Search

Background Cigarette smoking is an important risk factor for disease onset and progression among the major chronic diseases accounting for most morbidity and mortality in the world. Our objective was to identify characteristics associated with tobacco use among patients with multiple chronic conditions (MCC). Methods This cross-sectional study was implemented at the Center HIPERDIA Minas Juiz de Fora, Brazil, which manages patients with high cardiovascular risk, hypertension, diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease. Results Of 1558 participants, 12% were current smokers; 41% former smokers and 47%, never smokers. In univariate analyses, current smoking was associated with gender, age, physical activity, alcohol use, depressive symptoms, overweight, and atherosclerosis. In multinomial analyses, multiple chronic conditions were associated with the current or previous use of tobacco; COPD and atherosclerotic disease were more prevalent among patients who were current smokers. Conclusions Cigarette smoking was as prevalent in this high population as in the general population. Smokers had worse clinical profiles compared to former smokers or never smokers. Aggressive smoking cessation support should yield considerable health benefits and health care cost savings within patients with MCC, especially, those with high cardiovascular risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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]

Background: Hospital-initiated smoking cessation interventions utilizing pharmacotherapy increase post-discharge quit rates. Use of smoking cessation medications following discharge may further increase quit rates. This study aims to identify individual, smoking-related and hospitalization-related predictors of engagement in three different steps in the smoking cessation pharmacotherapy utilization process: 1) receiving medications as inpatient, 2) being discharged with a prescription and 3) using medications at 1-month post-hospitalization, while accounting for associations between these steps.Methods: Study data come from a clinical trial (N = 1054) of hospitalized smokers interested in quitting who were randomized to recieve referral to a quitline via either warm handoff or fax. Variables were from the electronic health record, the state tobacco quitline, and participant self-report. Relationships among the predictors and the steps in cessation medication utilization were assessed using bivariate analyses and multivariable path analysis.Results: Twenty-eight percent of patients reported using medication at 1-month post-discharge. Receipt of smoking cessation medications while hospitalized (OR = 2.09, 95%CI [1.39, 3.15], p < .001) and discharge with a script (OR = 4.88, 95%CI [3.34, 7.13], p < .001) were independently associated with medication use at 1-month post-hospitalization. The path analysis also revealed that the likelihood of being discharged with a script was strongly influenced by receipt of medication as an inpatient (OR = 6.61, 95%CI [4.66, 9.38], p < .001). A number of other treatment- and individual-level factors were associated with medication use in the hospital, receipt of a script, and use post-discharge.Conclusions: To encourage post-discharge smoking cessation medication use, concerted effort should be made to engage smokers in tobacco treatment while in hospital. The individual and hospital-level factors associated with each step in the medication utilization process provide good potential targets for future implementation research to optimize treatment delivery and outcomes.Trial Registration: Number: NCT01305928 . Date registered: February 24, 2011. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Hospitalisation represents an opportunity to identify and treat e-cigarette use among adolescents and young adults (AYAs). Knowledge on how to provide this care is lacking. We aim to fill this gap by developing an e-cigarette use intervention and evaluating preliminary efficacy and implementation outcomes among hospitalised AYAs., Methods and Analysis: We will enrol 144 hospitalised AYAs (14-21 years) who report past 30-day e-cigarette use and randomise 2:1 to intervention or control arms. We will develop an evidence-based intervention that includes education, motivational interviewing, quit planning and nicotine replacement therapy prescription offered confidentially in person during the hospital stay and 4 weekly phone booster sessions. Control participants will receive brief advice and quit programme resources. We will assess self-reported demographics, e-cigarette use behaviours, nicotine dependence, motivation and confidence to quit at baseline and postintervention. Our primary outcome is self-reported 30-day point prevalence e-cigarette abstinence at the 3-month follow-up with biochemical salivary cotinine confirmation. Our secondary implementation outcomes are feasibility, acceptability and fidelity. We will assess our primary outcome using a generalised linear model assuming an underlying binomial distribution and logit link function. X 2 (categorical variables) and Wilcoxon rank-sum (continuous variables) tests will be used to assess differences between groups., Ethics and Dissemination: Careful consideration will be given to ethical recruitment and implementation of all elements of the study. Our study protocol and documents will be reviewed and approved by the institutional review board at the affiliated academic institution. Only approved study team members will access participant data, and all data will be managed in accordance with institutional review board and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) requirements. Study results will be disseminated to our public committee, youth research advisory board, to relevant stakeholders and through publication., Trial Registration Number: NCT05936099; registered on 30 June 2023. Study recruitment and enrolment began in August 2023 and is ongoing., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2025. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ Group.)

