Comparative Effectiveness of Post-Discharge Strategies for Hospitalized Smokers: study protocol for the Helping HAND 2 randomized controlled trial

Interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients

BACKGROUND

In 2020, 32.6% of the world's population used tobacco. Smoking contributes to many illnesses that require hospitalisation. A hospital admission may prompt a quit attempt. Initiating smoking cessation treatment, such as pharmacotherapy and/or counselling, in hospitals may be an effective preventive health strategy. Pharmacotherapies work to reduce withdrawal/craving and counselling provides behavioural skills for quitting smoking. This review updates the evidence on interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients, to understand the most effective smoking cessation treatment methods for hospitalised smokers.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of any type of smoking cessation programme for patients admitted to an acute care hospital.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 7 September 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised studies of behavioural, pharmacological or multicomponent interventions to help patients admitted to hospital quit. Interventions had to start in the hospital (including at discharge), and people had to have smoked within the last month. We excluded studies in psychiatric, substance and rehabilitation centres, as well as studies that did not measure abstinence at six months or longer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was abstinence from smoking assessed at least six months after discharge or the start of the intervention. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence, preferring biochemically-validated rates where reported. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 82 studies (74 RCTs) that included 42,273 participants in the review (71 studies, 37,237 participants included in the meta-analyses); 36 studies are new to this update. We rated 10 studies as being at low risk of bias overall (low risk in all domains assessed), 48 at high risk of bias overall (high risk in at least one domain), and the remaining 24 at unclear risk. Cessation counselling versus no counselling, grouped by intensity of intervention Hospitalised patients who received smoking cessation counselling that began in the hospital and continued for more than a month after discharge had higher quit rates than patients who received no counselling in the hospital or following hospitalisation (risk ratio (RR) 1.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24 to 1.49; 28 studies, 8234 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might account for an additional 76 quitters in every 1000 participants (95% CI 51 to 103). The evidence was uncertain (very low-certainty) about the effects of counselling interventions of less intensity or shorter duration (in-hospital only counselling ≤ 15 minutes: RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.89; 2 studies, 1417 participants; and in-hospital contact plus follow-up counselling support for ≤ 1 month: RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.20; 7 studies, 4627 participants) versus no counselling. There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, that smoking cessation counselling for at least 15 minutes in the hospital without post-discharge support led to higher quit rates than no counselling in the hospital (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.58; 12 studies, 4432 participants). Pharmacotherapy versus placebo or no pharmacotherapy Nicotine replacement therapy helped more patients to quit than placebo or no pharmacotherapy (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.67; 8 studies, 3838 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might equate to an additional 62 quitters per 1000 participants (95% CI 9 to 126). There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision (as CI encompassed the possibility of no difference), that varenicline helped more hospitalised patients to quit than placebo or no pharmacotherapy (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.75; 4 studies, 829 participants). Evidence for bupropion was low-certainty; the point estimate indicated a modest benefit at best, but CIs were wide and incorporated clinically significant harm and clinically significant benefit (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.43, 4 studies, 872 participants). Hospital-only intervention versus intervention that continues after hospital discharge Patients offered both smoking cessation counselling and pharmacotherapy after discharge had higher quit rates than patients offered counselling in hospital but not offered post-discharge support (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.38; 7 studies, 5610 participants; high-certainty evidence). In absolute terms, this might equate to an additional 34 quitters per 1000 participants (95% CI 13 to 55). Post-discharge interventions offering real-time counselling without pharmacotherapy (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.60, 8 studies, 2299 participants; low certainty-evidence) and those offering unscheduled counselling without pharmacotherapy (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.14; 2 studies, 1598 participants; very low-certainty evidence) may have little to no effect on quit rates compared to control. Telephone quitlines versus control To provide post-discharge support, hospitals may refer patients to community-based telephone quitlines. Both comparisons relating to these interventions had wide CIs encompassing both possible harm and possible benefit, and were judged to be of very low certainty due to imprecision, inconsistency, and risk of bias (post-discharge telephone counselling versus quitline referral: RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.51; 3 studies, 3260 participants; quitline referral versus control: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.96; 2 studies, 1870 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Offering hospitalised patients smoking cessation counselling beginning in hospital and continuing for over one month after discharge increases quit rates, compared to no hospital intervention. Counselling provided only in hospital, without post-discharge support, may have a modest impact on quit rates, but evidence is less certain. When all patients receive counselling in the hospital, high-certainty evidence indicates that providing both counselling and pharmacotherapy after discharge increases quit rates compared to no post-discharge intervention. Starting nicotine replacement or varenicline in hospitalised patients helps more patients to quit smoking than a placebo or no medication, though evidence for varenicline is only moderate-certainty due to imprecision. There is less evidence of benefit for bupropion in this setting. Some of our evidence was limited by imprecision (bupropion versus placebo and varenicline versus placebo), risk of bias, and inconsistency related to heterogeneity. Future research is needed to identify effective strategies to implement, disseminate, and sustain interventions, and to ensure cessation counselling and pharmacotherapy initiated in the hospital is sustained after discharge.

