Tobacco Screening Practices and Perceived Barriers to Offering Tobacco Cessation Services among Texas Health Care Centers Providing Behavioral Health Treatment

Correlates of Tobacco Use Among People with Mental Illness Within Asia: A Scoping Review

Tobacco use among people with mental illness is one of the contributing risk factors for premature morbidity and mortality. Two in three people with mental illness are current smokers with deteriorating physical health and quality of life. This review outlines the prevalence and predictors of tobacco use among people with mental illness in Asia. Twenty-five cross-sectional studies were selected from the exhaustive search of databases. Ten countries emerged based on the number of studies conducted within Asia among people diagnosed with mental illness and tobacco use, namely, India (8), China (7), Pakistan (2), Singapore (2), Sri Lanka (01), Japan (01), Jordan (01), Malaysia (01), Korea (01), and Taiwan (01). The prevalence of tobacco use was in the range of 3.6% to 89.4%, with the measure of precision at 95% confidence. The highest and lowest prevalence was reported in China, followed by India. Being male, separated, lower education, unemployed, lack of family support, a psychotic diagnosis, lack of knowledge, motivation, and a coping mechanism were predictors of tobacco use. This review emphasized the extent and predictors of tobacco use among this vulnerable group that need to be reflected while initiating and implementing cessation strategies by healthcare providers.

Assessment of the Smoke Free Families Tobacco Screening, Counseling, and Referral Program in Pediatric Primary Care Practices

OBJECTIVE

The Smoke Free Families (SFF) program trained pediatric providers to use an SFF tool during well-child visits (WCVs) of infants ≤12 months to "Ask" caregivers about tobacco use, "Advise" smokers to quit, and "Refer" smokers to cessation services (AAR). The primary objectives were to assess the prevalence and changes in caregiver tobacco use after being screened and counseled by providers using the SFF tool. A secondary objective was to examine providers' AAR behavior facilitated by using the SFF tool.

METHODS

Pediatric practices participated in 1 of 3 6-9-month SFF program waves. Over the 3 waves, all initial SFF tools completed on caregivers during their infant's WCV were evaluated for the caregiver and household tobacco use and providers' AAR rates. An infant's first and next WCV was matched to determine changes in caregiver tobacco product use.

RESULTS

In total, the SFF tool was completed at 19,976 WCVs; 2081 (18.8%) infants were exposed to tobacco smoke. A total of 834 (74.1%) caregivers who smoked received counseling: 786 (69.9%) were advised to quit, 700 (62.2%) were given cessation resources, and 198 (17.6%) were referred to the Quitline. In total, 230 (27.6%) of caregivers who smoked had a second visit; 58 (25.2%) self-reported that they quit using tobacco. Among cigarette users (n = 183), 89 (48.6%) reported that they used fewer cigarettes or quit at their infants' second WCV.

CONCLUSIONS

Systematic use of the SFF AAR tool during infants' WCVs could improve the health of caregivers and children, resulting in decreases in tobacco-related morbidity.

Policy and Practice Changes Associated with a Tobacco-Free Initiative in Residential Substance Use Disorder Treatment

A California-sponsored, 18-month, tobacco-free intervention in residential substance use disorder (SUD) programs was associated with increases in tobacco-free grounds and tobacco-related client services. The current study examined whether positive results would be replicated in 11 programs participating subsequently. Program directors (N = 11) completed surveys of tobacco-related policies pre- and post-intervention. Pre- (n = 163) and post-intervention (n = 128) cross-sectional staff surveys examined tobacco-related training, beliefs, practices, smoking policy, and smoking status. Directors reported increases in tobacco-free grounds (from 3 to 8 programs), tobacco-related staff training (1 to 10 programs), tobacco cessation staff services (1 to 9 programs) and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) provision (6 to 10 programs). At post-intervention, staff were more likely to report smoke-free workplaces (p = 0.008), positive beliefs about treating tobacco use (p = 0.017) and less likely to report current smoking (p = 0.003). Clinical staff were more likely to report tobacco-related training receipt (p = 0.001), program-level NRT provision (p = 0.009) and conducting tobacco-related client services (p < 0.0001) post-intervention. Findings of increases in tobacco-free grounds and tobacco cessation client services corroborated prior results. These and the additional finding of decreases in staff smoking strengthen evidence that initiatives supporting tobacco-free policies can be successfully implemented in SUD treatment.

