Search

Introduction: Although studies have suggested that implicit attitudes may predict smoking-related decisions, evidence that changes in implicit attitudes toward smoking are related to changes in smoking behavior is lacking. Using data from a trial comparing interventions to induce quit attempts among unmotivated smokers, this study examined whether changes in implicit attitudes were associated with quit attempts and cessation after controlling for explicit motivation.Methods: Daily smokers recruited from the community completed measures of implicit attitudes (Implicit Association Test) and explicit measure of motivation to smoke at baseline, mid-intervention (week 12 [W12]) and follow-up (week 26 [W26]). Quit attempts and cessation were assessed at follow-up, and cessation was biochemically verified.Results: As hypothesized, Implicit Association Test scores became more negative from baseline to W12, a change that was sustained at follow-up. Logistic regression analyses in which implicit attitudes were used to predict smoking outcomes revealed that negative changes in implicit attitudes from baseline to W12 and from baseline to W26 were significantly related to quit attempts (OR = 0.71, 95% CI [0.52, 0.97], p < .05 for both) independent of explicit motivation. Negative changes in implicit attitudes from baseline to W26 were significantly related to cessation (OR = 0.50, 95% CI [0.25, 1.00], p < .05).Conclusions: Negative changes in implicit attitudes were associated with positive changes in smoking behavior independent of explicit motivation. This result indicates that smoking cessation interventions may be enhanced by incorporating strategies to change implicit attitudes, and that changes in implicit attitudes are also potentially important intervention outcomes.Implications: Smoking cessation interventions may be improved by going beyond the current focus on explicit psychological constructs and targeting automatic cognitive processes such as implicit attitudes. The results are encouragement to examine how best to manipulate smokers' implicit attitudes as well as to determine the effect on their smoking behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims To estimate the prevalence and predictors of failed biochemical verification of self-reported abstinence among participants enrolled in trials of hospital-initiated smoking cessation interventions. Design Comparison of characteristics between participants who verified and those who failed to verify self-reported abstinence. Settings Multi-site randomized clinical trials conducted between 2010 and 2014 in hospitals throughout the United States. Participants Recently hospitalized smokers who reported tobacco abstinence 6 months post-randomization and provided a saliva sample for verification purposes ( n = 822). Measurements Outcomes were salivary cotinine-verified smoking abstinence at 10 and 15 ng/ml cut-points. Predictors and correlates included participant demographics and tobacco use; hospital diagnoses and treatment; and study characteristics collected via surveys and electronic medical records. Findings Usable samples were returned by 69.8% of the 1178 eligible trial participants who reported 7-day point prevalence abstinence. The proportion of participants verified as quit was 57.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 54.4, 61.2; 10 ng/ml cut-off] or 60.6% (95% CI = 57.2, 63.9; 15 ng/ml). Factors associated independently with verification at 10 ng/ml were education beyond high school education [odds ratio (OR) = 1.51; 95% CI = 1.07, 2.11], continuous abstinence since hospitalization (OR = 2.82; 95% CI = 2.02, 3.94), mailed versus in-person sample (OR = 3.20; 95% CI = 1.96, 5.21) and race. African American participants were less likely to verify abstinence than white participants (OR = 0.64; 95% CI = 0.44, 0.93). Findings were similar for verification at 15 ng/ml. Verification rates did not differ by treatment group. Conclusions In the United States, high rates (40%) of recently hospitalized smokers enrolled in smoking cessation trials fail biochemical verification of their self-reported abstinence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Few hospitals treat patients' tobacco dependence. To be effective, hospital-initiated cessation interventions must provide at least 1 month of supportive contact post-discharge.Study Design: Individually randomized clinical trial. Recruitment commenced July 2011; analyses were conducted October 2014-June 2015.Setting/participants: The study was conducted in two large Midwestern hospitals. Participants included smokers who were aged ≥18 years, planned to stay quit after discharge, and spoke English or Spanish.Intervention: Hospital-based cessation counselors delivered the intervention. For patients randomized to warm handoff, staff immediately called the quitline from the bedside and handed the phone to participants for enrollment and counseling. Participants randomized to fax were referred on the day of hospital discharge.Main Outcome Measures: Outcomes at 6 months included quitline enrollment/adherence, medication use, biochemically verified cessation, and cost effectiveness.Results: Significantly more warm handoff than fax participants enrolled in quitline (99.6% vs 59.6%; relative risk, 1.67; 95% CI=1.65, 1.68). One in four (25.4% warm handoff, 25.3% fax) were verified to be abstinent at 6-month follow-up; this did not differ significantly between groups (relative risk, 1.02; 95% CI=0.82, 1.24). Cessation medication use in the hospital and receipt of a prescription for medication at discharge did not differ between