Search

Purpose: In 2017, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) funded the Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I) to implement and expand tobacco treatment programs in routine oncology care. Many C3I programs developed specialty care programs staffed by tobacco treatment specialists (TTSs) to deliver evidence-based treatment to adult patients who smoke. People involved in specialty tobacco treatment programs can help to identify implementation strategies and adaptations that may enhance tobacco treatment reach and effectiveness in cancer care and help more patients with cancer quit using tobacco., Methods: We conducted semistructured interviews with TTSs from 21 C3I-funded cancer centers and applied content analysis to interview transcripts from 37 TTSs and 17 respondents in other program roles. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to code interview data. We identified final themes and implementation strategies and adaptations recommended by respondents on the basis of these codes., Results: Respondents shared that implementation of specialty tobacco treatment programs in cancer care settings could be facilitated by training staff to provide patient connection to services, incorporating prescription of no- or low-cost cessation medications, hiring additional staff to deliver tobacco treatment, allocating space to the program, and automating electronic health record workflows., Conclusion: TTSs and others involved in specialty tobacco treatment in NCI-designated cancer centers identified ways to improve tobacco treatment access, use, and effectiveness by (1) adapting specialty tobacco treatment delivery to meet patient needs; (2) facilitating referrals and pharmacotherapy coordination; and (3) committing staffing, space, and support resources to tobacco treatment programs. Key program participants suggested that these approaches would help more oncology patients connect with evidence-based tobacco treatment and quit smoking.

Background: Cancer patients who receive evidence-based tobacco-dependence treatment are more likely to quit and remain abstinent, but tobacco treatment programs (TTPs) are not consistently offered. In 2017, the U.S. National Cancer Institute, through the Cancer Moonshot, funded the Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I). C3I supports 52 cancer centers to implement and expand evidence-based tobacco treatment in routine oncology care. Integration into routine care involves the use of health information technology (IT), including modifying electronic health records and clinical workflows. Here, we examine C3I cancer centers' IT leadership involvement and experiences in tobacco-dependence treatment implementation., Method: This qualitative study of C3I-funded cancer centers integrated data from online surveys and in-person, semistructured interviews with IT leaders. We calculated descriptive statistics of survey data and applied content analysis to interview transcripts., Results: Themes regarding IT personnel included suggestions to involve IT early, communicate regularly, understand the roles and influence of the IT team, and match program design with IT funding and resources. Themes regarding electronic health record (EHR) modifications included beginning modifications early to account for long lead time to make changes, working with IT to identify and adapt existing EHR tools for TTP or designing tools that will support a desired workflow developed with end-users, and working with IT personnel to make sure TTPs comply with system and state policies (e.g., privacy laws)., Conclusions: The experiences of C3I cancer centers regarding the use of health IT to enhance tobacco-dependence treatment program implementation can guide cancer centers and community oncology practices to potentially enhance TTP implementation and patient outcomes., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2023.)

Introduction: Available evidence is mixed concerning associations between smoking status and COVID-19 clinical outcomes. Effects of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and vaccination status on COVID-19 outcomes in smokers are unknown., Methods: Electronic health record data from 104 590 COVID-19 patients hospitalized February 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021 in 21 U.S. health systems were analyzed to assess associations of smoking status, in-hospital NRT prescription, and vaccination status with in-hospital death and ICU admission., Results: Current (n = 7764) and never smokers (n = 57 454) did not differ on outcomes after adjustment for age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance, body mass index, and comorbidities. Former (vs never) smokers (n = 33 101) had higher adjusted odds of death (aOR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06-1.17) and ICU admission (aOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.11). Among current smokers, NRT prescription was associated with reduced mortality (aOR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50-0.82). Vaccination effects were significantly moderated by smoking status; vaccination was more strongly associated with reduced mortality among current (aOR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.16-0.66) and former smokers (aOR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.39-0.57) than for never smokers (aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57, 0.79). Vaccination was associated with reduced ICU admission more strongly among former (aOR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.66-0.83) than never smokers (aOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79-0.97)., Conclusions: Former but not current smokers hospitalized with COVID-19 are at higher risk for severe outcomes. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is associated with better hospital outcomes in COVID-19 patients, especially current and former smokers. NRT during COVID-19 hospitalization may reduce mortality for current smokers., Implications: Prior findings regarding associations between smoking and severe COVID-19 disease outcomes have been inconsistent. This large cohort study suggests potential beneficial effects of nicotine replacement therapy on COVID-19 outcomes in current smokers and outsized benefits of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in current and former smokers. Such findings may influence clinical practice and prevention efforts and motivate additional research that explores mechanisms for these effects., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.)