Implementing a tobacco-free workplace program at a substance use treatment center: a case study

BACKGROUND

People with substance use disorders smoke cigarettes at much higher rates than the general population in the United States and are disproportionately affected by tobacco-related diseases. Many substance use treatment centers do not provide evidence-based tobacco cessation treatment or maintain comprehensive tobacco-free workplace policies. The goal of the current work is to identify barriers and facilitators to a successful and sustainable implementation of a tobacco-free workplace program, which includes a comprehensive tobacco-free policy and evidence-based cessation treatment services, in a substance use treatment center.

METHODS

This study is based on an ethnographic approach and uses a qualitative case study design. Data were collected via interviews with staff (n = 6) and clients (n = 16) at the substance use treatment center and site visits (n = 8). Data were analyzed using thematic analysis guided by the extended Normalization Process Theory designed to inform the implementation of innovations in healthcare practice.

RESULTS

Staff at the substance use treatment center supported the implementation of the program and shared a good understanding of the purpose of the intervention and its potential benefits. However, the study identified significant challenges faced by the center during implementation, including widespread tobacco use among clients, contributing to attitudes among staff that tobacco cessation was a low-priority problem due to a perceived lack of interest in quitting and inability to quit among their clients. We identified several factors that contributed to changing this attitude, including provision of tobacco training to staff, active leadership support, low number of staff members who smoked, and access to material resources, including nicotine replacement products. The implementation and active enforcement of a comprehensive tobacco-free workplace program contributed to a gradual change in attitudes and improved the provision of evidence-based tobacco cessation care at the substance use treatment center.

CONCLUSIONS

Substance use treatment centers can integrate tobacco cessation practices in their daily operations, despite multiple challenges they face due to the complex behavioral health and socioeconomic needs of their clients. With proper support, substance use treatment centers can provide much needed tobacco cessation care to their clients who are disproportionately affected by tobacco-related health conditions and systemic health inequities.

Differences in health care provider screening for tobacco use among youth in the United States: The National Youth Tobacco Survey, 2021

OBJECTIVE

Health care providers (HCP) are encouraged to screen youth for tobacco product use as a key step in preventing such use and associated health outcomes. However, recent data examining differences in HCP tobacco screening by sociodemographic characteristics and tobacco use is scant.

METHODS

Data from the 2021 National Youth Tobacco Survey (N = 14,685) were analyzed. Three types of HCP screening were examined: no screening, any e-cigarette use (e-cigarette only, e-cigarette and other tobacco), and non-e-cigarette tobacco product use. Differences by HCP screening were examined using multinomial logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, race/ethnicity, and tobacco use (non-current, sole, dual/poly).

RESULTS

Among the sample, 42.8% were screened for any tobacco use, with 30.6% screened for any e-cigarette use and 12.2% for non-e-cigarette tobacco product use only. Youth who were older (vs. younger) (OR = 5.98, 95% CI: 4.78-7.49) and gay/lesbian (vs. heterosexual) (OR = 1.47, 95% CI: 1.02-2.12) were more likely to be screened for e-cigarette use. Youth who were non-Hispanic Black (vs. non-Hispanic White) were less likely to be screened for e-cigarette use (OR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.42-0.67) and more likely to be screened for non-e-cigarette tobacco use (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 1.10-1.63). Current sole tobacco use (vs. non-current use) and dual/poly tobacco use (vs. non-current use) increased the likelihood for HCP screening for e-cigarette use.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of U.S. youth continue to not be screened for tobacco use by their HCP. Evidence of disparities in tobacco use screening suggest the need for policies and training that promote equity in screening.

Texas tobacco quitline knowledge, attitudes, and practices within healthcare agencies serving individuals with behavioral health needs: A multimethod study

