicians about the effectiveness of tobacco treatment; lack of therapeutic support from clinical staff; insufficient use of health information technology to improve tobacco use identification and treatment; and limited time and reimbursement for clinicians to provide treatment. We highlight three vignettes demonstrating the complexities of practical barriers at the health care system level. We consider each of the barriers in turn and discuss evidence-based strategies that could be implemented in the clinical care of patients with comorbid conditions. In addition, in the absence of compelling data to guide implementation approaches, we offer suggestions for potential strategies and avenues for future research. Implications: Three vignettes highlighted in this article illustrate some systemic barriers to providing tobacco treatment for patients being treated for comorbid conditions. We explore the barriers to tobacco treatment and offer suggestions for changes in training, health care systems, clinical workflow, and payment systems that could enhance the reach and the quality of tobacco treatment within the US health care system.

Integration of Tobacco Treatment Services into Cancer Care at Stanford

As part of a National Cancer Institute Moonshot P30 Supplement, the Stanford Cancer Center piloted and integrated tobacco treatment into cancer care. This quality improvement (QI) project reports on the process from initial pilot to adoption within 14 clinics. The Head and Neck Oncology Clinic was engaged first in January 2019 as a pilot site given staff receptivity, elevated smoking prevalence, and a high tobacco screening rate (95%) yet low levels of tobacco cessation treatment referrals (<10%) and patient engagement (<1% of smokers treated). To improve referrals and engagement, system changes included an automated "opt-out" referral process and provision of tobacco cessation treatment as a covered benefit with flexible delivery options that included phone and telemedicine. Screening rates increased to 99%, referrals to 100%, 74% of patients were reached by counselors, and 33% of those reached engaged in treatment. Patient-reported abstinence from all tobacco products at 6-month follow-up is 20%. In July 2019, two additional oncology clinics were added. In December 2019, less than one year from initiating the QI pilot, with demonstrated feasibility, acceptability, and efficacy, the tobacco treatment services were integrated into 14 clinics at Stanford Cancer Center.

Feasibility, uptake and impact of a hospital-wide tobacco addiction treatment pathway: Results from the CURE project pilot

INTRODUCTION

Providing comprehensive tobacco addiction treatment to smokers admitted to acute care settings represents an opportunity to realise major health resource savings and population health improvements.

METHODS

The CURE project is a hospital-wide tobacco addiction treatment service piloted in Wythenshawe Hospital, Manchester, UK. The core components of the project are electronic screening of all patients to identify smokers; the provision of brief advice and pharmacotherapy by frontline staff; opt-out referral of smokers to a specialist team for inpatient behavioural interventions; and continued support after discharge.

RESULTS

From 01 October 2018 to 31 March 2019, 92% (13,515/14,690) of adult admissions were screened for smoking status, identifying 2,393 current smokers. Of these, 96% were given brief advice to quit by the admitting team. Through the automated 'opt-out' referral process, 61% patients completed inpatient behavioural interventions with a specialist cessation practitioner (69% within the first 48 hours of admission). Overall, 66% of smokers were prescribed pharmacotherapy. Over one in five of all smokers admitted during this pilot reported that they were abstinent from smoking 12 weeks after discharge (22%) at a cost £183 per quit.

DISCUSSION

National implementation of this cost-effective programme would be likely to generate substantial benefits to public health.

Leverage points to improve smoking cessation treatment in a large tertiary care hospital: a systems-based mixed methods study

OBJECTIVES

To generate system insights on patient and provider levers and strategies that must be activated to improve hospital-based smoking cessation treatment.

DESIGN

Mixed methods study including a series of in-depth group model building sessions, which informed the design of an online survey completed by healthcare providers and a structured interview protocol administered at the bedside to patients who smoke.

SETTING

Large, tertiary care hospital in the Midwestern United States.

PARTICIPANTS

Group model building: 28 healthcare providers and 22 previously-hospitalised patients; Online survey: 308 healthcare providers; Bedside interviews: 205 hospitalised patients.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Hypothesis-generating, participatory qualitative methods informed the examination of the following quantitative outcomes: patient interest versus provider perception of patient interest in smoking cessation and treatment; patient-reported receipt versus provider-reported offering of inpatient smoking cessation interventions; and priority ratings of importance and feasibility of strategies to improve treatment.