Comparative Effectiveness of Postdischarge Smoking Cessation Interventions for Hospital Patients: The Helping HAND 4 Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Smoking cessation interventions for hospitalized patients must continue after discharge to improve long-term tobacco abstinence. How health systems can best deliver postdischarge tobacco treatment is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if health system-based tobacco cessation treatment after hospital discharge produces more long-term tobacco abstinence than referral to a community-based quitline.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This randomized clinical trial was conducted September 2018 to November 2020 in 3 hospitals in Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee. Cigarette smokers admitted to a study hospital who received brief in-hospital tobacco treatment and wanted to quit smoking were recruited for participation and randomized for postdischarge treatment to health system-based Transitional Tobacco Care Management (TTCM) or electronic referral to a community-based quitline (QL). Both multicomponent interventions offered smoking cessation counseling and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for up to 3 months. Data were analyzed from February 1, 2021, to April 25, 2022.

INTERVENTIONS

TTCM provided 8 weeks of NRT at discharge and 7 automated calls with a hospital-based counselor call-back option. The QL intervention sent referrals from the hospital electronic health record to the state quitline, which offered 5 counseling calls and an NRT sample.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was biochemically verified past 7-day tobacco abstinence at 6 months. Self-reported point-prevalence and continuous tobacco abstinence and tobacco treatment utilization were assessed 1, 3, and 6 months after discharge.

RESULTS

A total of 1409 participants (mean [SD] age, 51.7 [12.6] years; 784 [55.6%] women; mean [SD] 16.4 [10.6] cigarettes/day) were recruited, including 706 randomized to TTCM and 703 randomized to QL. Participants were comparable at baseline, including 216 Black participants (15.3%), 82 Hispanic participants (5.8%), and 1089 White participants (77.3%). At 1 and 3 months after discharge, more TTCM participants than QL participants used cessation counseling (1 month: 245 participants [34.7%] vs 154 participants [21.9%]; 3 months: 248 participants [35.1%] vs 123 participants [17.5%]; P < .001) and pharmacotherapy (1 month: 455 participants [64.4%] vs 324 participants [46.1%]; 3 months: 367 participants [52.0%] vs 264 participants [37.6%]; P < .001). More TTCM than QL participants reported continuous abstinence for 3 months (RR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.06-1.58) and point-prevalence abstinence at 1 month (RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.08-1.35) and 3 months (RR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.09-1.37) but not at 6 months (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.99-1.29). The primary outcome, biochemically verified point-prevalence abstinence at 6 months, was not statistically significantly different between groups (19.9% vs 16.9%; RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.92-1.50).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this randomized clinical trial, biochemically verified tobacco abstinence rates were not significantly different between groups at the 6-month follow-up. However, the health system-based model was superior to the community-based quitline model throughout the 3 months of active treatment. A longer duration of postdischarge treatment may sustain the superiority of the health system-based model.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03603496.

Text messaging interventions to support smoking cessation among hospitalized patients in Brazil: a randomized comparative effectiveness clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

A clinical trial carried out in patients hospitalized for clinical and surgical conditions. This study evaluated the effectiveness of text messaging interventions (TM) versus telephone counseling (TC) to promote smoking cessation among hospitalized smokers in a middle-income country. Seven-day abstinence was measured during follow-up phone calls one month after discharge. The comparative cost of the two interventions considered the cost of calls, time spent on phone calls and sending SMS and cost of the professional involved in the approaches.