Clinical trials powered to detect subgroup effects provide the most reliable data on heterogeneity of treatment effect among different subpopulations. However, pre-specified subgroup analysis is not always practical and post hoc analysis results should be examined cautiously. Bayesian hierarchical modelling provides grounds for defining a controlled post hoc analysis plan that is developed after seeing outcome data for the population but before unblinding the outcome by subgroup. Using simulation based on the results from a tobacco cessation clinical trial conducted among the general population, we defined an analysis plan to assess treatment effect among American Indians and Alaska Natives (AI/AN) enrolled in the study. Patients were randomized into two arms using Bayesian adaptive design. For the opt-in arm, clinicians offered a cessation treatment plan after verifying that a patient was ready to quit. For the opt-out arm, clinicians provided all participants with free cessation medications and referred them to a Quitline. The study was powered to test a hypothesis of significantly higher quit rates for the opt-out arm at one-month post randomization. Overall, one-month abstinence rates were 15.9% and 21.5% (opt-in and opt-out arm, respectively). For AI/AN, one-month abstinence rates were 10.2% and 22.0% (opt-in and opt-out arm, respectively). The posterior probability that the abstinence rate in the treatment arm is higher is 0.96, indicating that AI/AN demonstrate response to treatment at almost the same probability as the whole population.

Bayesian adaptive designs with response adaptive randomization (RAR) have the potential to benefit more participants in a clinical trial. While there are many papers that describe RAR designs and results, there is a scarcity of works reporting the details of RAR implementation from a statistical point exclusively. In this paper, we introduce the statistical methodology and implementation of the trial Changing the Default (CTD). CTD is a single-center prospective RAR comparative effectiveness trial to compare opt-in to opt-out tobacco treatment approaches for hospitalized patients. The design assumed an uninformative prior, conservative initial allocation ratio, and a higher threshold for stopping for success to protect results from statistical bias. A particular emerging concern of RAR designs is the possibility that time trends will occur during the implementation of a trial. If there is a time trend and the analytic plan does not prespecify an appropriate model, this could lead to a biased trial. Adjustment for time trend was not pre-specified in CTD, but post hoc time-adjusted analysis showed no presence of influential drift. This trial was an example of a successful two-armed confirmatory trial with a Bayesian adaptive design using response adaptive randomization.

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.)

