Search

Background: Individuals undergoing cancer treatment have better outcomes when they discontinue tobacco use. Few cancer centers systematically provide evidence-based cessation services. As part of a national quality improvement initiative [Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3i)], we collaborated with our cancer registry to develop and implement two tobacco treatment metrics for tracking the provision of behavioral support and pharmacotherapy., Methods: Post-development, the tobacco treatment metrics were integrated into the registry for all future patients. We used means and frequencies to summarize tobacco treatment for cases treated between 2017 and 2019, coinciding with the timeframe of C3i participation., Results: Of 17,735 cancer cases reviewed, both measures were captured on 17,654 (99.5%) of patients, with 3,091 (17.4%) identified as users of tobacco. Across the 3 years, 557 (18%) of individuals who used tobacco received either tobacco cessation pharmacotherapy or behavioral support; with 478 (15.5%) receiving behavioral counseling, 352 (11.4%) receiving pharmacotherapy, and 273 (8.8%) receiving both-considered gold standard care. Tobacco treatment varied substantially across cancer types. The odds of receiving gold standard care were 2.37 times greater in 2019 compared with 2017. (OR, 2.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.63-3.46; P < 0.0001)., Conclusions: The new metrics demonstrated high completion rates and their potential to track quality improvement efforts over time. They identified suboptimal treatment reach, but a potential increase in treatment over time and greater treatment among tobacco-related versus nontobacco-related cancers., Impact: Continued tobacco use worsens cancer care outcomes. Integrating measures into cancer registries is a viable option for tracking tobacco treatment and cessation in the context of cancer care., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Because tobacco use remains one of the leading causes of disease, disability, and mortality, tobacco treatment programs should be integrated into medical systems such as hospitals and outpatient centers. Medical providers have a unique, high-impact opportunity to initiate smoking cessation treatment with patients. However, there are several barriers that may hinder the development and implementation of these programs. The purpose of this review was to address such barriers by illustrating several examples of successful tobacco treatment programs in US health-care systems that were contributed by the authors. This includes describing treatment models, billing procedures, and implementation considerations. Using an illustrative review of vignettes from existing programs, various models are outlined, emphasizing commonalities and unique features, strengths and limitations, resources necessary, and other relevant considerations. In addition, clinical research and dissemination trials from each program are described to provide evidence of feasibility and efficacy from these programs. This overview of example treatment models designed for hospitals and outpatient centers provides guidelines for any emerging tobacco cessation services within these contexts. For existing treatment programs, this review provides additional insight and ideas about improving these programs within their respective medical systems., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Chest Physicians. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Changes in reimbursement policy have made nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) much more available, but little is known about what happens to patients after they receive their prescription. This study describes rates of successfully filling prescriptions for NRT and its association with type of insurance. Methods: We identified 224 patients who received a prescription for NRT during an outpatient visit to an academic medical center between January 1st 2016 and February 10th 2017. We conducted telephone surveys to assess whether they tried to fill their prescriptions and if so, determine the effects of insurance type on the ability to successfully fill the prescription. Results: Of 117 patients completing the survey, 23 (19.6%) did not attempt to fill and 6 (5.1%) had no insurance. Of the 90 patients with insurance who attempted to fill their prescription, 67 (74.4%) were successful and 23 (25.6%) were unsuccessful in obtaining medications. Success varied by insurance with successful fills ranging from 34 (87.2%) of those with commercial insurance, 24 (70.6%) with Medicaid, to 9 (52.9%) with Medicare. Of 37 participants living with another smoker, 31 (83.7%) wanted an NRT prescription specifically for their partner; several volunteered that they had shared patches with their partner. Conclusions: Despite widespread coverage for NRT, many patients may still encounter difficulties in getting their prescriptions filled. Some tobacco users might also benefit from getting NRT prescriptions for their partners that smoke.