RESULTS

Past 7-day tobacco abstinence was not statistically different between groups (30.5% in TM group and 26% in TC, p = 0.318). Costs were significantly lower in the TM group (U$9.28 × U$19.45- p < 0,001). Continuous abstinence was reported by 26% of TM participants and 24.5% of TC participants (p = 0.730). In the 3-month follow-up, 7-day abstinence was 23% in the TMI and 27% in the TC (p = 0.356) group. Continuous abstinence was reported by 20% of TM participants and 24% of TC participants (p = 0.334).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03237949 Registred on: 30th May 2017.

The effect of reproductive hormones on women's daily smoking across the menstrual cycle

BACKGROUND

Women attempt to quit smoking less often than men and are less likely to maintain abstinence. Reproductive hormones have been postulated as a reason for this sex difference, though this remains to be clarified. Research suggests that estradiol and progesterone may influence nicotine addiction, though various methodologies have led to inconsistent findings. The current study aimed to directly examine the effect of reproductive hormones on women's smoking behavior.

METHODS

Over the course of one menstrual cycle, twenty-one female smokers recorded the number of cigarettes smoked in a day, as well as their perceived need for and enjoyment of cigarettes smoked. Additionally, they provided 12 urine samples for the measurement of the urinary metabolites of estradiol (estrone-3-glucuronide, E1G) and progesterone (pregnanediol glucuronide, PdG). Multilevel modeling was used to examine the effects of hormone levels as well as hormone change on smoking outcomes.

RESULTS

When PdG levels were low, they were inversely associated with daily cigarettes smoked. Furthermore, E1G level was negatively associated with both self-reported need for and enjoyment of cigarettes smoked but not the number of cigarettes smoked. Examining the effect of hormonal change on smoking outcomes revealed a significant interaction between change in PdG and E1G on number of cigarettes smoked such that only a simultaneous drop or increase in both hormones was associated with a greater number of cigarettes. Hormonal change effects on need for and enjoyment of cigarettes were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggests that (1) elevated progesterone levels lessen the propensity to smoke in women, (2) estrogen levels influence women's subjective experience of smoking, and (3) simultaneous drops or increases in these hormones are associated with increased smoking.

Impact of Smoking Cessation Interventions Initiated During Hospitalization Among HIV-Infected Smokers

INTRODUCTION

Smoking is a key determinant of mortality among people living with HIV (PLWH).

METHODS

To better understand the effects of smoking cessation interventions in PLWH, we conducted a pooled analysis of four randomized controlled trials of hospital-initiated smoking interventions conducted through the Consortium of Hospitals Advancing Research on Tobacco (CHART). In each study, cigarette smokers were randomly assigned to usual care or a smoking cessation intervention. The primary outcome was self-reported past 30-day tobacco abstinence at 6-month follow-up. Abstinence rates were compared between PLWH and participants without HIV and by treatment arm, using both complete-case and intention-to-treat analyses. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the effect of HIV status on 6-month tobacco abstinence and to determine predictors of smoking cessation within PLWH.

RESULTS

Among 5550 hospitalized smokers, there were 202 (3.6%) PLWH. PLWH smoked fewer cigarettes per day and were less likely to be planning to quit than smokers without HIV. At 6 months, cessation rates did not differ between intervention and control groups among PLWH (28.9% vs. 30.5%) or smokers without HIV (36.1% vs. 34.1%). In multivariable regression analysis, HIV status was not significantly associated with smoking cessation at 6 months. Among PLWH, confidence in quitting was the only clinical factor independently associated with smoking cessation (OR 2.0, 95% CI = 1.4 to 2.8, p < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

HIV status did not alter likelihood of quitting smoking after hospital discharge, whether or not the smoker was offered a tobacco cessation intervention, but power was limited to identify potentially important differences.

IMPLICATIONS

PLWH had similar quit rates to participants without HIV following a hospital-initiated smoking cessation intervention. The findings suggest that factors specific to HIV infection may not influence response to smoking cessation interventions and that all PLWH would benefit from efforts to assist in quitting smoking.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

(1) Using "warm handoffs" to link hospitalized smokers with tobacco treatment after discharge: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial: NCT01305928. (2) Web-based smoking cessation intervention that transitions from inpatient to outpatient: NCT01277250. (3) Effectiveness of smoking-cessation interventions for urban hospital patients: NCT01363245. (4) Effectiveness of Post-Discharge Strategies for Hospitalized Smokers (HelpingHAND2): NCT01714323.