Importance: Tobacco use causes 7 million deaths per year; most national guidelines require people who use tobacco to opt in to care by affirming they are willing to quit. Use of medications and counseling is low even in advanced economy countries., Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of opt-out care vs opt-in care for people who use tobacco., Design, Setting, and Participants: In Changing the Default (CTD), a Bayesian adaptive population-based randomization trial, eligible patients were randomized into study groups, treated according to group assignment, and debriefed and consented for participation at 1-month follow-up. A total of 1000 adult patients were treated at a tertiary care hospital in Kansas City. Patients were randomized from September 2016 to September 2020; final follow-up was in March 2021., Interventions: At bedside, counselors screened for eligibility, conducted baseline assessment, randomized patients to study group, and provided opt-out care or opt-in care. Counselors and medical staff provided opt-out patients with inpatient nicotine replacement therapy, prescriptions for postdischarge medications, a 2-week medication starter kit, treatment planning, and 4 outpatient counseling calls. Patients could opt out of any or all elements of care. Opt-in patients willing to quit were offered each element of treatment described previously. Opt-in patients who were unwilling to quit received motivational counseling., Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were biochemically verified abstinence and treatment uptake at 1 month after randomization., Results: Of a total of 1000 eligible adult patients who were randomized, most consented and enrolled (270 [78%] of opt-in patients; 469 [73%] of opt-out patients). Adaptive randomization assigned 345 (64%) to the opt-out group and 645 (36%) to the opt-in group. The mean (SD) age at enrollment was 51.70 (14.56) for opt-out patients and 51.21 (14.80) for opt-out patients. Of 270 opt-in patients, 123 (45.56%) were female, and of 469 opt-out patients, 226 (48.19%) were female. Verified quit rates for the opt-out group vs the opt-in group were 22% vs 16% at month 1 and 19% vs 18% at 6 months. The Bayesian posterior probability that opt-out care was better than opt-in care was 0.97 at 1 month and 0.59 at 6 months. Treatment use for the opt-out group vs the opt-in group was 60% vs 34% for postdischarge cessation medication (bayesian posterior probability of 1.0), and 89% vs 37% for completing at least 1 postdischarge counseling call (bayesian posterior probability of 1.0). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $678.60, representing the cost of each additional quit in the opt-out group., Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, opt-out care doubled treatment engagement and increased quit attempts, while enhancing patients' sense of agency and alliance with practitioners. Stronger and longer treatment could increase cessation., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02721082.

Smoking during pregnancy and postpartum remains an important public health problem. No known prior study has prospectively examined mutual changes in risk factors and women's smoking trajectory across pregnancy and postpartum. The objective of this study was to report methods used to implement a prospective cohort (Msgs4Moms), present participant baseline characteristics, and compare our sample characteristics to pregnant women from national birth record data. The cohort study was designed to investigate smoking patterns, variables related to tobacco use and abstinence, and tobacco treatment quality across pregnancy through 1-year postpartum. Current smokers or recent quitters were recruited from obstetrics clinics. Analyses included Chi-square and independent sample t-tests using Cohen's d . A total of 62 participants (41 smokers and 21 quitters) were enrolled. Participants were Black (45.2%), White (35.5%), and multiracial (19.3%); 46.8% had post-secondary education; and most were Medicaid-insured (64.5%). Compared with quitters, fewer smokers were employed (65.9 vs 90.5%, Cohen's d = 0.88) and more reported financial strain (61.1% vs 28.6%; Cohen's d = 0.75). Women who continue to smoke during pregnancy cope with multiple social determinants of health. Longitudinal data from this cohort provide intensive data to identify treatment gaps, critical time points, and potential psychosocial variables warranting intervention.