Introduction: Over 85% of opioid-dependent individuals in methadone treatment smoke cigarettes; however, smoking cessation interventions are minimally effective in this population. To better help opioid-dependent individuals quit smoking, we developed and pilot-tested an intervention, based in the Information-Motivation-Behavioral Skills (IMB) model of behavior change, which could be tailored to address individual barriers to smoking cessation in this population., Methods: We randomized participants (n = 83) in methadone treatment to the eight-session, IMB model-based, intervention plus nicotine replacement therapy (intervention, n = 41) or a facilitated referral to the state Quitline (control, n = 42). All participants completed assessments at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months., Results: Intervention participants completed a median of five sessions (interquartile range [IQR] 3-8) and had significantly higher intervention satisfaction than control participants. Intervention participants reported smoking significantly fewer cigarettes per day at 3 months (median [IQR] = 6 [4-15]) and 6 months (median [IQR] = 8 [4-14]) as compared control participants at 3 months (median [IQR] = 10 [5-20]) and 6 months (median [IQR] = 10 [6-20]). Fifty-six percent of the intervention group and 41% of the control group a made a quit attempt during the study (p = .16). At 3 months, 7% (n = 3) of intervention participants and none of the control participants were abstinent from smoking (p = .23). At 6 months, 2% of participants in both groups were abstinent. Twenty-four percent and 10% of the intervention and control group participants, respectively, reported 20 or more smoke-free days (p = .43)., Conclusions: An IMB model-based smoking cessation intervention for opioid-dependent smokers is feasible and acceptable in methadone treatment and may help methadone maintained smokers cut down on their smoking., Implications: This is the first study of a tailored, IMB Model-based, smoking cessation intervention for opioid dependent smokers. Results showed that opioid dependent smokers are willing and able to participate in an IMB model-based smoking cessation intervention, and this intervention may help this population cut down on their smoking. Also, the Quitline seems less feasible and acceptable for this population than a face-to-face intervention. Further research is needed to determine how to integrate smoking cessation treatment into methadone programs and how to improve interventions so that treatment gains can lead to long-term abstinence in this population.

Behavioral counseling is effective for smoking cessation and the psychotherapy literature indicates therapeutic alliance is key to counseling effectiveness. However, no tobacco-counseling specific measures of alliance exist that are suitable in most tobacco counseling contexts. This hinders assessment of counseling components in research and clinical practice. Based on the Working Alliance Inventory, and external expert review, we developed two alliance instruments: the 12-item and 3-item Working Alliance Inventory for Tobacco (WAIT-12 and WAIT-3). Two samples of 226 daily smokers via Amazon Mechanical Turk completed measures including demographics, tobacco characteristics, working alliance scales, and quit attempts. Both WAIT-12 and WAIT-3 had good to excellent internal consistency (0.92 and 0.88 for the WAIT-3 and 0.96 for the WAIT-12). The WAIT-12 1-factor model indicated poor fit (CFI=0.83, TLI=0.79, RMSEA=0.19, SRMR=0.09). The WAIT-12 3-factor model (CFI=0.94, TLI=0.93, RMSEA=0.11, SRMR=0.04) was indicative of acceptable fit. Both the WAIT-12 and the WAIT-3 were significantly associated with participants' self-reported cigarettes per day, quit attempts, and cessation. Initial validation of the WAIT-12 and WAIT-3 indicates they are psychometrically sound measures of tobacco dependence counseling alliance. The WAIT-3 provides brevity; it can be administered in under 1min. The WAIT-12 allows for assessment of specific components of therapeutic alliance. Overall, these instruments should allow for better measurement of alliance in clinical services and research., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Most health care providers do not treat tobacco dependence routinely. This may in part be due to the treatment "default." Current treatment guidelines recommend that providers (1) ask patients if they are willing to quit and (2) provide cessation-focused medications and counseling only to smokers who state that they are willing to quit. The default is that patients have to "opt in" to receive cessation assistance: providers ask smokers if they are willing to quit, and only offer medications and cessation support to those who say "yes." This drastically limits the reach of cessation services because, at any given encounter, only one in three smokers say that they are ready to quit. The objective of this study is to determine the impact of providing all smokers with tobacco-cessation treatment unless they refuse it (OPT OUT) versus current practice-screening for readiness and only offering treatment to smokers who say they are ready to quit (OPT IN)., Methods: This individually randomized clinical trial is conducted in a tertiary-care hospital. We will conduct the trial among up to 1000 randomly selected hospitalized smokers to determine the population impact of changing the treatment default, identify mediators of outcome, and determine the cost-effectiveness of this new, highly proactive approach. This is a population-based study that targets an endpoint of vital interest; applies minimal eligibility criteria to broaden generalizability; and utilizes hospital staff for interventions to ensure long-term sustainability. The study employs delayed consent and an innovative Bayesian adaptive design to evaluate a major shift in our approach to care. If effective, this change would expand the reach of tobacco-cessation treatment from 30% to 100% of smokers., Discussion: Regardless of outcome, the trial will provide a model of how to alter and evaluate the impact of health care defaults. If OPT OUT proves to be more effective, it will expand the population eligible for cessation treatment by over 300%. It will also simplify the tobacco-cessation treatment algorithm, and relieve busy health care providers of the burden of evaluating readiness to quit., Trial Registration: Clinical Trials Registration, ID: NCT02721082 . Registered on 22 March 2016.