Comparative effectiveness of post-discharge strategies for hospitalized smokers: Study protocol for the Helping HAND 4 randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Tobacco smoking remains the leading preventable cause of death in the US. A hospital admission provides smokers with a unique opportunity to stop smoking because it requires temporary tobacco abstinence while illness may enhance motivation to quit. Hospital interventions must continue post-discharge to increase tobacco abstinence long-term, but how best to accomplish this remains unclear. Building on two previous randomized controlled trials, each of which tested smoking cessation interventions that began in hospital and continued after discharge, this trial compares two interventions that provide sustained smoking cessation treatment after hospital discharge with the goal of improving long-term smoking cessation rates among hospitalized smokers.

METHODS/DESIGN

Helping HAND 4 is a three-site randomized controlled trial that compares the effectiveness of two active interventions for producing validated past 7-day tobacco abstinence 6 months after hospital discharge. Smokers who are admitted to three hospitals receive a standard in-hospital smoking intervention, and those who plan to quit smoking after discharge are recruited and randomly assigned to two interventions that begin at discharge, Personalized Tobacco Care Management (PTCM) or Quitline eReferral. Each lasts 3 months. At discharge, PTCM provides 8 weeks of free nicotine replacement (NRT; a participant's choice of patch, gum, lozenge, or a combination) and then proactive smoking cessation support using an automated communication platform and live contact with a tobacco treatment specialist who is based in the health care system. In the eReferral condition, a direct referral is made from the hospital electronic health record to a community-based resource, the state's telephone quitline. The quitline provides up to 8 weeks of free NRT and offers behavioral support via a series of phone calls from a trained coach. Outcomes are assessed at 1, 3, and 6 months after discharge. The study hypothesis is that PTCM will produce higher quit rates than eReferral.

DISCUSSION

Helping HAND 4 is a pragmatic trial that aims to evaluate interventions in real-world conditions. This project will give hospital systems critical evidence-based tools for meeting National Hospital Quality Measures for tobacco treatment and maximizing their ability to improve cessation rates and overall health for the millions of smokers hospitalized annually in the US.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospectively registered prior to start of enrollment at Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03603496 (July 27, 2018). https://register.clinicaltrials.gov/prs/app/action/SelectProtocol?sid=S00084MJ&selectaction=Edit&uid=U00002G7&ts=2&cx=ff0oxn.

Smoking cessation after hospitalization for myocardial infarction or cardiac surgery: Assessing patient interest, confidence, and physician prescribing practices

Background

Prioritizing and managing multiple behavior changes following a cardiac hospitalization can be difficult, particularly among smokers who must also overcome a serious addiction.

Hypothesis

Hospitalized smokers will report a strong interest in smoking cessation (SC) but will receive little assistance from their physicians.

Methods

We asked current smokers hospitalized for an acute cardiac event to prioritize their health behavior priorities, and inquired about their attitude toward SC therapies. We also assessed SC cessation prescriptions provided by their physicians.

Results

Of the 105 patients approached, 81 (77%) completed the survey. Of these, 72.5% ranked SC as their greatest health change priority, surpassing all other behavior changes, including: taking medications, attending cardiac rehabilitation (CR), dieting, losing weight, and attending doctor appointments. Patients felt that SCM (44%), CR (41%), and starting exercise (35%) would increase their likelihood for SC. While most patients agreed that smoking was harmful, 16% strongly disagreed that smoking was related to their hospitalization. At discharge, medication was prescribed to ~32% of patients, with equal frequency among patients who reported interest and those who reported no interest in using medications.

Conclusion

The majority of hospitalized smokers with cardiac disease want to quit smoking, desire help in doing so, and overwhelmingly rate cessation as their highest health behavior priority, although some believe smoking is unrelated to their disease. The period following an acute cardiac event appears to be a time of great receptivity to SC interventions; however, rates of providing tailored, evidence‐based interventions are disappointingly low.