RESULTS

System insights included patients frequently leaving the floor to smoke, which created major workflow disruption. Leverage points included interventions to reduce withdrawal symptoms, and action ideas included nurse-driven protocols for timely administration of nicotine replacement therapy. Quantitative data corroborated system insights; for instance, 80% of providers reported that patients frequently leave the floor to smoke, leading to safety risks, missed assessments and inefficient use of staff time. Patients reported significantly lower rates of receiving any smoking cessation interventions, compared with provider reports (mean difference=17.4%-33.7%, p<0.001). Although 92% of providers cited patient interest as a key barrier, only 4% of patients indicated no interest in quitting or reducing smoking.

CONCLUSIONS

Engaging hospital providers and patients in participatory approaches to develop an implementation strategy revealed discrepant perceptions of patient interest and frequency of hospital-based treatment for smoking. These findings spurred adoption of standardised point-of-care treatment for cigarette smoking, which remains highly prevalent yet undertreated among hospitalised patients.

Effect of an Evidence-based Inpatient Tobacco Dependence Treatment Service on 1-Year Postdischarge Health Care Costs

Background:

In 2014, the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) implemented a Tobacco Dependence Treatment Service (TDTS) consistent with the Joint Commission (JC) standards recommending that hospitals screen patients for smoking, provide cessation support, and follow-up contact for relapse prevention within 1 month of discharge. We previously demonstrated that patients exposed to the MUSC TDTS were approximately half as likely to be smoking one month after discharge and 23% less likely to have a 30-day hospital readmission. This paper examines whether exposure to the TDTS influenced downstream health care charges 12 months after patients were discharged from the hospital.

Methods:

Data from MUSC’s electronic health records, the TDTS, and statewide health care utilization datasets (eg, hospitalization, emergency department, and ambulatory surgery visits) were linked to assess how exposure to the MUSC TDTS impacted health care charges. Total health care charges were compared for patients with and without TDTS exposure. To reduce potential TDTS exposure selection bias, propensity score weighting was used to balance baseline characteristics between groups. The cost of delivering the MUSC TDTS intervention was calculated, along with cost per smoker.

Results:

The overall adjusted mean health care charges for smokers exposed to the TDTS were $7299 lower than for those who did not receive TDTS services (P=0.047). The TDTS cost per smoker was modest by comparison at $34.21 per smoker eligible for the service.

Discussion:

Results suggest that implementation of a TDTS consistent with JC standards for smoking cessation can be affordably implemented and yield substantial health care savings that would benefit patients, hospitals, and insurers.

Impact of a standardized referral to a community pharmacist-led smoking cessation program before elective joint replacement surgery

INTRODUCTION

Smokers undergoing total joint replacement (TJR) are more likely to develop infections and be re-admitted than non-smokers. The primary purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of standardized preoperative referral to a community-based pharmacist-led smoking cessation program compared to usual care for patients undergoing TJR. Secondarily, we evaluated the use of the smoking cessation program.

METHODS

A pre-post quasi-experimental study was conducted at a central intake clinic that prepares approximately 3000 TJR patients annually. Participants were recruited at a mean of 13±11.1 weeks preoperatively and provided informed consent. Participants in the ‘pre’ observational phase (OP) received usual care for smoking cessation. For ‘post’ intervention phase (IP) participants, a referral was sent to a community-based pharmacist-led smoking cessation program. Smoking status was validated on study entry using exhaled carbon monoxide. Participants’ smoking status was re-assessed using self-reported point prevalence abstinence at 6 months post-recruitment.

RESULTS

We enrolled 120/150 (80%) potential OP candidates and 104/286 (36%) potential IP candidates. The groups were similar on study entry; overall, the mean age of participants was 58.7±9.1 years and 103 (47%) were male. They reported medium nicotine dependence with 37±11.6 mean years smoked. At 6 months post-recruitment, 8 (7%) OP participants self-reported 30-day point prevalence abstinence compared to 21 (20%) IP participants (p=0.003). Only 58 (56%) IP participants complied with the pharmacist referral, with 19 (33%) of those seeing the pharmacist reporting point prevalence abstinence at 6 months compared to only 2 (4%) of the 45 participants who did not see the pharmacist (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Referral to a community smoking cessation program as preoperative standard of care is feasible and can enhance long-term quit rates, but voluntary participation led to low recruitment to the program.