Purpose: Quitting smoking improves patients' clinical outcomes, yet smoking is not commonly addressed as part of cancer care. The Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I) supports National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers to integrate tobacco treatment programs (TTPs) into routine cancer care. C3I centers vary in size, implementation strategies used, and treatment approaches. We examined associations of these contextual factors with treatment reach and smoking cessation effectiveness., Methods: This cross-sectional study used survey data from 28 C3I centers that reported tobacco treatment data during the first 6 months of 2021. Primary outcomes of interest were treatment reach (reach)-the proportion of patients identified as currently smoking who received at least one evidence-based tobacco treatment component (eg, counseling and pharmacotherapy)-and smoking cessation effectiveness (effectiveness)-the proportion of patients reporting 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 6-month follow-up. Center-level differences in reach and effectiveness were examined by center characteristics, implementation strategies, and tobacco treatment components., Results: Of the total 692,662 unique patients seen, 44,437 reported current smoking. Across centers, a median of 96% of patients were screened for tobacco use, median smoking prevalence was 7.4%, median reach was 15.4%, and median effectiveness was 18.4%. Center-level characteristics associated with higher reach included higher smoking prevalence, use of center-wide TTP, and lower patient-to-tobacco treatment specialist ratio. Higher effectiveness was observed at centers that served a larger overall population and population of patients who smoke, reported a higher smoking prevalence, and/or offered electronic health record referrals via a closed-loop system., Conclusion: Whole-center TTP implementation among inpatients and outpatients, and increasing staff-to-patient ratios may improve TTP reach. Designating personnel with tobacco treatment expertise and resources to increase tobacco treatment dose or intensity may improve smoking cessation effectiveness.

Background: There is mixed evidence about the relations of current versus past cancer with severe COVID-19 outcomes and how they vary by patient and cancer characteristics., Methods: Electronic health record data of 104,590 adult hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were obtained from 21 United States health systems from February 2020 through September 2021. In-hospital mortality and ICU admission were predicted from current and past cancer diagnoses. Moderation by patient characteristics, vaccination status, cancer type, and year of the pandemic was examined., Results: 6.8% of the patients had current (n = 7,141) and 6.5% had past (n = 6,749) cancer diagnoses. Current cancer predicted both severe outcomes but past cancer did not; adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for mortality were 1.58 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.46-1.70] and 1.04 (95% CI, 0.96-1.13), respectively. Mortality rates decreased over the pandemic but the incremental risk of current cancer persisted, with the increment being larger among younger vs. older patients. Prior COVID-19 vaccination reduced mortality generally and among those with current cancer (aOR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53-0.90)., Conclusions: Current cancer, especially among younger patients, posed a substantially increased risk for death and ICU admission among patients with COVID-19; prior COVID-19 vaccination mitigated the risk associated with current cancer. Past history of cancer was not associated with higher risks for severe COVID-19 outcomes for most cancer types., Impact: This study clarifies the characteristics that modify the risk associated with cancer on severe COVID-19 outcomes across the first 20 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. See related commentary by Egan et al., p. 3., (©2022 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted cancer screening and treatment delivery, but COVID-19's impact on tobacco cessation treatment for cancer patients who smoke has not been widely explored., Aims and Methods: We conducted a sequential cross-sectional analysis of data collected from 34 National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers participating in NCI's Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I), across three reporting periods: one prior to COVID-19 (January-June 2019) and two during the pandemic (January-June 2020, January-June 2021). Using McNemar's