Smokers' use of electronic cigarettes before, during, and in the month after hospitalization. Findings from the Helping HAND 2 Study

INTRODUCTION

Hospitalization can motivate smokers to attempt cessation, and some smokers might use e-cigarettes to aid quitting after discharge. Little is known about the patterns and predictors of smokers' e-cigarette use immediately before, during, and after hospitalization.

METHODS

Secondary data analysis of a multi-site randomized controlled trial that enrolled 1357 hospitalized smokers planning to quit offered two intensities of post-discharge cessation treatment and reached 1100 participants at 1-month follow-up. We assessed reasons for and patterns of e-cigarette use before, during and immediately after hospitalization. Multivariable logistic regression models identified independent predictors of e-cigarette use.

RESULTS

E-cigarettes were used, primarily to aid quitting, by 21.4% of smokers in the month before admission, 3.1% during hospitalization, and 18.3% in the month after discharge. At 1 month, 10.6% were past 7-day (current) e-cigarette users, but few used e-cigarettes regularly and 57.3% also smoked tobacco. New e-cigarette use in the month after discharge was rare. The adjusted odds ratio (AOR;95%CI) for current e-cigarette use was higher among smokers who used e-cigarettes before hospitalization (5.08;3.31-7.81), consumed more alcohol (1.80;1.16-2.80) and had less confidence to quit (1.66;1.05-2.61). The AOR was lower among non-Hispanic blacks (0.25;0.09-0.71), Medicaid-insured (0.56;0.33-0.93), and those randomly assigned to receive free cessation medication and counseling at discharge (0.58;0.38-0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

Following hospitalization, some smokers who plan to quit use e-cigarettes, particularly if they used them before admission, are less confident to quit, or have less easy access to conventional treatment. Clinicians should document and be prepared to address e-cigarette use among hospitalized smokers.

Smoking Cessation After Hospital Discharge: Factors Associated With Abstinence

Hospitalization offers tobacco smokers an opportunity to quit smoking, but factors associated with abstinence from tobacco after hospital discharge are poorly understood. We analyzed data from a multisite, randomized controlled trial testin a smoking cessation intervention for 1,357 hospitalized cigaretts smokers who planned to quit. Using multiple logistic regression, we assessed factors identifiable in the hospital that were independently associated with biochemically confirmed tobacco abstinence 6 months after discharge. Biochemically confirmed abstinence at 6 months (n = 218, 16%) was associated with a smoking-related primary discharge diagnosis (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] = 1.98, 95% CI: 1.41-2.77), greater confidence in the ability to quit smoking (AOR - 1.31, 95% CI: 1.07-1.60), and stronger intention to quit (plan to quit after discharge vs. try to quit; AOR = 1.68, CI: 1.19-2.38). In conclusion, smokers hospitalized with a tobacco-related illness and those with greater confidence and intention to quit after discharge are more likely to sustain abstinence in the long term. Hospital clinicians' efforts to promote smoking cessation should target smokers' confidence and motivation to quit.

Improvements in health-related quality of life among smokers who quit after hospitalization

Few rigorous longitudinal assessments have examined health-related quality of life (HRQoL) changes after smoking cessation, especially among recently-hospitalized smokers. We compared the change in HRQoL between those who did or did not quit smoking 6 months after hospital discharge. Participants were 1357 smokers recruited for a cessation trial between 2012 and 2014 while hospitalized at two hospitals in Massachusetts and one in Pennsylvania. Cessation was defined as biochemically confirmed 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 6 months or as self-reported continuous abstinence at 1, 3, or 6 months post discharge. HRQoL measures included a single-item global health measure (SF1); the Patient Health Questionnaire for Depression and Anxiety (PHQ-4) screening tool for psychological distress; and the EQ-5D-5L health utilities measure. Multivariable models controlled for age, sex, race, education, insurance, study site, study arm, discharge diagnoses, and baseline HRQoL. Improvements in HRQoL were evident in the first month after discharge among those achieving abstinence compared to continuing smokers. At 6 months post-discharge, those with biochemically confirmed cessation were 30% more likely to report at least good health by the SF1 (aRR 95% CI 1.14-1.45), 19% less likely to screen positive for psychological distress (aRR, 95% CI 0.68-0.93), and had EQ-5D-5L health utility scores 0.05 points (95% CI 0.02-0.08) higher than continuing smokers. Results were similar when assessed as a function of self-reported cessation. Hospital-initiated smoking cessation is associated with rapid statistically and clinically significant improvements in a range of HRQoL measures, providing an additional tool clinicians and health systems could use to encourage smoking cessation.