Introduction: Government and health organizations in the United States and the United Kingdom have taken different stances on e-cigarettes policy. To explore the potential effects of these policies, we describe e-cigarette user characteristics, intentions to quit, and perceived attitudes toward vaping., Methods: We used the online crowdsourcing platform Prolific to conduct a cross-sectional survey of current vapers in both countries. Measures were drawn from international surveys., Results: The sample included 1044 vapers (524 United Kingdom; 520 United States) with a mean age of 34. Samples differed by gender (United States: 57% male vs 45% in United Kingdom), race (United States: 79% White vs 90% in United Kingdom) and employment (United States: 73% employed vs 79% in United Kingdom). UK respondents were more likely than US respondents to be ever smokers (89% vs 71%, p < .0001); be daily vapers (69% vs 53%, p < .0001) and to use e-cigarettes to quit smoking (75% vs 65%, p < .0007). Most vapers in the United Kingdom and the United States want to stop vaping (62% vs 61%; p < .9493), but US respondents plan to quit significantly sooner (odds ratio 0.47, p < .0004). Attitudes differed as well. Over half (56%) of UK respondents reported their government-approved e-cigarette use, and 24% felt health care providers had positive views on e-cigarettes versus 29% and 13% from the United States, respectively (p < .0004 for both)., Conclusions: Plans for quitting and perceptions regarding e-cigarettes differ markedly between demographically similar groups of vapers in the two countries. Future research should determine whether e-cigarette cessation for adults should be a public health goal, and if so, identify effective ways to stop., Implications: The contribution of this study is that it describes differences in behaviors and attitudes of vapers recruited through the same research platform and adjusted to account for minor demographic differences across country samples. For clinicians, these findings suggest that most vapers would welcome assistance in quitting. For researchers and policymakers, findings suggest that government policy regarding nicotine devices might influence behaviors and attitudes related to use and also that future research is needed to determine effective ways to quit., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: To describe treatment engagement and outcomes of patients who smoke with cancer and received tobacco cessation treatment during hospitalization., Method: We analyzed treatment engagement and cessation outcomes for hospitalized patients who smoke with a current or former history of cancer receiving treatment from an inpatient tobacco treatment service between July, 2018 to October, 2019., Results: The service treated 407 inpatients. Patients had an overall high level of interest in quitting (7.6, 0-10 scale). One in three accepted cessation pharmacotherapies during hospitalization or at discharge (35%) and/or referral to the state tobacco quitline (37%). Of 189 patients reached at one-month post-discharge, 73 (39%) reported tobacco abstinence (18% intent to treat-ITT-quit rate); 35.5% had used cessation pharmacotherapy and 6.5% had engaged in quitline counseling. Of 151 patients reached at 6 months post-discharge, 29% reported abstinence (11%, ITT)., Conclusion: Inpatients with a history of cancer are interested in quitting. Post-discharge quit rates and pharmacotherapy use were high but quitline use was low. Hospitalization is an under-utilized, prime treatment opportunity and teachable moment for people with a history of cancer who continue to use tobacco., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Enrollment in smoking cessation trials remain sub-optimal. The aim of this analysis was to determine the effectiveness of a modified Zelen's design in engaging hospitalized patients who smoke in a pragmatic OPT-IN versus OPT-OUT tobacco treatment trial. Methods: At bedside, clinical staff screened smokers for eligibility, randomized eligible into study arms, and delivered the appropriate treatment approach. Study staff called randomized patients at one-month post-discharge, debriefed patients on the study design, and collected consent to participate. We used frequencies and percentages for categorical variables and means and standard deviations for quantitative variables to describe the characteristics of those who consented and were enrolled versus those who did not enroll. We also compared the characteristics of participants who consented and those who were reached and explicitly refused consent at one-month follow-up. We used the Cohen's d measure of effect size to evaluate differences. Results: Of the 1,000 randomized, 741 (74.1%) consented to continue in the study at one-month follow-up. One hundred and twenty-seven (12.7%) refused consent and 132 (13.2%) were unreachable. Cohen's d effect size differences between those who consented/enrolled ( n  = 741) and those who were not enrolled ( n  = 259) were negligible (<0.2) for age, gender, race/ethnicity, and most forms of insurance. The effect size was small for Medicaid (0.36), and other public insurance (0.48). After excluding those unreached at 1 month (12.7%), there were medium Cohen's d effect size differences between those who consented to participate ( n  = 741) and those who explicitly refused ( n  = 127) with respect to age (0.55) and self-pay or no insurance (0.51). There were small to negligible effect size differences with respect to sex, race/ethnicity, and other forms of health insurance. Conclusions: The modified Zelen's design resulted in successful enrollment of most participants who were initially randomized into the trial, including those not motivated to quit.