Objectives: Rural smokers are more likely to be uninsured and live in poverty, which may pose significant cost barriers to accessing smoking cessation medications. As part of a randomized clinical trial, we provided support to connect low-income smokers with the use of pharmaceutical assistance programs (PAPs) to improve medication access., Methods: Study participants were rural smokers enrolled in a randomized clinical trial testing in-office telemedicine versus telephone-based approaches to deliver counseling sessions. For potentially qualified participants, we developed a system to connect them with PAPs that provided smoking cessation medications at low or no cost. Participants reported medication utilization 3 and 6 months after randomization., Results: Of the 560 study participants, 312 (55.7%) met initial screening criteria for PAP eligibility. Of those eligible, 104 (33.3%) initiated a PAP application, with 49 (15.7%) completing the application and ultimately receiving medications through the programs. Despite the availability of assistance with the PAP application process, overall medication use among those that were eligible for PAP was significantly lower than among participants with higher incomes or access to prescription insurance (60.4% vs. 51.3%; P = 0.04). Abstinence among PAP-eligible smokers was also lower at the 3-month follow-up (P = 0.01), but this difference was not present at the 6- and 12-month follow-up surveys., Conclusion: With substantial assistance, some low-income smokers without prescription insurance can get effective smoking cessation medications through PAPs, but overall access remains worse than among those with higher incomes or prescription insurance., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2017 American Pharmacists Association®. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: We aimed to evaluate how psychiatric and personality disorders influence smoking cessation goals and attempts among people with opiate dependence who smoke. This information could aid the development of more effective cessation interventions for these individuals., Methods: Participants (N = 116) were recruited from two methadone clinics, completed the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III, and were asked about their smoking behavior and quitting goals. We used the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) method, a technique commonly used for studies with small sample sizes and large number of predictors, to develop models predicting having a smoking cessation goal, among those currently smoking daily, and ever making a quit attempt, among those who ever smoked., Results: Almost all participants reported ever smoking (n = 115, 99%); 70% (n = 80) had made a serious quit attempt in the past; 89% (n = 103) reported current daily smoking; and 59% (n = 61) had a goal of quitting smoking and staying off cigarettes. Almost all (n = 112, 97%) had clinically significant characteristics of a psychiatric or personality disorder. White race, anxiety, and a negativistic personality facet (expressively resentful) were negative predictors of having a cessation goal. Overall, narcissistic personality pattern and a dependent personality facet (interpersonally submissive) were positive predictors of having a cessation goal. Somatoform disorder, overall borderline personality pattern, and a depressive personality facet (cognitively fatalistic) were negative predictors of ever making a quit attempt. Individual histrionic (gregarious self-image), antisocial (acting out mechanism), paranoid (expressively defensive), and sadistic (pernicious representations) personality disorder facets were positive predictors of ever making a quit attempt. Each model provided good discrimination for having a smoking cessation goal or not (C-statistic of .76, 95% CI [0.66, 0.85]) and ever making a quit attempt or not (C-statistic of .79, 95% CI [0.70, 0.88])., Conclusions: Compared to existing treatments, smoking cessation treatments that can be tailored to address the individual needs of people with specific psychiatric disorders or personality disorder traits may better help those in opiate dependence treatment to set a cessation goal, attempt to quit, and eventually quit smoking.