Patients with behavioral health conditions have disproportionately high tobacco use rates and face significant barriers to accessing evidence-based tobacco cessation services. Tobacco quitlines are an effective and accessible resource, yet they are often underutilized. We identify knowledge, practices, and attitudes towards the Texas Tobacco Quitline (TTQL) within behavioral healthcare settings in Texas. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected in 2021 as part of a statewide needs assessment in behavioral healthcare settings. Survey respondents (n = 125) represented 23 Federally Qualified Health Centers, 29 local mental health authorities (LMHAs), 12 substance use treatment programs in LMHAs, and 61 standalone substance use treatment centers (26 people participated in qualitative interviews). Over half of respondents indicated familiarity with the TTQL and believed that the TTQL was helpful for quitting. Qualitative findings reveal potential concerns about inconsistency of services, long wait time, and the format of the quitline. About half of respondents indicated that their center promoted patient referral to TTQL, and few indicated that their center had an electronic referral system with direct TTQL referral capacity. Interview respondents reported overall lack of systematic follow up with patients regarding their use of the TTQL services. Findings suggest the need for (1) increased TTQL service awareness among healthcare providers; (2) further investigation into any changes needed to better serve patients with behavioral health conditions who use tobacco; and (3) electronic health record integration supporting direct referrals and enhanced protocols to support patient follow up after TTQL referral.

Educating Substance Use Treatment Center Providers on Tobacco Use Treatments Is Associated with Increased Provision of Counseling and Medication to Patients Who Use Tobacco

Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of death in America and is elevated among patients with non-tobacco substance use disorders. Substance use treatment centers (SUTCs) do not commonly address their patients' tobacco use. Lack of knowledge on treating tobacco use with counseling and medication may be a barrier that underlies this inaction. A multi-component tobacco-free workplace program implemented in Texas SUTCs educated providers on treating tobacco use with evidence-based medication (or referral) and counseling. This study examined how center-level changes in knowledge from pre- to post-implementation (i.e., over time) affected center-level behavioral changes in providers' provision of tobacco use treatment over time. Providers from 15 SUTCs completed pre- and post-implementation surveys (pre N = 259; post N = 194) assessing (1) perceived barriers to treating tobacco use, specifically, a lack of knowledge on treating tobacco use with counseling or medication; (2) receipt of past-year education on treating tobacco use with counseling or medication; and (3) their intervention practices, specifically, the self-reported regular use of (a) counseling or (b) medication intervention or referral with patients who use tobacco. Generalized linear mixed models explored associations between provider-reported knowledge barriers, education receipt, and intervention practices over time. Overall, recent counseling education receipt was endorsed by 32.00% versus 70.21% of providers from pre- to post-implementation; the regular use of counseling to treat tobacco use was endorsed by 19.31% versus 28.87% from pre- to post-implementation. Recent medication education receipt was endorsed by 20.46% versus 71.88% of providers from pre- to post-implementation; the regular use of medication to treat tobacco use was endorsed by 31.66% versus 55.15% from pre- to post-implementation. All changes were statistically significant (ps < 0.05). High versus low reductions in the provider-reported barrier of "lack of knowledge on pharmacotherapy treatment" over time were a significant moderator of effects, such that SUTCs with high reductions in this barrier were more likely to report greater increases in both medication education receipt and medication treatment/referral for patients who use tobacco over time. In conclusion, a tobacco-free workplace program implementation strategy that included SUTC provider education improved knowledge and resulted in increased delivery of evidence-based treatment of tobacco use at SUTCs; however, treatment provision rates-in particular, offering tobacco cessation counseling-remained less than desirable, suggesting that barriers beyond lack of knowledge may be important to address to improve tobacco use care in SUTCs. Moderation results suggest (1) differences in the mechanisms underlying uptake of counseling education versus medication education and (2) that the relative difficulty of providing counseling versus providing medication persists regardless of knowledge gains.

Changes in Substance Use Treatment Providers' Delivery of the 5A's for Non-Cigarette Tobacco Use in the Context of a Comprehensive Tobacco-Free Workplace Program Implementation

