Search

Background: A hospital admission offers smokers an opportunity to quit. Smoking cessation counseling provided in the hospital is effective, but only if it continues for more than one month after discharge. Providing smoking cessation medication at discharge may add benefit to counseling. A major barrier to translating this research into clinical practice is sustaining treatment during the transition to outpatient care. An evidence-based, practical, cost-effective model that facilitates the continuation of tobacco treatment after discharge is needed. This paper describes the design of a comparative effectiveness trial testing a hospital-initiated intervention against standard care., Methods/design: A two-arm randomized controlled trial compares the effectiveness of standard post-discharge care with a multi-component smoking cessation intervention provided for three months after discharge. Current smokers admitted to Massachusetts General Hospital who receive bedside smoking cessation counseling, intend to quit after discharge and are willing to consider smoking cessation medication are eligible. Study participants are recruited following the hospital counseling visit and randomly assigned to receive Standard Care or Extended Care after hospital discharge. Standard Care includes a recommendation for a smoking cessation medication and information about community resources. Extended Care includes up to three months of free FDA-approved smoking cessation medication and five proactive computerized telephone calls that use interactive voice response technology to provide tailored motivational messages, offer additional live telephone counseling calls from a smoking cessation counselor, and facilitate medication refills. Outcomes are assessed at one, three, and six months after hospital discharge. The primary outcomes are self-reported and validated seven-day point prevalence tobacco abstinence at six months. Other outcomes include short-term and sustained smoking cessation, post-discharge utilization of smoking cessation treatment, hospital readmissions and emergency room visits, and program cost per quit., Discussion: This study tests a disseminable smoking intervention model for hospitalized smokers. If effective and widely adopted, it could help to reduce population smoking rates and thereby reduce tobacco-related mortality, morbidity, and health care costs., Trial Registration: United States Clinical Trials Registry NCT01177176.

Internet interventions for smoking cessation are ubiquitous. Yet, to date, there are few randomized clinical trials that gauge their efficacy. This study is a randomized clinical trial (N= 284, n= 140 in the treatment group, n= 144 in the control group) of an Internet smoking cessation intervention. Smokers were randomly assigned to receive either bupropion plus counseling alone, or bupropion and counseling in addition to 12 weeks of access to the Comprehensive Health Enhancement Support System for Smoking Cessation and Relapse Prevention (CHESS SCRP; a Web site which provided information on smoking cessation as well as support). We found that access to CHESS SCRP was not significantly related to abstinence at the end of the treatment period (OR= 1.13, 95% CI 0.66-2.62) or at 6 months postquit (OR= 1.48, 95% CI 0.66-2.62). However, the number of times participants used CHESS SCRP per week was related to abstinence at both end of treatment (OR= 1.79, 95% CI 1.25-2.56) and at the 6-month follow-up (OR= 1.59, 95% CI 1.06-2.38). Participants with access to CHESS SCRP logged in an average of 33.64 times (SD=30.76) over the 90-day period of access. Rates of CHESS SCRP use did not differ by ethnicity, level of education or gender (all p>.05). In sum, results suggest that participants used CHESS SCRP frequently, CHESS SCRP use was related to success, but the effects in general did not yield intergroup effects.

Objective: Most smoking cessation studies have used long-term abstinence as their primary outcome measure. Recent research has suggested that long-term abstinence may be an insensitive index of important smoking cessation mechanisms. The goal of the current study was to examine the effects of 5 smoking cessation pharmacotherapies using Shiffman et al.'s (2006) approach of examining the effect of smoking cessation medications on 3 process markers of cessation or smoking cessation milestones: initial abstinence, lapse, and the lapse-relapse transition. Method: The current study (N = 1,504; 58.2% female and 41.8% male; 83.9% Caucasian, 13.6% African American, 2.5% other races) examined the effect of 5 smoking cessation pharmacotherapy treatments versus placebo (bupropion, nicotine lozenge, nicotine patch, bupropion + lozenge, patch + lozenge) on Shiffman et al.'s smoking cessation milestones over 8 weeks following a quit attempt. Results: Results show that all 5 medication conditions decreased rates of failure to achieve initial abstinence and most (with the exception of the nicotine lozenge) decreased lapse risk; however, only the nicotine patch and bupropion + lozenge conditions affected the lapse-relapse transition. Conclusions: These findings demonstrate that medications are effective at aiding initial abstinence and decreasing lapse risk but that they generally do not decrease relapse risk following a lapse. The analysis of cessation milestones sheds light on important impediments to long-term smoking abstinence, suggests potential mechanisms of action of smoking cessation pharmacotherapies, and identifies targets for future treatment development. (Contains 3 figures, 3 footnotes and 2 tables.)