Background: In rural America, cigarette smoking is prevalent and health care providers lack the time and resources to help smokers quit. Telephone quitlines are important avenues for cessation services in rural areas, but they are poorly integrated with local health care resources., Objective: The intent of the study was to assess the comparative effectiveness and cost effectiveness of two models for delivering expert tobacco treatment at a distance: telemedicine counseling that was integrated into smokers' primary care clinics (Integrated Telemedicine-ITM) versus telephone counseling, similar to telephone quitline counseling, delivered to smokers in their homes (Phone)., Methods: Smokers (n=566) were recruited offline from 20 primary care and safety net clinics across Kansas. They were randomly assigned to receive 4 sessions of ITM or 4 sessions of Phone counseling. Patients in ITM received real-time video counseling, similar to Skype, delivered by computer/webcams in clinic exam rooms. Three full-time equivalent trained counselors delivered the counseling. The counseling duration and content was the same in both groups and was available in Spanish or English. Both groups also received identical materials and assistance in selecting and obtaining cessation medications. The primary outcome was verified 7-day point prevalence smoking abstinence at month 12, using an intent-to-treat analysis., Results: There were no significant baseline differences between groups, and the trial achieved 88% follow-up at 12 months. Verified abstinence at 12 months did not significantly differ between ITM or Phone (9.8%, 27/280 vs 12%, 34/286; P=.406). Phone participants completed somewhat more counseling sessions than ITM (mean 2.6, SD 1.5 vs mean 2.4, SD 1.5; P=.0837); however, participants in ITM were significantly more likely to use cessation medications than participants in Phone (55.9%, 128/280 vs 46.1%, 107/286; P=.03). Compared to Phone participants, ITM participants were significantly more likely to recommend the program to a family member or friend (P=.0075). From the combined provider plus participant (societal) perspective, Phone was significantly less costly than ITM. Participants in ITM had to incur time and mileage costs to travel to clinics for ITM sessions. From the provider perspective, counseling costs were similar between ITM (US $45.46, SD 31.50) and Phone (US $49.58, SD 33.35); however, total provider costs varied widely depending on how the clinic space for delivering ITM was valued., Conclusions: Findings did not support the superiority of ITM over telephone counseling for helping rural patients quit smoking. ITM increased utilization of cessation pharmacotherapy and produced higher participant satisfaction, but Phone counseling was significantly less expensive. Future interventions could combine elements of both approaches to optimize pharmacotherapy utilization, counseling adherence, and satisfaction. Such an approach could commence with a telemedicine-delivered clinic office visit for pharmacotherapy guidance, and continue with telephone or real-time video counseling delivered via mobile phones to flexibly deliver behavioral support to patients where they most need it-in their homes and communities., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00843505; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00843505 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6YKSinVZ9)., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: None declared.

Background: Over 80% of people in methadone treatment smoke cigarettes, and existing smoking cessation interventions have been minimally effective., Objective: To develop an Information-Motivation-Behavioral Skills (IMB) Model of behavior change based smoking cessation intervention for methadone maintained smokers, we examined smoking cessation related IMB factors in this population., Methods: Current or former smokers in methadone treatment (n = 35) participated in focus groups. Ten methadone clinic counselors participated in an individual interview. A content analysis was conducted using deductive and inductive approaches., Results: Commonly known IMB factors related to smoking cessation were described. These factors included: the health effects of smoking and treatment options for quitting (information); pregnancy and cost of cigarettes (motivators); and coping with emotions, finding social support, and pharmacotherapy adherence (behavioral skills). IMB factors specific to methadone maintained smokers were also described. These factors included: the relationship between quitting smoking and drug relapse (information), the belief that smoking is the same as using drugs (motivator); and coping with methadone clinic culture and applying skills used to quit drugs to quitting smoking (behavioral skills). IMB strengths and deficits varied by individual., Conclusions: Methadone maintained smokers could benefit from research on an IMB Model based smoking cessation intervention that is individualized, addresses IMB factors common among all smokers, and also addresses IMB factors unique to this population.

The World Health Organization estimates that 1 billion people will die from tobacco-related illnesses this century. Most health-care providers, however, fail to treat tobacco dependence. This may be due in part to the treatment 'default'. Guidelines in many countries recommend that health-care providers: (i) ask patients if they are 'ready' to quit using tobacco; and (ii) provide treatment only to those who state they are ready to quit. For other health conditions--diabetes, hypertension, asthma and even substance abuse--treatment guidelines direct health-care providers to identify the health condition and initiate evidence-based treatment. As with any medical care, patients are free to decline--they can 'opt out' from care. If patients do nothing, they will receive care. For tobacco users, however, the treatment default is often that they have to 'opt in' to treatment. This drastically limits the reach of tobacco treatment because, at any given encounter, a minority of tobacco users will say they are ready to quit. As a result, few are offered treatment. It is time to change the treatment default for tobacco dependence. All tobacco users should be offered evidence-based care, without being screened for readiness as a precondition for receiving treatment. Opt-out care for tobacco dependence is warranted because changing defaults has been shown to change choices and outcomes for numerous health behaviors, and most tobacco users want to quit; there is little to no evidence supporting the utility of assessing readiness to quit, and an opt-out default is more ethical., (© 2014 Society for the Study of Addiction.)