Association of E-Cigarette Use With Smoking Cessation Among Smokers Who Plan to Quit After a Hospitalization: A Prospective Study

BACKGROUND

Many smokers report using e-cigarettes to help them quit smoking, but whether e-cigarettes aid cessation efforts is uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether e-cigarette use after hospital discharge is associated with subsequent tobacco abstinence among smokers who plan to quit and are advised to use evidence-based treatment.

DESIGN

Secondary data analysis of a randomized controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01714323 [parent trial]).

SETTING

3 hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

1357 hospitalized adult cigarette smokers who planned to stop smoking, received tobacco cessation counseling in the hospital, and were randomly assigned at discharge to a tobacco treatment recommendation (control) or free tobacco treatment (intervention).

MEASUREMENTS

Self-reported e-cigarette use (exposure) was assessed 1 and 3 months after discharge; biochemically validated tobacco abstinence (outcome) was assessed 6 months after discharge.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight percent of participants used an e-cigarette within 3 months after discharge. In an analysis of 237 propensity score-matched pairs, e-cigarette users were less likely than nonusers to abstain from tobacco use at 6 months (10.1% vs. 26.6%; risk difference, -16.5% [95% CI, -23.3% to -9.6%]). The association between e-cigarette use and quitting varied between intervention patients, who were given easy access to conventional treatment (7.7% vs. 29.8%; risk difference, -22.1% [CI, -32.3% to -11.9%]), and control patients, who received only treatment recommendations (12.0% vs. 24.1%; risk difference, -12.0% [CI, -21.2% to 2.9%]) (P for interaction = 0.143).

LIMITATIONS

Patients self-selected e-cigarette use. Unmeasured confounding is possible in an observational study.

CONCLUSION

During 3 months after hospital discharge, more than a quarter of smokers attempting to quit used e-cigarettes, mostly to aid cessation, but few used them regularly. This pattern of use was associated with less tobacco abstinence at 6 months than among smokers who did not use e-cigarettes. Additional study is needed to determine whether regular use of e-cigarettes aids or hinders smoking cessation.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Examining the effects of illicit drug use on tobacco cessation outcomes in the Helping HAND 2 randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Individuals with substance use disorders (SUD) smoke at higher rates and have higher tobacco-related mortality than the general population. Despite having an interest in smoking cessation, smokers with SUDs may have greater difficulty quitting.

METHODS

Analysis of data from a RCT testing a post-discharge smoking cessation intervention for hospitalized cigarette smokers interested in quitting. Past 7day tobacco abstinence was self-reported at 1, 3, and 6 months and biochemically confirmed at 6 months post-discharge. Other drug use was assessed at baseline by self-report or a past-year discharge diagnosis of SUD. Multiple logistic regression compared tobacco cessation outcomes among participants with no recreational drug use (NDU; n=942) vs. marijuana only (MU; n=284) vs. other illicit drugs (IDU; n=131).

RESULTS

Groups differed at baseline on age, gender, race, education, other household smokers, alcohol use, and anxiety/depression (all p<0.05). Confirmed 6-month tobacco abstinence was lower among IDU than NDU participants (9% vs 18%, p=0.01; AOR=0.43, CI: 0.22-0.84) after adjustment for study arm, smoking characteristics, demographics, quality of life, alcohol use and MU. Confirmed 6-month abstinence did not differ significantly between MU vs. NDU participants (14% vs 18%, p>0.05; AOR=0.77, CI:0.51-1.14). Counseling and medication use did not differ significantly among groups at any follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitalized smokers who planned to stop smoking after discharge and used cessation assistance were less successful if they had used illicit drugs in the past year, but not if they had only used marijuana. More intensive or tailored interventions may be required to address smoking in this population.

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.

Implementation of the Tobacco Tactics intervention versus usual care in Trinity Health community hospitals

Background

Guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) implementation framework, a National Institutes of Health-sponsored study compared the nurse-administered Tobacco Tactics intervention to usual care. A prior paper describes the effectiveness of the Tobacco Tactics intervention. This subsequent paper provides data describing the remaining constructs of the RE-AIM framework.