Tobacco treatment implementation within 28 commission on cancer accredited programs in the Northeast region of the USA: A pilot study

Cancer survivors are a rapidly growing population and an important target for tobacco treatment interventions. Continued smoking after the diagnosis of cancer is associated with a higher risk of cancer recurrence and mortality. Systematic tobacco cessation programs are effective. This study surveyed American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer (CoC) programs in the Northeast region of the USA regarding their tobacco control programs. Seventy percent of cancer survivors are treated within CoC programs. The purpose of this study was to describe the extent of implementation of tobacco treatment and determine the organizational delivery of tobacco treatment as measured by the presence of goals to address smoking, leadership support, and integration of tobacco treatment guidelines into care delivery. Data were collected by a survey. The Assessment of Chronic Illness Care questionnaire was used to collect data on implementation of tobacco treatment services. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. Most programs (78.6%) had an electronic health record and of these 68% captured smoking status. Implementation of tobacco treatment was not optimal for identifying smokers, providing patients with community linkages or self-care cessation support. Implementation of decision aides for pharmacotherapy and reassessment of smoking status were the least developed areas. Moreover, the organizational delivery for tobacco treatment was less than optimal. Many cancer programs have not implemented systems to deliver optimal tobacco treatment. Efforts should be made to help cancer programs develop sustainable system-wide programs that address the urgent need to deliver tobacco treatment to all cancer survivors.

Tobacco Use Assessment and Treatment in Cancer Patients: A Scoping Review of Oncology Care Clinician Adherence to Clinical Practice Guidelines in the U.S

BACKGROUND

Smoking after a cancer diagnosis negatively impacts health outcomes; smoking cessation improves symptoms, side effects, and overall prognosis. The Public Health Service and major oncology organizations have established guidelines for tobacco use treatment among cancer patients, including clinician assessment of tobacco use at each visit. Oncology care clinicians (OCCs) play important roles in this process (noted as the 5As: Asking about tobacco use, Advising users to quit, Assessing willingness to quit, Assisting in quit attempts, and Arranging follow-up contact). However, OCCs may not be using the "teachable moments" related to cancer diagnosis, treatment, and survivorship to provide cessation interventions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this scoping literature review of articles from 2006 to 2017, we discuss (1) frequency and quality of OCCs' tobacco use assessments with cancer patients and survivors; (2) barriers to providing tobacco treatment for cancer patients; and (3) the efficacy and future of provider-level interventions to facilitate adherence to tobacco treatment guidelines.

RESULTS

OCCs are not adequately addressing smoking cessation with their patients. The reviewed studies indicate that although >75% assess tobacco use during an intake visit and >60% typically advise patients to quit, a substantially lower percentage recommend or arrange smoking cessation treatment or follow-up after a quit attempt. Less than 30% of OCCs report adequate training in cessation interventions.

CONCLUSION

Intervention trials focused on provider- and system-level change are needed to promote integration of evidence-based tobacco treatment into the oncology setting. Attention should be given to the barriers faced by OCCs when targeting interventions for the oncologic context.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This article reviews the existing literature on the gap between best and current practices for tobacco use assessment and treatment in the oncologic context. It also identifies clinician- and system-level barriers that should be addressed in order to lessen this gap and provides suggestions that could be applied across different oncology practice settings to connect patients with tobacco use treatments that may improve overall survival and quality of life.

Tobacco Use Prevalence and Outcomes Among Perinatal Patients Assessed Through an "Opt-out" Cessation and Follow-Up Clinical Program

Purpose Cigarette smoking in the perinatal period is associated with costly morbidity and mortality for mother and infant, yet many women continue to smoke throughout their pregnancy and following delivery. This report describes tobacco use prevalence among perinatal smokers identified through an "opt-out" inpatient smoking cessation clinical service. Description Adult women admitted to the peripartum, delivery, and postpartum units at a large academic hospital were screened for tobacco use. Smokers were identified through their medical record and referred to a bedside consult and follow-up using an interactive voice response (IVR) system to assess smoking up to 30 days post-discharge. Assessment Between February 2014 and March 2016, 533 (10%) current and 898 (16%) former smokers were identified out of 5649 women admitted to the perinatal units. Current smokers reported an average of 11 cigarettes per day for approximately 12 years. Only 10% reported having made a quit attempt in the past year. The majority of smokers (56%) were visited by a bedside tobacco cessation counselor during their stay and 27% were contacted through the IVR system. Those counselled in the hospital were twice as likely (RR 1.98, CI 1.04-3.78) to be abstinent from smoking using intent-to-treat analysis at any time during the 30 days post-discharge. Conclusions This opt-out service reached a highly nicotine-dependent perinatal population, many of whom were receptive to the service, and it appeared to improve abstinence rates post-discharge. Opt-out tobacco cessation services may have a significant impact on the health outcomes of this population and their children.