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: Smoking is a key determinant of mortality among people living with HIV (PLWH)., Methods: To better understand the effects of smoking cessation interventions in PLWH, we conducted a pooled analysis of four randomized controlled trials of hospital-initiated smoking interventions conducted through the Consortium of Hospitals Advancing Research on Tobacco (CHART). In each study, cigarette smokers were randomly assigned to usual care or a smoking cessation intervention. The primary outcome was self-reported past 30-day tobacco abstinence at 6-month follow-up. Abstinence rates were compared between PLWH and participants without HIV and by treatment arm, using both complete-case and intention-to-treat analyses. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the effect of HIV status on 6-month tobacco abstinence and to determine predictors of smoking cessation within PLWH., Results: Among 5550 hospitalized smokers, there were 202 (3.6%) PLWH. PLWH smoked fewer cigarettes per day and were less likely to be planning to quit than smokers without HIV. At 6 months, cessation rates did not differ between intervention and control groups among PLWH (28.9% vs. 30.5%) or smokers without HIV (36.1% vs. 34.1%). In multivariable regression analysis, HIV status was not significantly associated with smoking cessation at 6 months. Among PLWH, confidence in quitting was the only clinical factor independently associated with smoking cessation (OR 2.0, 95% CI = 1.4 to 2.8, p < .01)., Conclusions: HIV status did not alter likelihood of quitting smoking after hospital discharge, whether or not the smoker was offered a tobacco cessation intervention, but power was limited to identify potentially important differences., Implications: PLWH had similar quit rates to participants without HIV following a hospital-initiated smoking cessation intervention. The findings suggest that factors specific to HIV infection may not influence response to smoking cessation interventions and that all PLWH would benefit from efforts to assist in quitting smoking., Trial Registration: (1) Using "warm handoffs" to link hospitalized smokers with tobacco treatment after discharge: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial: NCT01305928. (2) Web-based smoking cessation intervention that transitions from inpatient to outpatient: NCT01277250. (3) Effectiveness of smoking-cessation interventions for urban hospital patients: NCT01363245. (4) Effectiveness of Post-Discharge Strategies for Hospitalized Smokers (HelpingHAND2): NCT01714323., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved.For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Cessation counseling and pharmacotherapy are recommended for hospitalized smokers, but better coordination between cessation counselors and providers might improve utilization of pharmacotherapy and enhance smoking cessation., Objective: To compare smoking cessation counseling combined with care coordination post-hospitalization to counseling alone on uptake of pharmacotherapy and smoking cessation., Design: Unblinded, randomized clinical trial PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalized smokers referred from primarily rural hospitals INTERVENTIONS: Counseling only (C) consisted of telephone counseling provided during the hospitalization and post-discharge. Counseling with care coordination (CCC) provided similar counseling supplemented by feedback to the smoker's health care team and help for the smoker in obtaining pharmacotherapy. At 6 months post-hospitalization, persistent smokers were re-engaged with either CCC or C., Main Measures: Utilization of pharmacotherapy and smoking cessation at 3, 6, and 12 months post-discharge., Key Results: Among 606 smokers randomized, 429 (70.8%) completed the 12-month assessment and 580 (95.7%) were included in the primary analysis. Use of any cessation pharmacotherapy between 0 and 6 months (55.2%) and between 6 and 12 months (47.1%) post-discharge was similar across treatment arms though use of prescription-only pharmacotherapy between months 6-12 was significantly higher in the CCC group (30.1%) compared with the C group (18.6%) (RR, 1.61 (95% CI, 1.08, 2.41)). Self-reported abstinence rates of 26.2%, 20.3%, and 23.4% at months 3, 6, and 12, respectively, were comparable across the two treatment arms. Of those smoking at month 6, 12.5% reported abstinence at month 12. Validated smoking cessation at 12 months was 19.3% versus 16.9% in the CCC and C groups, respectively (RR, 1.13 (95% CI, 0.80, 1.61))., Conclusion: Supplemental care coordination, provided by counselors outside of the health care team, failed to improve smoking cessation beyond that achieved by cessation counseling alone. Re-engagement of smokers 6 months post-discharge can lead to new quitters, at which time care coordination might facilitate use of prescription medications., Trial Registration: NCT01063972.