Test of Homogeneity, we assessed changes in services offered and implementation activities over time., Results: The proportion of centers offering remote treatment services increased each year for Quitline referrals (56%, 68%, and 91%; p = .000), telephone counseling (59%, 79%, and 94%; p = .002), and referrals to Smokefree TXT (27%, 47%, and 56%; p = .006). Centers offering video-based counseling increased from 2020 to 2021 (18% to 59%; p = .006), Fewer than 10% of centers reported laying off tobacco treatment staff. Compared to early 2020, in 2021 C3I centers reported improvements in their ability to maintain staff and clinician morale, refer to external treatment services, train providers to deliver tobacco treatment, and modify clinical workflows., Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a rapid transition to new telehealth program delivery of tobacco treatment for patients with cancer. C3I cancer centers adjusted rapidly to challenges presented by the pandemic, with improvements reported in staff morale and ability to train providers, refer patients to tobacco treatment, and modify clinical workflows. These factors enabled C3I centers to sustain evidence-based tobacco treatment implementation during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic., Implications: This work describes how NCI-designated cancer centers participating in the Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I) adapted to challenges to sustain evidence-based tobacco use treatment programs during the COVID-19 pandemic. This work offers a model for resilience and rapid transition to remote tobacco treatment services delivery and proposes a policy and research agenda for telehealth services as an approach to sustaining evidence-based tobacco treatment programs., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.)

Effective treatments for smoking cessation exist but are underused. Proactive chronic care approaches may enhance the reach of cessation treatment and reduce the prevalence of smoking in healthcare systems. This pragmatic study evaluated a population-based Comprehensive Tobacco Intervention Program (CTIP) implemented in all (6) adult primary care clinics in a Madison, Wisconsin, USA healthcare cooperative, assessing treatment reach, reach equity, and effectiveness in promoting smoking cessation. CTIP launched in 3 waves of 2 clinics each in a multiple baseline design. Electronic health record (EHR) tools facilitated clinician-delivered pharmacotherapy and counseling; guiding tobacco care managers in phone outreach to all patients who smoke; and prompting multimethod bulk outreach to all patients on a smoking registry using an opt-out approach. EHR data were analyzed to assess CTIP reach and effectiveness among 6894 adult patients between January 2018 and February 2020. Cessation treatment reach increased significantly after CTIP launch in 5 of 6 clinics and was significantly higher when clinics were active vs. inactive in CTIP [Odds Ratio (OR) range = 2.0-3.0]. Rates of converting from current to former smoking status were also higher in active vs. inactive clinics (OR range = 2.2-10.5). Telephone treatment reach was particularly high in historically underserved groups, including African-American, Hispanic, and Medicaid-eligible patients. Implementation of a comprehensive, opt-out, chronic-care program aimed at all patients who smoke was associated with increases in the rates of pharmacotherapy and counseling delivery and quitting smoking. Proactive outreach may help reduce disparities in treatment access., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Danielle E. McCarthy, Michael C. Fiore, and Timothy B. Baker have all received grant funding from NCI, the institute that sponsors SmokefreeTXT. Michael C. Fiore serves as a consultant to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) on tobacco cessation policy issues. Timothy B. Baker has served as a paid consultant to ICF to evaluate the portfolio of Smokefree resources via monies supplied by NCI. His consulting activities involved suggesting new research directions for digital health interventions and providing feedback to ICF and NCI on research products on such interventions. The research reported in this report was not part of his consulting work with ICF/NCI. Timothy B. Baker is Principal Investigator on a project funded by NHLBI for which Pfizer provided free active and placebo varenicline. Pfizer played no role in the design, implementation, or analysis of the project described in the present manuscript. All other authors have no conflicts to report. The electronic health record tools described