groups; however, significantly more fax participants reported using cessation medication post-discharge (32% vs 25%, p=0.01). The average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of enrolling participants into warm handoff was $0.14. Hospital-borne costs were significantly lower in warm handoff than in fax ($5.77 vs $9.41, p<0.001).Conclusions: One in four inpatient smokers referred to quitline by either method were abstinent at 6 months post-discharge. Among motivated smokers, fax referral and warm handoff are efficient and comparatively effective ways to link smokers with evidence-based care. For hospitals, warm handoff is a less expensive and more effective method for enrolling smokers in quitline services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Overview:Many U.S. hospitals use fax-referral to quitlines to provide outpatient follow-up. It is important to understand whether it is better to refer all smokers, or only those ready to quit, to quitline services. The purpose of this pilot project was to evaluate the feasibility and intermediate out-comes of a proactive (offering fax referral to all smokers) versus a reactive (pre-screening for readiness to quit within the next 30 days) approach to quitline fax-referral. Method:We employed a pre-test, post-test comparison group design in which a script-based reactive approach was employed over a two-week period and a script-based proactive approach was employed in the following two-week period. Scripts were inserted into the counselling protocols of a pre-existing inpatient treatment program. Major Findings:We enrolled 45 patients - 25 during the reactive, and 20 during the proactive block. In the reactive group, 12 (48%) indicated that they were ready to quit smoking and accepted fax-referral to the quitline. Nine (75%) were successfully contacted and enrolled in the quitline, for an overall quitline enrolment rate of 36% (9/25). In the proactive group, all accepted fax-referral to the quitline and 11 were successfully contacted and enrolled by the quitline for an overall enrolment rate of 55% (11/20). Quitlines were able to reach and enrol a higher proportion of patients referred to them, when patients were pre-screened for readiness to quit. Offering quitline referral, regardless of readiness to quit, potentially expands the reach and possibly the impact of quitline counselling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pharmacotherapy is a critical adjunct to smoking cessation therapy. Little is known about relative preferences for these agents among smokers in primary care settings. In the context of a population-based clinical trial, we identified 750 smokers in primary care practices and independent of their readiness to quit offered them a free treatment course of either bupropion or transdermal nicotine replacement (TNR). Smokers opting for pharmacotherapy completed standardized contraindication screens that were reviewed by the patient's primary care physician. Most participants (67%) requested pharmacotherapy. Use of pharmacotherapy was positively associated with higher nicotine dependence and readiness to quit. Of the smokers requesting pharmacotherapy, 51% requested bupropion and 49% requested TNR. Choice of bupropion was related to no history of heart disease and no previous use of bupropion. Although potential contraindications to treatments were identified for 21.7% of bupropion and 6.6% of TNR recipients, physicians rarely felt that these potential contraindications precluded the use of these agents. When cost is removed as a barrier, a large proportion of rural smokers are eager to use smoking cessation pharmacotherapy, especially agents that they have not tried before. Although some comorbid conditions and concurrent drug therapies were considered contraindications, particularly to bupropion, physicians rarely considered these clinically significant risks enough to deny pharmacotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most substance abuse treatment facilities do not routinely treat cigarette smoking even though most of their clients smoke and many will die from tobacco-related illness. This study is a secondary analysis of a national survey of the prevalence and type of tobacco treatment services available in methadone maintenance treatment. It presents qualitative and quantitative information on provider attitudes regarding tobacco treatment in drug treatment. One clinic leader (either a medical director, head nurse, or clinic director) from all 697 U.S. facilities was invited to participate in the study. Most (38%) clinic leaders thought the best time to treat patients for nicotine dependence was whenever the patient wanted treatment. One in four clinic leaders reported they or one of their staff had advised patients to delay quitting smoking cigarettes. Fewer (14%) believed that patients in some way benefited from cigarette smoking; these benefits included managing mood disturbances (calming, reducing anxiety, depression, stress, anger) and substituting for illicit drug abuse. This suggests that some providers might rely on cigarettes in lieu of psychotherapy or prescription medications to address patients' mood disorders such as depression, anger, and anxiety. One tactic for disseminating tobacco treatment in drug treatment might involve identifying the purported benefits of tobacco and training providers in alternative methods for delivering these benefits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Smoking prevalence among homeless persons is approximately 70%, yet little is known about tobacco use patterns or smoking cessation