Objective: Text messaging interventions are effective. Despite high utilization of smartphones, few studies evaluate text messaging for cessation in middle-/lower-income countries. Initiating tobacco treatment in hospitals is an effective but underutilized approach for reaching smokers. We evaluated a hybrid phone counseling/text messaging intervention for supporting cessation among hospitalized smokers in Brazil., Methods: We used an experimental design to assess the feasibility and potential effect size of the intervention. Participants (N = 66) were recruited from a university hospital and randomized in a 2:1 ratio into TXT (one session of telephone counseling plus 2 weeks of text messaging; N = 44) or Standard Care control group (N = 22). Participants lost to follow-up were counted as smokers., Results: Counselors sent 1186 texts, of which 924 (77.9%) were received by study participants. Participants rated the TXT content as "helpful" (80.4%) and the phone counseling length to be "just right" (95.1%). Although the study was not powered to evaluate abstinence rates, we did observe a higher prevalence of abstinence in the TXT compared to control group at both 1-month follow-up (25.0% vs. 9.1%) and 3-month follow-up (31.8% vs. 9.1%). Carbon monoxide-verified abstinence at month 3 was also higher in TXT (20.5% vs. 4.5%)., Conclusions: This hybrid telephone/text intervention should progress to full-scale effectiveness testing as it achieved favorable outcomes, was acceptable to participants, and was readily implemented. This type of intervention has strong potential for expanding the reach of hospital-initiated tobacco treatment in middle-/lower-income countries., Implications: This study extends research on hospital-initiated smoking cessation by establishing the feasibility of a novel text-messaging approach for post-discharge follow-up. Text messaging is a low-cost alternative to proactive telephone counseling that could help overcome resource barriers in middle- and lower-income countries. This hybrid texting/counseling intervention identified smokers in hospitals, established rapport through a single telephone follow-up, and expanded acceptability and reach of later support by using text-messaging, which is free of charge in this and other low-income countries. The favorable cessation outcomes achieved by the hybrid intervention provide support for a fully powered effectiveness trial., (© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: To determine the prevalence and predictors of receiving a smoking cessation medication prescription at discharge., Methods: Retrospective analysis of ongoing Human Studies Committee-approved clinical trial data at large tertiary care center, The University of Kansas Medical Center. Patients included were smokers over 18, either Spanish or English speaking, those admitted between October 1, 2016 through May 31, 2018. Other eligibility criteria include access to a telephone or mobile phone, not currently be pregnant or breastfeeding, have no significant co-morbidity that precludes participation (acute, life-threatening illness, and communication barriers such as tracheal tube or altered mental status). Those included in this analysis were those randomized into the trial who expressed interest in receiving a smoking cessation medication prescription at discharge., Results: Two hundred fourteen patients were recommended a prescription by their smoking cessation counselor, 88 patients (41.12%) were approved a prescription at discharge. Out of those approved, 50.70 (14.05 SD) was the average age, 12.84 (8.47 SD) was the average number of cigarettes used per day, 47 patients (53.41%) were White, 49 patients (55.68%) were admitted through the emergency department, 55 patients (62.50%) had used smoking cessation medication in the past, 49 patients (55.68%) had used inpatient smoking cessation, 36 patients (40.91%) had Medicaid. A binary logistic regression determined to show insurance status (P = 0.042) and use of inpatient smoking cessation medication use (P < 0.001) as statistically significant predictors of receiving a prescription at discharge., Conclusion: It was determined that among the population recommended for medication, 41.12% actually received a prescription at discharge. The variables of "health insurance status" and "use of inpatient smoking cessation medication" demonstrated to be predictors of receiving a prescription. It is important to further study this as many patients rely on a prescription to afford these medications that are useful in a quit attempt., (Copyright © 2019 American Pharmacists Association®. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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., Competing Interests: Authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest and none was reported., (© 2019 de Souza IW.)

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.