in this manuscript are marketed by Epic Systems Corporation., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Health system change can increase the reach of evidence-based smoking cessation treatments. Proactive electronic health record (EHR)-enabled, closed-loop referral ("eReferral") to state tobacco quitlines increases the rates at which patients who smoke accept cessation treatment. Implementing such system change poses many challenges, however, and adaptations to system contexts are often required, but are understudied. This retrospective case study identified adaptations to eReferral EHR tools and implementation strategies in two healthcare systems., Methods: In a large clustered randomized controlled trial (C-RCT; NCT02735382) conducted in 2016-2017, 11 primary care clinics in two healthcare systems implemented quitline eReferral, starting with 1 pilot clinic per system followed by 2 phases of implementation (an experimental phase in 5-6 test clinics per system and then a system-wide dissemination phase in both systems). Adaptations were informed by stakeholder input from live trainings, follow-up calls and meetings in the first month after eReferral launch, emails, direct observation by researchers, and clinic staff survey responses. Retrospective, descriptive analysis characterized implementation strategy modifications and adaptations using the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications to Evidence-based Implementation Strategies (FRAME-IS). A pre- and post-implementation survey assessed staff ratings of eReferral acceptability and implementation barriers and facilitators., Findings: Major modifications to closed-loop eReferral implementation strategies included aligning the eReferral initiative with other high-priority health system objectives, modifying eReferral user interfaces and training in their use, modifying eReferral workflows and associated training, and maintaining and enhancing interoperability and clinician feedback functions. The two health systems both used Epic EHRs but used different approaches to interfacing with the quitline vendor and integrating eReferral into clinician workflows. Both health systems engaged in iterative refinement of the EHR alert prompting eReferral, the eReferral order, trainings, and workflows. Staff survey comments suggested moderate acceptability of eReferral processes and identified possible targets for future modifications in eReferral, including reducing clinician burden related to EHR documentation and addressing clinicians' negative beliefs about patient receptivity to cessation treatment., Conclusions: System-wide implementation of tobacco quitline eReferral in primary care outpatient clinics is feasible but requires extensive coordination across stakeholders, tailoring to local health system EHR configurations, and sensitivity to system- and clinic-specific workflows., Trial Registration: www., Clinicaltrials: gov, NCT02735382 . Registered on 12 August 2016., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Main Objective: There is limited information on how patient outcomes have changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study characterizes changes in mortality, intubation, and ICU admission rates during the first 20 months of the pandemic., Study Design and Methods: University of Wisconsin researchers collected and harmonized electronic health record data from 1.1 million COVID-19 patients across 21 United States health systems from February 2020 through September 2021. The analysis comprised data from 104,590 adult hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Inclusion criteria for the analysis were: (1) age 18 years or older; (2) COVID-19 ICD-10 diagnosis during hospitalization and/or a positive COVID-19 PCR test in a 14-day window (+/- 7 days of hospital admission); and (3) health system contact prior to COVID-19 hospitalization. Outcomes assessed were: (1) mortality (primary), (2) endotracheal intubation, and (3) ICU admission., Results and Significance: The 104,590 hospitalized participants had a mean age of 61.7 years and were 50.4% female, 24% Black, and 56.8% White. Overall risk-standardized mortality (adjusted for age, sex, race, ethnicity, body mass index, insurance status and medical comorbidities) declined from 16% of hospitalized COVID-19 patients (95% CI: 16% to 17%) early in the pandemic (February-April 2020) to 9% (CI: 9% to 10%) later (July-September 2021). Among subpopulations, males (vs. females), those on Medicare (vs. those on commercial insurance), the severely obese (vs. normal weight), and those aged 60 and older (vs. younger individuals) had