Effect of an Evidence-based Inpatient Tobacco Dependence Treatment Service on 30-, 90-, and 180-Day Hospital Readmission Rates

INTRODUCTION

Smoking is a risk factor for hospitalization and interferes with patient care due to its effects on pulmonary function, wound healing, and interference with treatments and medications. Although benefits of stopping smoking are well-established, few hospitals provide tobacco dependence treatment services (TDTS) due to cost, lack of mandatory tobacco cessation standards and lack of evidence demonstrating clinical and financial benefits to hospitals and insurers for providing services.

METHODS

This study explored the effect of an inpatient TDTS on 30-, 90-, and 180-day hospital readmissions. To carry out this work, 3 secondary datasets were linked, which included clinical electronic health record data, tobacco cessation program data, and statewide health care utilization data. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using inverse propensity score-weighted logistic regression models, with program exposure as the primary independent variable and 30 (90 and 180)-day readmission rates as the dependent variable, and adjustment for putative covariates.

RESULTS

Odds of readmission were compared for patients who did and did not receive TDTS. At 30 days postdischarge, smokers exposed to the TDTS had a lower odds of readmission (OR=0.77, P=0.031). At 90 and 180 days, odds of readmission remained lower in the TDTS group (ORs=0.87 and 0.86, respectively), but were not statistically significant.

DISCUSSION

Findings from the current study, which are supported by prior studies, provide evidence that delivery of TDTS is a strategy that may help to reduce hospital readmissions.

Using Bioinformatics to Treat Hospitalized Smokers: Successes and Challenges of a Tobacco Treatment Service

BACKGROUND

Hospitals face increasing regulations to provide and document inpatient tobacco treatment, yet few blueprint data exist to implement a tobacco treatment service (TTS).

METHODS

A hospitalwide, opt-out TTS with three full-time certified counselors was developed in a large tertiary care hospital to proactively treat smokers according to Chronic Care Model principles and national treatment guidelines. A bioinformatics platform facilitated integration into the electronic health record to meet evolving Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services meaningful use and Joint Commission standards. TTS counselors visited smokers at the bedside and offered counseling, recommended smoking cessation medication to be ordered by the primary clinical service, and arranged for postdischarge resources.

RESULTS

During a 3.5-year span, 21,229 smokers (31,778 admissions) were identified; TTS specialists reached 37.4% (7,943), and 33.3% (5,888) of daily smokers received a smoking cessation medication order. Adjusted odds ratios (AORs) of receiving a chart order for smoking cessation medication during the hospital stay and at discharge were higher among patients the TTS counseled > 3 minutes and recommended medication: inpatient AOR = 7.15 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 6.59-7.75); discharge AOR = 5.3 (95% CI = 4.71-5.97). As implementation progressed, TTS counseling reach and medication orders increased. To assess smoking status ≤ 1 month postdischarge, three methods were piloted, all of which were limited by low follow-up rates (4.5%-28.6%).

CONCLUSION

The TTS counseled approximately 3,000 patients annually, with increases over time for reach and implementation. Remaining challenges include the development of strategies to engage inpatient care teams to follow TTS recommendations, and patients postdischarge in order to optimize postdischarge smoking cessation.

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.

Who Opted Out of an Opt-Out Smoking-Cessation Programme for Hospitalised Patients?

Introduction: The Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) hospital implemented an inpatient opt-out smoking-cessation service where smokers received a mandatory smoking-cessation consult and phone follow-up within 1-month post-discharge.

Aim: To examine predictors of patients who opted-out of bedside counselling or follow-up phone calls.

Methods: Eligible adult cigarette smokers admitted to the MUSC hospital were enrolled in the programme. Opting-out of bedside consult or follow-up calls were assessed separately using log-linear modelling where predictors included patient demographics, length of hospitalisation, insurance type, smoking history, and motivation/confidence to quit.

Results: Of the 38,758 admitted patients (February 2014–May 2015), 6,684 reported currently smoking and were automatically referred to bedside-consult. Approximately 26% of smokers made contact with the counselor, most of whom (83%) accepted the consult. Amongst patients eligible for post-discharge follow-up (n = 3485), 49% responded to the calls. Those who opted-out of the bedside-consult were mostly males (RR = 1.29). Those who did not respond to follow-up calls were younger age (RR = 1.33), with Medicaid/no insurance (RR = 1.17), and had not received a bedside consult (RR = 1.32).

Conclusions: An opt-out smoking-cessation programme was feasible and acceptable to most patients and was able to reach 65% of eligible smokers; 17% opted-out of bedside counselling; <1% asked to be removed from further phone calls.