practices in this population. We assessed smoking attitudes and behaviors, psychosocial and environmental influences on smoking, barriers to and interest in quitting, and preferred methods for cessation among some homeless smokers. Six 90‐min focus groups of current smokers ( N = 62) were conducted at homeless service facilities. Participants had a mean age of 41.5 years ( SD = 9.3), were predominantly male (69.4%) and African American (59%), and smoked an average of 18.3 cigarettes/day. Although most reported that they were motivated to quit, a number of barriers to quitting were identified. Participants reported that the pervasiveness and social acceptance of tobacco use in homeless settings contributed to smoking more cigarettes per day, adopting alternative smoking behaviors such as smoking cigarette butts and making their own cigarettes, and experiencing difficulty in quitting. High levels of boredom and stress also were cited as reasons for continued smoking. Smoking frequently occurred in combination with alcohol or illicit drug use or to achieve a substitute “high.” Most participants (76%) reported that they planned to quit smoking in the next 6 months. Many were interested in using pharmacotherapy in combination with behavioral treatments. Results suggest that, although motivated to quit smoking, homeless smokers are faced with unique social and environmental barriers that make quitting more difficult. Interventions must be flexible and innovative to address the unique needs of homeless smokers. Smoking restrictions at homeless service facilities and funding for smoking cessation assistance in this underserved population may help to reduce prevalence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the longitudinal cohort study on the impact of repeated cycles of pharmacotherapy on smoking cessations. It outlines the method of the study which examines the impact of the repeated cycles of pharmacotheraphy on smokers who had failed to quit during their prior medication-assisted attempts. The study found out that cessation rates were consistently higher for pharmacotherapy user and proposes the need for insurance programs treatment limitations to reexamine policies.

Abstract: Background: Most drug treatment patients smoke cigarettes, yet few data exist on the prevalence and outcomes of varenicline treatment among smokers with comorbid substance use and psychiatric disorders. Methods: We reviewed all patient charts of opioid-dependent smokers prescribed varenicline between May 2006 and December 2009 in two urban methadone clinics that also provide on-site medical and psychiatric care. We assessed prevalence, adverse events, and effectiveness of varenicline treatment in this cohort. Results: We identified 575 smokers among 690 patients (83.3%), and assessed 82 courses of varenicline treatment prescribed to 70 smokers. Both cardiovascular risk factors and psychiatric illness were highly prevalent among those prescribed varenicline: hypertension, 51%; hyperlipidemia, 23%; diabetes, 20%; depression, 53%; anxiety, 30%; psychotic disorders, 10%; bipolar disorder, 8.6%. Of 82 varenicline courses, nine (11%) were discontinued due to adverse events and two due to depressive symptoms. One patient initiated new psychiatric medications within six months of initiating varenicline, but did not discontinue varenicline. There were no reports of suicidal ideation, agitation prompting clinical intervention, or psychiatric hospitalization. There were no incident cardiac or vascular events within six months of varenicline prescription. Some (8.6%) varenicline-treated smokers quit smoking, and cessation was significantly associated with varenicline treatment duration. Conclusions: Despite substantial comorbidity, opioid-dependent smokers receiving integrated substance abuse, medical and psychiatric care had few documented adverse events with varenicline treatment. Methadone patients will likely experience little harm and a great deal of benefit from treatment with varenicline for smoking cessation. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Objective: The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence and determinants of cigarette smoking cessation treatment in U.S. outpatient substance abuse treatment (OSAT) units. Methods: Program directors and clinical supervisors from a national sample of 550 OSAT units in the United States were surveyed in 2004–2005. Supervisors reported the availability of cigarette smoking assessment, and individual or group counseling and pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation. This analysis examines whether institutional and resource factors influence the delivery of these services. Results: Of OSAT programs in the United States, 41% offer smoking cessation counseling or pharmacotherapy, 38% offer individual/group counseling, and 17% provide quit-smoking medication. In multivariate models, hospital affiliation, service breadth, the priority given to physical health, the availability of medication to treat addictive problems, assessment of cigarette smoking, and a greater perception of the proportion of patients who smoke were associated with the delivery of smoking cessation services. Program size and medical staffing also influenced the availability of quit-smoking medication. Conclusions: Of U.S. OSAT programs, two in five offer behavioral treatment for smoking cessation, but fewer than one in five provide access to pharmacotherapy. Substance abuse treatment programs that are medically oriented, provide more comprehensive services, and recognize the burden of tobacco smoking among their patients are more likely to deliver evidence-based smoking cessation services. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Introduction: Despite limitations in evidence, the current Clinical Practice Guideline advocates Motivational Interviewing for smokers not ready to quit. This study evaluated the efficacy of Motivational Interviewing for inducing cessation-related behaviors among smokers with low motivation to quit.Design: Randomized clinical trial.Setting/participants: Two-hundred fifty-five daily smokers reporting low desire to quit smoking were recruited from an urban community during 2010-2011 and randomly assigned to Motivational Interviewing, health education, or brief advice using a 2:2:1 allocation. Data were analyzed from 2012 to 2014.Intervention: Four sessions of Motivational Interviewing utilized a patient-centered communication style that explored patients' own reasons for change. Four sessions of health education provided education related to smoking cessation while excluding elements characteristic of Motivational Interviewing. A single session of brief advice consisted of brief, personalized advice to quit.Main Outcomes Measures: Self-reported quit attempts; smoking abstinence (biochemically verified); use of cessation pharmacotherapies; motivation; and confidence to quit were assessed at baseline and 3- and 6-month follow-ups.Results: Unexpectedly, no significant differences emerged between groups in the proportion who made a quit attempt by 6-month follow-up (Motivational Interviewing, 52.0%; health education, 60.8%; brief advice, 45.1%; p=0.157). Health education had significantly higher biochemically verified abstinence rates at 6 months (7.8%) than brief advice (0.0%) (8% risk difference, 95% CI=3%, 13%, p=0.003), with the Motivational Interviewing group falling in between (2.9% abstinent, 3% risk difference, 95% CI=0%, 6%, p=0.079). Both Motivational Interviewing and health education groups showed greater increases in cessation medication use, motivation, and confidence to quit relative to brief advice (all p<0.05), and health education showed greater increases in motivation relative to Motivational Interviewing (Cohen's d=0.36, 95% CI=0.12, 0.60).Conclusions: Although Motivational Interviewing was generally more efficacious than brief advice in inducing cessation behaviors, health education appeared the most efficacious. These results highlight the need to identify the contexts in which Motivational Interviewing may be most efficacious and question recommendations to use Motivational Interviewing rather than other less complex cessation induction interventions.Trial Registration: This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01188018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction In rural America cigarette smoking is prevalent, few cessation services are available, and healthcare providers lack the time and resources to help smokers quit. This paper describes the design and participant characteristics of Connect2Quit (C2Q), a randomized control trial (RCT) that tests the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of integrated telemedicine counseling delivered by 2-way webcams mounted on desktop computers in participant's physician office examining rooms (ITM) versus quitline counseling delivered by telephone in participant's homes (Phone) for helping rural smokers quit. Methods/design C2Q was implemented in twenty primary care and safety net clinics. Integrated telemedicine consisted of real-time video counseling, delivered to patients in their primary care physician's (PCP) office. Phone counseling, was delivered to patients in their homes. All participants received educational materials and guidance in selecting cessation medications. Results The 566 participants were predominantly Caucasian (92%); 9% were Latino. Most (65%) earned < 200% of Federal Poverty Level. One out of three lacked home internet access, 40% were not comfortable using computers, and only 4% had been seen by a doctor via telemedicine in the past. Hypertension, chronic lung disease, and diabetes were highly prevalent. Participants smoked nearly a pack a day and were highly motivated to quit. Discussion C2Q is reaching a rural low-income population, with comorbid chronic diseases, that would benefit greatly from quitting smoking. ITM is a good delivery model, which integrates care by holding counseling sessions in the patient's PCP office and keeps the primary care team updated on patients' progress. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to obtain descriptions of tobacco treatment services across different substance abuse treatment settings. We conducted mixed-method assessments in eight facilities among eight directors, 25 staff, 29 clients, and 82 client charts. Measures included systems assessment, chart reviews, and semistructured interviews. Although many programs reported they offer key components of evidence-based treatment, few actually provided any treatment and none did so systematically. Many addressed tobacco as part of drug education or part of a health promotion session. Chart reviews suggested that provision of tobacco treatment is rare. By many reports, clients had to specifically request treatment and few staff reported encouraging unmotivated smokers to quit. Systems to facilitate consistent, evidence-based tobacco treatment and to implement quality improvement were nonexistent. The findings imply that drug treatment facilities may need to build capacity in several domains to deliver care that is consistent with national guidelines. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]