especially high mortality rates both early and late in the pandemic. ICU admission and intubation rates also declined across these 20 months., Conclusions: Mortality, intubation, and ICU admission rates improved markedly over the first 20 months of the pandemic among adult hospitalized COVID-19 patients although gains varied by subpopulation. These data provide important information on the course of COVID-19 and identify hospitalized patient groups at heightened risk for negative outcomes., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04506528 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04506528)., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Purpose: Hospitalization affords an opportunity to reduce smoking, but fewer than half of patients who smoke receive evidence-based cessation treatment during inpatient stays. This study evaluated a pharmacist-led, electronic health record (EHR)-facilitated opt-out smoking cessation intervention designed to address this need., Methods: Analyses of EHR records for adult patients who smoked in the past 30 days admitted to an academic medical center in the upper Midwest were conducted using the Reach Effectiveness Adoption Implementation Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. The reach of a pharmacist-led, EHR-facilitated protocol for smoking cessation treatment was assessed by comparing patients' receipt of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and tobacco quitline referral before and after implementation. χ2 tests, t tests, and multiple logistic regression models were used to compare reach across patient demographic groups to assess treatment disparities and the representativeness of reach. Adoption of the program by hospital services was also assessed., Results: Of the 70 hospital services invited to implement the program, 88.6% adopted it and 78.6% had eligible admissions. Treatment reach increased as rates of delivering NRT rose from 43.6% of eligible patients before implementation to 50.4% after implementation (P < 0.0001) and quitline referral rates rose from 0.9% to 11.9% (P < 0.0001). Representativeness of reach by sex and ethnicity improved after implementation, although disparities by race and age persisted after adjustment for demographics, insurance, and primary diagnosis. Pharmacists addressed tobacco use for eligible patients in 62.5% of cases after protocol implementation., Conclusion: Smoking cessation treatment reach and representativeness of reach improved after implementation of a proactive, pharmacist-led, EHR-facilitated opt-out smoking cessation treatment protocol in adult inpatient services., (© American Society of Health-System Pharmacists 2021. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Smoking cessation results in improved cancer treatment outcomes. However, the factors associated with successful implementation of cessation programs in cancer care settings are not well understood. This paper presents the reach the reach and effectiveness of cessation programs implemented in NCI-Designated Cancer Centers in the Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I). An observational, cross-sectional study was conducted among C3I Cancer Centers from July 1, 2019 and December 31, 2019 (N = 38). Reach was calculated as the proportion of patients reporting current smoking that received cessation treatment and was analyzed overall and by organizational characteristics. Smoking abstinence rates were determined by the proportion of participants self-reporting smoking abstinence in the previous 7 and 30 days at 6 months after treatment. On average, nearly 30% of patients who smoked received any cessation treatment. In-person counseling was most implemented but reached an average of only 13.2% of patients who smoked. Although less frequently implemented, average reach was highest for counseling provided via an interactive voice response system (55.8%) and telephone-based counseling (18.7%). Reach was higher at centers with more established programs, electronic health record referral systems, and higher smoking prevalence. At 6-month follow-up, about a fifth of participants on average had not smoked in the past 7 days (21.7%) or past 30 days (18.6%). Variations in reach by organizational characteristics suggest that leadership engagement and investment in technology-facilitated programs may yield higher levels of reach. Understanding which implementation and intervention strategies facilitate greater cessation treatment reach and effectiveness could lead to improved outcomes among cancer patients who smoke., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.)