Objective: Tobacco use is rarely addressed in community mental healthcare settings, despite its high prevalence among people with serious mental illness. The aim of the current study was to gather stakeholder feedback regarding the feasibility of chronic care management strategies for tobacco dependence in community mental health centers (CMHCs). Chronic care strategies evaluated included the 5 As (Ask about tobacco use, Advise users of tobacco to quit, Assess interest in cessation, Assist with cessation, and Arrange for follow-up) and proactive telephone outreach (reaching out to all users of tobacco to offer connection to tobacco cessation treatment). Methods: Using a semi-structured interview guide informed by the Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model, we conducted individual semi-structured interviews with providers, leaders, and clients across two CMHCs. Our objectives were to capture their attitudes toward smoking cessation treatment, two chronic care model interventions (i.e., proactive outreach, the 5 As), and to determine the infrastructure needed to implement such interventions in their CMHCs. Thematic analysis was conducted by two independent coders to uncover pertinent themes. Results: Participants (n = 20) included nine providers, six leaders, and five clients. Thematic analysis revealed three major themes: (1) characteristics of recipients, (2) characteristics of the intervention, and (3) infrastructure needed for implementation and sustainability. Providers, leaders, and clients all reported that tobacco cessation treatment was rarely provided in CMHCs and expressed an interest in such treatments becoming more available. The 5 As and proactive outreach were viewed as feasible and acceptable to deliver and receive. Providers, leaders, and clients wanted support to connect clients with smoking cessation treatment. Providers and leaders requested a range of implementation supports, including didactic trainings, decision aids, performance feedback, and coaching on evidence-based tobacco cessation treatments for people with serious mental illness. Clients requested tobacco cessation resources, such as a cessation counseling provided at the CMHC and prescriptions for cessation medication. Conclusions: CMHC providers, leaders, and clients are interested in making tobacco cessation services more widely accessible and available. The feedback gathered in this study can be used to inform the delivery and implementation of guideline-adherent tobacco dependence care in CMHCs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: People with serious mental illness (SMI) have a high smoking prevalence and low quit rates. Few cessation treatments are tested in smokers with SMI. Mental health (MH) providers are reluctant to address smoking. Proactive tobacco cessation treatment strategies reach out directly to smokers to offer counseling and medication and improve treatment utilization and quit rates. The current study is a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of proactive outreach for tobacco cessation treatment in VA MH patients.Aims and Methods: Participants (N = 1938, 83% male, mean age 55.7) across four recruitment sites, who were current smokers and had a MH visit in the past 12 months, were identified using the electronic medical record. Participants were randomized to Intervention (telephone outreach call plus invitation to engage in MH tailored telephone counseling and assistance obtaining nicotine replacement therapy) or Control (usual care). The current study assessed outcomes in participants with SMI (N = 982).Results: Compared to the Control group, participants assigned to the Intervention group were more likely to engage in telephone counseling (22% vs. 3%) and use nicotine replacement therapy (51% vs. 41%). Participants in the Intervention group were more likely to be abstinent (7-day point prevalence; 18%) at 12 months than participants in the Control group (11%) but equally likely to make quit attempts.Conclusions: Proactive tobacco cessation treatment is an effective strategy for tobacco users with SMI. Proactive outreach had a particularly strong effect on counseling utilization. Future randomized clinical trials examining proactive tobacco treatment approaches in SMI treatment settings are needed.Implications: Few effective treatment models exist for smokers with SMI. Proactive tobacco cessation outreach with connections to MH tailored telephone counseling and medication promotes tobacco abstinence among smokers with SMI and is an effective treatment strategy for this underserved population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a research to compare the effectiveness of smoking cessation treatments in real-world use. It states that the research involves randomly assigning 1346 primary care patients to 5 active pharmacotherapies including 3 monotherapies and 2 combination therapies, and then the patients were given cessation counseling through a telephone quit line. Furthermore, the result shows that combination pharmacotherapy has increased abstinence in comparison to monotherapies.