Tobacco use treatment is not prioritized in substance use treatment centers (SUTCs), leading to tobacco-related health inequities for patients with substance use disorders (SUDs) and necessitating efforts to enhance providers' care provision. Training providers on how to treat tobacco use increases their intervention on patients' smoking, but limited work addresses its effects on their non-cigarette tobacco use intervention provision. This study redressed this gap using data from 15 unaffiliated SUTCs in Texas (serving 82,927 patients/year) participating in a tobacco-free workplace program (TFWP) that included provider education on treating tobacco use, including non-cigarette tobacco use. SUTC providers completed surveys before (n = 259) and after (n = 194) TFWP implementation. Past-month screening/intervention provision for non-cigarette tobacco use (the 5A's; ask, advise, assess, assist, arrange) and provider factors theoretically and practically presumed to underlie change [i.e., beliefs about concurrently treating tobacco use disorder (TUD) and other SUDs, self-efficacy for tobacco use assessment (TUA) delivery, barriers to treating tobacco dependence, receipt of tobacco intervention training] were assessed. Generalized linear or linear mixed models assessed changes over time from before to after TFWP implementation; low vs. high SUTC-level changes in provider factors were examined as moderators of changes in 5A's delivery. Results indicated significant improvement in each provider factor and increases in providers' asking, assisting, and arranging for non-cigarette tobacco use over time (ps < 0.04). Relative to their counterparts, SUTCs with high changes in providers' beliefs in favor of treating patients' tobacco use had greater odds of advising, assessing, assisting, and arranging patients, and SUTCs with greater barrier reductions had greater odds of advising and assisting patients. Results suggest that TFWPs can address training deficits and alter providers' beliefs about treating non-tobacco TUD during SUD care, improve their TUA delivery self-efficacy, and reduce intervention barriers, ultimately increasing intervention provision for patients' non-cigarette tobacco use. SUTCs with the greatest room for improvement in provider beliefs and barriers to care provision seem excellent candidates for TFWP implementation aimed at increasing non-cigarette tobacco use care delivery.

Smoking Intervention Practices in Texas Healthcare Centers with Sexual and Gender Minority Patients

Objectives

This study evaluated the use of evidence-based practices (EBPs) for smoking cessation in centers providing behavioral healthcare for patient populations that included some proportion of sexual and gender minorities (SGMs).

Methods

Healthcare providers from 75 healthcare centers across Texas serving SGMs with behavioral health needs participated in a survey assessing their center's tobacco control policies and practices.

Results

Nearly half (N = 36) of participating centers had a comprehensive tobacco-free workplace policy, 30.67% employed ≥1 tobacco treatment specialist, 73.91% employed ≥1 prescriber, 80.82% mandated screening for patient tobacco use at intake, and 57.53% provided a template for tobacco use assessments. Overall, 70.67% of providers asked patients about smoking status, 69.33% advised patients to quit, 64.00% assessed patients' interest in quitting, 58.67% assisted patients with quit attempts, and 36.00% arranged follow-up. Providers' ability to tailor interventions for special populations like SGMs ranged from very low/0 to very high/10 (M = 4.63 ± 2.59).

Conclusions

There are opportunities to improve policy implementation, standardization and usage of evidence-based interventions, and intervention tailoring within settings providing care to SGM patients in Texas to better address their tobacco use inequities.

Organization-Level Factors Associated with Changes in the Delivery of the Five A's for Smoking Cessation following the Implementation of a Comprehensive Tobacco-Free Workplace Program within Substance Use Treatment Centers

Many adults with a substance use disorder smoke cigarettes. However, tobacco use is not commonly addressed in substance use treatment centers. This study examined how provider beliefs about addressing tobacco use during non-nicotine substance use treatment, provider self-efficacy in delivering tobacco use assessments, and perceived barriers to the routine provision of tobacco care were associated with changes in the delivery of the evidence-based five A's for smoking intervention (asking, advising, assessing, assisting, and arranging) at the organizational level. The data were from 15 substance use treatment centers that implemented a tobacco-free workplace program; data were collected before and after the program's implementation. Linear regression examined how center-level averages of provider factors (1) at pre-implementation and (2) post- minus pre-implementation were associated with changes in the use of the five A's for smoking in substance use treatment patients. The results indicated that centers with providers endorsing less agreement that tobacco use should be addressed in non-nicotine substance use treatment and reporting lower self-efficacy for providing tobacco use assessments at pre-implementation were associated with significant increases in asking patients about smoking, assessing interest in quitting and assisting with a quit attempt by post-implementation. Centers reporting more barriers at pre-implementation and centers that had greater reductions in reported barriers to treatment over time had greater increases in assessing patients' interest in quitting smoking and assisting with a quit attempt by post-implementation. Overall, the centers that had the most to learn regarding addressing patients' tobacco use had greater changes in their use of the five A's compared to centers whose personnel were already better informed and trained. Findings from this study advance implementation science and contribute information relevant to reducing the research-to-practice translational gap in tobacco control for a patient group that suffers tobacco-related health disparities.