Background: Delivering evidence-based tobacco dependence treatment in oncology settings improves smoking abstinence and cancer outcomes. Leadership engagement/buy-in is critical for implementation success, but few studies have defined buy-in or described how to secure buy-in for tobacco treatment programs (TTPs) in cancer care. This study examines buy-in during the establishment of tobacco treatment programs at National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers., Methods: We utilized a sequential, explanatory mixed-methods approach to analyze quantitative data and qualitative interviews with program leads in the U.S.-based NCI Moonshot-supported Cancer Center Cessation Initiative ( n = 20 Centers). We calculated descriptive statistics and applied structural coding and content analysis to qualitative data., Results: At least 75% of participating centers secured health care system administrative, clinical, and IT leadership buy-in and support. Six themes emerged from interviews: engaging leadership, access to resources, leveraging federal funding support to build leadership interest, designating champions, identifying training needs, and ensuring staff roles and IT systems support workflows., Conclusions: Buy-in among staff and clinicians is defined by the belief that the TTP is necessary, valuable, and evidence based. Recognizing and securing these dimensions of buy-in can facilitate implementation success, leading to improved cancer outcomes.

Background: Although people who smoke cigarettes are overrepresented among hospital inpatients, few are connected with smoking cessation treatment during their hospitalization. Training, accountability for medication use, and monitoring of all patients position pharmacists well to deliver cessation interventions to all hospitalized patients who smoke. Methods: A large Midwestern University hospital implemented a pharmacist-led smoking cessation intervention. A delegation protocol for hospital pharmacy inpatients who smoked cigarettes gave hospital pharmacists the authority to order nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) during hospitalization and upon discharge, and for referral to the Wisconsin Tobacco Quit Line (WTQL) at discharge. Eligible patients received the smoking cessation intervention unless they actively refused (ie, "opt-out"). The program was pilot tested in phases, with pharmacist feedback between phases, and then implemented hospital-wide. Interviews, surveys, and informal mechanisms identified ways to improve implementation and workflows. Results: Feedback from pharmacists led to changes that improved workflow, training and patient education materials, and enhanced adoption and reach. Refining implementation strategies across pilot phases increased the percentage of eligible smokers offered pharmacist-delivered cessation support from 37% to 76%, prescribed NRT from 2% to 44%, and referred to the WTQL from 3% to 32%. Conclusion: Hospitalizations provide an ideal opportunity for patients to make a tobacco quit attempt, and pharmacists can capitalize on this opportunity by integrating smoking cessation treatment into existing inpatient medication reconciliation workflows. Pharmacist-led implementation strategies developed in this study may be applicable in other inpatient settings., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2021.)

Maternal smoking increases mortality and morbidity risks for both mother and infant. The First Breath Wisconsin study examined the cost-effectiveness of providing incentives to pregnant women who smoked to engage in stop smoking treatment. Participants (N = 1014) were Medicaid-enrolled pregnant women recruited from September 2012 to April 2015 through public health departments, private, and community health clinics in Wisconsin. The incentive group (n = 505) could receive $460 for completing pre-birth visits ($25 each), post-birth home visits ($40, $25, $25, $40 for 1-week, 2-month, 4-month and 6-month visits), monthly smoking cessation phone calls post-birth ($20 each), and biochemically-verified tobacco abstinence at 1-week ($40) and 6-months ($40) post-birth. The control group (n = 509) received up to $80 for 1-week ($40) and 6-month ($40) post-birth assessments. Intervention costs included incentive payments to participants, counselor and administrative staff time, and smoking cessation medications. Cost-effectiveness analysis calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per one additional smoker who quit. The incentive group had higher 6-month post-birth biochemically-confirmed tobacco abstinence than the control group (14.7% vs. 9.2%). Incremental costs averaged $184 per participant for the incentive group compared to controls ($317 vs $133). The ICER of financial incentives was $3399 (95% CI $2228 to $8509) per additional woman who was tobacco abstinent at 6 months post-birth. The ICER was lower ($2518 vs $4760) for women who did not live with another smoker. This study shows use of financial incentives for stop smoking treatment is a cost-effective option for low-income pregnant women who smoke., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: Patients who use tobacco are too rarely connected with tobacco use treatment during healthcare visits. Electronic health record enhancements may increase such referrals in primary care settings. This project used the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework to assess the implementation of a healthcare system change carried out in an externally valid manner (executed by the healthcare system)., Methods: The healthcare system used their standard, computer-based training approach to implement the electronic health record and clinic workflow changes for electronic referral in 30 primary care clinics that previously used faxed quitline referral. Electronic health record data captured rates of assessment of readiness to quit and quitline referral 4 months before implementation and 8 months (May-December 2017) after implementation. Data, analyzed from October 2018 to June 2019, also reflected intervention reach, adoption, and maintenance., Results: For reach and effectiveness, from before to after implementation for electronic referral, among adult patients who smoked, assessment of readiness to quit increased from 24.8% (2,126 of 8,569) to 93.2% (11,163 of 11,977), quitline referrals increased from 1.7% (143 of 8,569) to 11.3% (1,351 of 11,977), and 3.6% were connected with the quitline after implementation. For representativeness of reach, electronic referral rates were especially high for women, African Americans, and Medicaid patients. For adoption, 52.6% of staff who roomed at least 1 patient who smoked referred to the quitline. For maintenance, electronic referral rates fell by approximately 60% over 8 months but remained higher than pre-implementation rates., Conclusions: Real-world implementation of an electronic health record-based electronic referral system markedly increased readiness to quit assessment and quitline referral rates in primary care patients. Future research should focus on implementation methods that produce more consistent implementation and better maintenance of electronic referral., (Copyright © 2020 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Too few smokers who present for outpatient healthcare receive evidence-based interventions to stop smoking. Referral to nationally available smoking cessation support may enhance tobacco intervention reach during healthcare visits. This study evaluated the feasibility of outpatient electronic health record (EHR)-enabled, closed-loop referral (eReferral) to SmokefreeTXT, a National Cancer Institute text message smoking cessation program. SmokefreeTXT eReferral for adult patients who smoke was implemented in a family medicine clinic and an allergy and asthma clinic in an integrated Midwestern healthcare system. Interoperable, HIPAA-compliant eReferral returned referral outcomes to the EHR. In Phase 1 of implementation, clinicians were responsible for eReferral; in Phase 2 this responsibility shifted to Medical Assistants and/or nurses. EHR data were extracted to compute eReferral rates among adult smokers and compare demographics among those eReferred versus not referred. SmokefreeTXT data were used to compute SmokefreeTXT enrollment rates among those eReferred. Descriptive analyses of clinic staff surveys assessed implementation context and staff attitudes toward and adaptations of eReferral processes. During clinician implementation, 43 of 299 adult smokers (14.4%) were eReferred. During medical assistant (MA) implementation, 36 of 401 adult smokers (9.0%) were eReferred. Overall, among those eReferred, 25.7% completed SmokefreeTXT enrollment (3.1% of patients eligible for eReferral). Staff survey responses indicated that eReferral was efficient and easy. eReferral rates and relevant attitudes varied meaningfully by clinic. Thus, interoperable eReferral via outpatient EHR to SmokefreeTXT is feasible and acceptable to clinic staff and enrolls roughly 3.0% of smokers. Clinic context and implementation approach may influence reach., (© Society of Behavioral Medicine 2019. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

People with a mental illness and/or drug use disorder have a higher rate of smoking than adults in general. To address this challenge, recommendations include integrating tobacco-free policies and tobacco dependency treatment into the behavioral health care delivery system. Currently, little is known regarding levels of such integration. A 65-item Internet survey measuring integration assessed three areas: a) policies addressing the use of tobacco products; b) provision of evidence-based tobacco dependence treatment; and, c) capacity to help employees/volunteers quit tobacco use. The survey was distributed to representatives of all behavioral health programs in Wisconsin. The survey response rate was 27.1%. Programs, on average, were 40% integrated. A significant proportion of programs (20%) were less than 20% integrated. A few programs (4.3%) exceeded 80% integration. Integration of tobacco policies and treatment into the behavioral health care delivery system remains limited and there is a need for technical assistance and training.