Methods

This pragmatic study used a mixed methods, quasi-experimental design in five Michigan community hospitals of which three received the nurse-administered Tobacco Tactics intervention and two received usual care. Nurses and patients were surveyed pre- and post-intervention.

Measures included reach (patient participation rates, characteristics, and receipt of services), adoption (nurse participation rates and characteristics), implementation (pre-to post-training changes in nurses' attitudes, delivery of services, barriers to implementation, opinions about training, documentation of services, and numbers of volunteer follow-up phone calls), and maintenance (continuation of the intervention once the study ended).

Results

Reach: Patient participation rates were 71.5 %. Compared to no change in the control sites, there were significant pre- to post-intervention increases in self-reported receipt of print materials in the intervention hospitals (n = 1370, p < 0.001). Adoption: In the intervention hospitals, all targeted units and several non-targeted units participated; 76.0 % (n = 1028) of targeted nurses and 317 additional staff participated in the training, and 92.4 % were extremely or somewhat satisfied with the training. Implementation: Nurses in the intervention hospitals reported increases in providing advice to quit, counseling, medications, handouts, and DVD (all p < 0.05) and reported decreased barriers to implementing smoking cessation services (p < 0.001). Qualitative comments were very positive (“user friendly,” “streamlined,” or “saves time”), although problems with showing patients the DVD and charting in the electronic medical record were noted. Maintenance: Nurses continued to provide the intervention after the study ended.

Conclusions

Given that nurses represent the largest group of front-line providers, this intervention, which meets Joint Commission guidelines for treating inpatient smokers, has the potential to have a wide reach and to decrease smoking, morbidity, and mortality among inpatient smokers. As we move toward more population-based interventions, the RE-AIM framework is a valuable guide for implementation.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01309217

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0511-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Quitline Tobacco Interventions in Hospitalized Patients: A Randomized Trial

INTRODUCTION

Hospitalization provides an opportunity for smokers to quit, but tobacco interventions can require specialized services that are not available to many hospitals. This study tests the hypothesis that a brief intervention to facilitate the use of telephone quitline services for both initial and follow-up counseling is effective in helping patients achieve sustained abstinence.

DESIGN

This was a population-based RCT.

SETTING

Participants were Olmsted County, MN residents who reported current smoking and were admitted to Mayo Clinic hospitals in Rochester, MN between May 2012 and August 2014.

INTERVENTION

A control group received brief (~5-minute) cessation advice; an intervention group received a brief (~5-minute) quitline facilitation intervention, with either warm handoff or faxed referral to a national quitline provider. All were offered a 2-week supply of nicotine patches at discharge.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcomes included self-reported 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 6 months after hospitalization and quitline utilization. Data analysis was performed from September 2014 to March 2015.

RESULTS

Of the 1,409 eligible patients who were approached, 600 (47%) were randomized. The quitline intake call was completed by 195 subjects (65% of the intervention group). Of these, 128 (66%) completed the first coaching call. Self-reported abstinence rates at 6 months after discharge were identical in both groups (24%).

CONCLUSIONS

The quitline facilitation intervention did not improve self-reported abstinence rates compared with a standard brief stop-smoking intervention. These results do not support the effectiveness of quitlines in providing tobacco use interventions to a general population of hospitalized smokers.

A Post-Discharge Smoking-Cessation Intervention for Hospital Patients: Helping Hand 2 Randomized Clinical Trial

INTRODUCTION

Hospitalization provides an opportunity for smokers to quit, but tobacco-cessation interventions started in hospital must continue after discharge to be effective. This study aimed to improve the scalability of a proven effective post-discharge intervention by incorporating referral to a telephone quitline, a nationally available cessation resource.

STUDY DESIGN

A three-site RCT compared Sustained Care, a post-discharge tobacco-cessation intervention, with Standard Care among hospitalized adult smokers who wanted to quit smoking and received in-hospital tobacco-cessation counseling.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1,357 daily smokers admitted to three hospitals were enrolled from December 2012 to July 2014.