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., Clinical Trials Registration: NCT00843505., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Although most people in treatment for illicit drug use smoke cigarettes, few facilities offer any form of treatment for tobacco dependence. One reason for this may be that drug treatment staff have varying levels of commitment to treat tobacco. We developed and validated a 14-item Tobacco Treatment Commitment Scale (TTCS), using 405 participants in leadership positions in drug treatment facilities. We first conducted a confirmatory factor analysis to evaluate 4 a priori domains suggested by our original set of 38 items-this did not produce a good fit (comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.782, root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA] = 0.067). We then conducted a series of exploratory factor analyses to produce a more precise and reliable scale. The final confirmatory factor analysis indicated a 3-factor solution, produced a good fit (CFI = 0.950, RMSEA = 0.058), and had substantial unified reliability of 0.975. The final TTCS contained 14 items in 3 domains: "Tobacco is less harmful than other drugs," "It's not our job to treat tobacco," and "Tobacco treatment will harm clients." These constructs account for most of the variance in the survey items and emerged as major sentiments driving staff commitment to providing tobacco services. The TTCS can be used to understand the role of staff attitudes in the adoption of tobacco services in this important treatment setting.

Background: Post-discharge support is a key component of effective treatment for hospitalized smokers, but few hospitals provide it. Many hospitals and care settings fax-refer smokers to quitlines for follow-up; however, less than half of fax-referred smokers are successfully contacted and enrolled in quitline services. "Warm handoff" is a novel approach to care transitions in which health care providers directly link patients with substance abuse problems with specialists, using face-to-face or phone transfer. Warm handoff achieves very high rates of treatment enrollment for these vulnerable groups., Methods: The aim of this study-"EQUIP" (Enhancing Quitline Utilization among In-Patients)-is to determine the effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness, of warm handoff versus fax referral for linking hospitalized smokers with tobacco quitlines. This study employs a two-arm, individually randomized design. It is set in two large Kansas hospitals that have dedicated tobacco treatment interventionists on staff. At each site, smokers who wish to remain abstinent after discharge will be randomly assigned to groups. For patients in the fax group, staff will provide standard in-hospital intervention and will fax-refer patients to the state tobacco quitline for counseling post-discharge. For patients in the warm handoff group, staff will provide brief in-hospital intervention and immediate warm handoff: staff will call the state quitline, notify them that a warm handoff inpatient from Kansas is on the line, then transfer the call to the patients' mobile or bedside hospital phone for quitline enrollment and an initial counseling session. Following the quitline session, hospital staff provides a brief check-back visit. Outcome measures will be assessed at 1, 6, and 12 months post enrollment. Costs are measured to support cost-effectiveness analyses. We hypothesize that warm handoff, compared to fax referral, will improve care transitions for tobacco treatment, enroll more participants in quitline services, and lead to higher quit rates. We also hypothesize that warm handoff will be more cost-effective from a societal perspective., Discussion: If successful, this project offers a low-cost solution for more efficiently linking millions of hospitalized smokers with effective outpatient treatment-smokers that might otherwise be lost in the transition to outpatient care., Trial Registration: Clinical Trials Registration NCT01305928.