INTERVENTION

Sustained Care started at discharge and included automated interactive voice response telephone calls and the patient's choice of cessation medication for 3 months. Each automated call advised cessation, supported medication adherence, and triaged smokers seeking additional counseling or medication support directly to a telephone quitline. Standard Care provided only medication and counseling recommendations at discharge.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Biochemically confirmed past 7-day tobacco abstinence 6 months after discharge (primary outcome) and self-reported tobacco abstinence and tobacco-cessation treatment use at 1, 3, and 6 months and overall (0-6 months). Analyses were done in 2015-2016.

RESULTS

Smokers offered Sustained Care (n=680), versus those offered Standard Care (n=677), did not have greater biochemically confirmed abstinence at 6 months (17% vs 16%, p=0.58). However, the Sustained Care group reported more tobacco-cessation counseling and medication use at each follow-up and higher rates of self-reported past 7-day tobacco abstinence at 1 month (43% vs 32%, p<0.0001) and 3 months (37% vs 30%, p=0.008). At 6 months, the difference narrowed (31% vs 27%, p=0.09). Overall, the intervention increased self-reported 7-day abstinence over the 6-month follow-up (relative risk, 1.25; 95% CI=1.10, 1.40; p=0.0006).

CONCLUSIONS

A 3-month post-discharge smoking-cessation intervention for hospitalized smokers who wanted to quit did not increase confirmed tobacco abstinence at 6 months but did increase self-reported abstinence during the treatment period (3 months). Real-time linkage of interactive voice response calls to a quitline, done in this trial to increase scalability of a previously proven cessation intervention, demonstrated short-term promise but did not sustain long-term intervention effectiveness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01714323.

Fidelity monitoring across the seven studies in the Consortium of Hospitals Advancing Research on Tobacco (CHART)

BACKGROUND

This paper describes fidelity monitoring (treatment differentiation, training, delivery, receipt and enactment) across the seven National Institutes of Health-supported Consortium of Hospitals Advancing Research on Tobacco (CHART) studies. The objectives of the study were to describe approaches to monitoring fidelity including treatment differentiation (lack of crossover), provider training, provider delivery of treatment, patient receipt of treatment, and patient enactment (behavior) and provide examples of application of these principles.

METHODS

Conducted between 2010 and 2014 and collectively enrolling over 9500 inpatient cigarette smokers, the CHART studies tested different smoking cessation interventions (counseling, medications, and follow-up calls) shown to be efficacious in Cochrane Collaborative Reviews. The CHART studies compared their unique treatment arm(s) to usual care, used common core measures at baseline and 6-month follow-up, but varied in their approaches to monitoring the fidelity with which the interventions were implemented.

RESULTS

Treatment differentiation strategies included the use of a quasi-experimental design and monitoring of both the intervention and control group. Almost all of the studies had extensive training for personnel and used a checklist to monitor the intervention components, but the items on these checklists varied widely and were based on unique aspects of the interventions, US Public Health Service and Joint Commission smoking cessation standards, or counselor rapport. Delivery of medications ranged from 31 to 100 % across the studies, with higher levels from studies that gave away free medications and lower levels from studies that sought to obtain prescriptions for the patient in real world systems. Treatment delivery was highest among those studies that used automated (interactive voice response and website) systems, but this did not automatically translate into treatment receipt and enactment. Some studies measured treatment enactment in two ways (e.g., counselor or automated system report versus patient report) showing concurrence or discordance between the two measures.

CONCLUSION

While fidelity monitoring can be challenging especially in dissemination trials, the seven CHART studies used a variety of methods to enhance fidelity with consideration for feasibility and sustainability.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dissemination of Tobacco Tactics for hospitalized smokers. Clinical Trials Registration No. NCT01309217.Smoking cessation in hospitalized smokers. Clinical Trials Registration No. NCT01289275.Using "warm handoffs" to link hospitalized smokers with tobacco treatment after discharge: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial. Clinical Trials Registration No. NCT01305928.Web-based smoking cessation intervention that transitions from inpatient to outpatient. Clinical Trials Registration No. NCT01277250.Effectiveness of smoking-cessation interventions for urban hospital patients. Clinical Trials Registration No. NCT01363245.Comparative effectiveness of post-discharge interventions for hospitalized smokers. Clinical Trials Registration No. NCT01177176.Health and economic effects from linking bedside and outpatient tobacco cessation services for hospitalized smokers in two large hospitals. Clinical Trials Registration No. NCT01236079.