Background: Most clients in drug treatment smoke cigarettes, but few facilities provide treatment for tobacco dependence. We identify subjective experiences and social processes that may influence facility adoption of tobacco treatment policies and practices., Methods: Cross-sectional, semi-structured interviews were conducted with staff, directors and clients of 8 drug treatment facilities in the Midwestern U.S. We assembled a purposive sample stratified by ownership, methadone provision, and treatment service provision. We conducted in-person interviews with clinic directors and 54 staff and clients and employed a mixed-method analytic approach., Results: Facility policies and philosophy related to tobacco differed from those regarding alcohol and other drugs. Participants suggested facilities may not treat tobacco dependence because it does not create legal and social problems that force clients into treatment. Tobacco dependence treatment falls outside of a core function of drug treatment, which is to help clients fix legal problems caused by their drug use. Moreover, proactively treating clients for tobacco dependence creates strong ambivalence amongst staff and directors. On the one hand, staff smoking would violate core principles of drug treatment (i.e., the importance of staff abstinence from drugs of abuse); on the other, staff who smoke feel their personal rights and jobs are threatened. This situation creates strong incentives for staff to resist adoption of tobacco dependence treatment. Unlike other studies, the fear of jeopardising clients' abstinence from other drugs did not emerge as a downside for treating tobacco dependence., Conclusions: International and national trends will probably increase the pressure to treat tobacco dependence during drug treatment. However, the U.S. context of drug treatment, as a patchwork, under-funded industry with high employee turnover, may undermine true adoption. At present, many facility staff resolve their ambivalence by reporting they "offer" treatment, but actually providing none. To facilitate dissemination of service provision, it may be useful to identify incentives for U.S. facilities that are closely aligned with the criminal justice system, help facilities define policies and treatment roles for staff who smoke, and better define the role of facilities in preventing morbidity and mortality., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

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 © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The efficacy of smoking cessation interventions for hospital patients has been well described, but we know little regarding implementation and outcomes of real-world programs., Objective: To describe the services provided and outcomes of an academic medical center-based tobacco treatment service (UKanQuit) located in the Midwestern United States., Method: This is a descriptive observational study. Both quantitative and qualitative data of all patients treated by UKanQuit over a 1-year period were analyzed., Results: Among 513 patients served, average interest in quitting was 7.9, standard deviation (SD) 2.9 on a scale of 0 to 10. More than 1 in 4 had been given an in-hospital medication to ameliorate withdrawal prior to seeing a counselor. Counselors recommended medication changes for 1 in 3 patients, helped 73% set a goal for quitting or reducing tobacco use, and fax referred 56% to quitlines. Six-month follow-up (response rate, 46%) found a 7-day abstinence rate of 32% among respondents for an intent-to-treat abstinence rate of 15%. Post-discharge, 74% made at least one serious quit attempt, 34% had used a quit smoking medication, but only 5% of those referred to the quitline reported using it., Conclusions: In a hospital setting, interest in quitting is high among smokers who requested to see a tobacco counselor but administration of inpatient medications remains low. Many smokers are making unassisted quit attempts post-discharge because utilization of cessation medications and quitline counseling were low. Fax-referral to quitline may not, on its own, fulfill guideline recommendations for post-discharge follow-up., (Copyright © 2010 Society of Hospital Medicine.)

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.

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.

Most persons in drug treatment smoke cigarettes. Until drug treatment facilities systematically treat their patients' tobacco use, millions will flow through the drug treatment system, overcome their primary drug of abuse, but die prematurely from tobacco-related illnesses. This paper reviews the literature on the health benefits of quitting smoking for drug treatment patients, whether smoking causes relapse to other drug or alcohol abuse, the treatment of tobacco dependence, and good and bad times for quitting smoking among drug treatment patients. It also presents a conceptual model and recommendations for treating tobacco in substance abuse treatment, and provides references to internet and paper-copy tools and information for treating tobacco dependence. At present, research on tobacco treatment in drug treatment is in its infancy. Although few drug treatment programs currently offer formal services, many more will likely begin to treat nicotine dependence as external forces and patient demand for these services increases. In the absence of clear guidelines and attention to quality of care, drug treatment programs may adopt smoking cessation services based on cost, convenience, or selection criteria other than efficacy. Because research in this field is relatively new, substance abuse treatment professionals should adhere to the standards of care for the general population, but be prepared to update their practices with emerging interventions that have proven to be effective for patients in drug treatment.

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.

This pilot study is the first to examine the feasibility and outcomes of dual pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation among drug treatment patients. The intervention consisted of 7 weeks of bupropion (300 mg), 12 weeks of nicotine gum, and 6 sessions of motivational interviewing. The trial was conducted among 28 patients recruited from 5 methadone clinics and employed a pretest-posttest design. At 6 months post quit date, 14% of participants met criteria for biochemically-verified abstinence. Among those still smoking, number of cigarettes smoked decreased significantly and most (88%) had made at least 1 serious quit attempt. Participation rates were excellent and no adverse effects on alcohol or illicit drug use were found. Although not a definitive test of the intervention, findings suggest that a multi-component approach to tobacco dependence is feasible and potentially effective in helping drug treatment patients achieve smoking cessation well beyond the end of treatment and that a large-scale randomized trial is warranted.

Objectives: Most patients in drug treatment smoke cigarettes. This study established the prevalence and types of nicotine dependence services offered in methadone and other opioid treatment clinics in the United States., Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted of all outpatient methadone maintenance clinics in the United States. One person in a leadership position from each clinic was surveyed. The 20-minute survey was collected by phone, fax, or mail, according to responder preference., Results: Fifty-nine percent of the clinics (408 of 697 clinics) responded. The sample was very similar to all outpatient methadone maintenance clinics in the United States in size, region, and ownership. In the 30 days before the survey, respondents reported that their clinics provided the following services to at least one patient: 73 percent provided brief advice to quit, 18 percent offered individual or group smoking cessation counseling, and 12 percent prescribed nicotine replacement therapy. However, the services were provided to very few patients. Clinics with written guidelines that required them to address smoking were much more likely to provide services than those without guidelines. Private for-profit clinics were significantly less likely than public or private nonprofit clinics to treat nicotine dependence. Most respondents (77 percent) reported that their staff were interested in receiving training in nicotine dependence treatment, and more than half (56 percent) had at least one staff member ("champion") with a strong interest in treating nicotine dependence., Conclusions: A vast majority of methadone patients smoke; yet in the 30 days before the survey only one out of three facilities provided counseling to any patients and only one out of ten prescribed nicotine replacement therapy to any patients. A dual strategy of requiring clinics to provide comprehensive nicotine dependence services and training staff to provide these services may provide the incentive and support necessary for the widespread adoption of treatment for nicotine dependence in methadone facilities.

INTRODUCTION The current study examined associations between affective and smoking-related factors, and dispositional mindfulness among smokers seeking enrollment in a cessation program in Brazil. METHODS Participants were first-time treatment seeking adult smokers (N=90) on a waiting list for a government-sponsored cessation program. Pearson's bivariate correlations assessed relationships between the primary outcome variable (dispositional mindfulness) and each explanatory variable (nicotine dependence, depression, anxiety, and state positive/negative affect). Linear regression analyses evaluated the unique contribution of each explanatory variable when controlling for the others. RESULTS The sample (N=90) was predominantly female (n=71) and most (79%) had 11 or fewer years of education. In the final regression model, a total of 36.2% of the variance in dispositional mindfulness was accounted for by positive affect (B=0.81, p<0.001), negative affect (B= -0.44, p=0.02), and level of nicotine dependence (B=1.48, p=0.007). CONCLUSIONS Positive and negative affect, as well as nicotine dependence, account for a significant and sizable amount of the variance in dispositional mindfulness. Future mindfulness interventions for smoking cessation should be designed to address individual differences in affect, as well as nicotine dependence, in order to better tailor treatment to address baseline differences in mindfulness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Quitting smoking improves health and drug use outcomes among people in treatment for substance abuse. The twofold purpose of this study is to describe tobacco treatment provision across a representative sample of U.S. facilities and to use these data to develop the brief Index of Tobacco Treatment Quality (ITTQ). Methods: We constructed survey items based on current tobacco treatment guidelines, existing surveys, expert input, and qualitative research. We administered the survey to a stratified sample of 405 facility administrators selected from all 3,800 U.S. adult outpatient facilities listed in the SAMHSA Inventory of Substance Abuse Treatment Services. We constructed the ITTQ with a subset of 7 items that have the strongest clinical evidence for smoking cessation. Results: Most facilities (87.7%) reported that a majority of their clients were asked if they smoke cigarettes. Nearly half of facilities (48.6%) reported that a majority of their smoking clients were advised to quit. Fewer (23.3%) reported that a majority of their smoking clients received tobacco treatment counseling and even fewer facilities (18.3%) reported a majority of their smoking clients were advised to use quit smoking medications. The median facility ITTQ score was 2.57 (on a scale of 1-5) and the ITTQ displayed good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=.844). Moreover, the ITTQ had substantial test-retest reliability (.856), and ordinal confirmatory factor analysis found that our one-factor model for ITTQ fit the data very well with a CFI of 0.997 and an RMSEA of 0.042. Conclusions: The ITTQ is a brief and reliable tool for measuring tobacco treatment quality in substance abuse treatment facilities. Given the clear-cut room for improvement in tobacco treatment, the ITTQ could be an important tool for quality improvement by identifying service levels, facilitating goal setting, and measuring change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]