Objectives: Although many states have expanded Medicaid coverage of cessation medications, utilization remains low. Anecdotal reports suggest that beneficiaries are at times denied coverage of cessation medications at the pharmacy counter. We conducted an observational community-wide case study of Medicaid beneficiary attempts to fill over-the-counter nicotine replacement therapy at pharmacies., Methods: We recruited tobacco-using beneficiaries from a Federally Qualified Health Center, whose providers wrote paper prescriptions for nicotine patches. Study staff escorted beneficiaries to all eligible pharmacies (n = 18) in a Midwestern community to observe fill attempts. Study staff recorded encounters via smartphone into a secure database on a university server., Results: Seven of 18 pharmacies (39%) did not fill the prescription on the day of the attempt. Of these, 6 offered to order the patch for pick-up at a later date. All (4/4) chain pharmacies filled the prescription; 2/3 mass merchant pharmacies failed to fill. Combining successful same-day fills with offers to order for pick-up, 17/18 (94%) would ultimately have been able to obtain patches., Conclusion: This pilot study found that many beneficiaries left pharmacies without a prescription in hand. Successful same-day fills varied markedly by store type. For people with low incomes, transportation presents a major barrier for delayed pick-up. In addition, delays can fuel ambivalence toward quitting. Future research based on this pilot study might address whether patients who fail to secure a same-day prescription ever fill the prescription and, if not, the degree to which this barrier contributes to success or failure in quitting., (Copyright © 2018 American Pharmacists Association®. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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., (© 2017 Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Introduction: Policies to promote smoking cessation among Medicaid-insured pregnant women have the potential to assist a significant proportion of pregnant smokers. In 2010, Kansas Medicaid began covering smoking cessation counseling for pregnant smokers. Our aim was to evaluate the use of smoking cessation benefits provided to pregnant women as a result of the Kansas Medicaid policy change that provided reimbursement for physician-provided smoking cessation counseling., Methods: We examined Kansas Medicaid claims data to estimate rates of delivery of smoking cessation treatment to Medicaid-insured pregnant women in Kansas from fiscal year 2010 through 2013. We analyzed the number of pregnant women who received physician-provided smoking cessation counseling indicated by procedure billing codes (ie, G0436 and G0437) and medication (ie, nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, or varenicline) located in outpatient managed care encounter and fee-for-service claims data. We estimated the number of Medicaid-insured pregnant smokers using the national smoking prevalence (14%) in this population and the number of live births reported in Kansas., Results: Annually from 2010 to 2013, approximately 27.2%-31.6% of pregnant smokers had claims for nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion, or varenicline. Excluding claims for bupropion, a medication commonly prescribed to treat depression, claims ranged from 9.3% to 11.1%. Following implementation of Medicaid coverage for smoking cessation counseling, less than 1% of estimated smokers had claims for counseling., Conclusions: This low claims rate suggests that simply changing policy is not sufficient to ensure use of newly implemented benefits, and that there probably remain critical gaps in smoking cessation treatment., Implications: This study evaluates the use of Medicaid reimbursement for smoking cessation counseling among low-income pregnant women in Kansas. We describe the Medicaid claims rates of physician-provided smoking cessation counseling for pregnant women, an evidence-based and universally recommended treatment approach for smoking cessation in this population. Our findings show that claims rates for smoking cessation benefits in this population are very low, even after policy changes to support provision of cessation assistance were implemented. Additional studies are needed to determine whether reimbursement is functioning as intended and identify potential gaps between policy and implementation of evidence-based smoking cessation treatment., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Smokers benefit from ongoing cessation support upon leaving the hospital and returning to their home environment. This study examined the impact of telephone-delivered care coordination on utilization of and adherence to cessation pharmacotherapy after hospital discharge., Methods: Inpatient smokers (n = 606) were randomized to receive counseling with care coordination (CCC) or counseling alone (C) for smoking cessation. Both groups received written materials and telephone-based cessation counseling during hospitalization and postdischarge. CCC recipients received help in selecting, obtaining, and refilling affordable pharmacotherapy prescriptions during and after hospitalization. Study outcomes included self-reported utilization, duration of use, and type of medication during the 3 months postdischarge., Results: Of the 487 (80%) of participants completing 3-month follow-up, 211 (43.3%) reported using cessation pharmacotherapy postdischarge; this did not differ by study arm (CCC: 44.7%, C: 42.0%, p = .55). Use of pharmacotherapy postdischarge was associated with smoking at least 20 cigarettes/day at baseline (odds ratio [OR]: 1.48; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.00-2.19) and receipt of pharmacotherapy during hospitalization (OR: 4.00; 95% CI: 2.39-6.89). Smokers with Medicaid (OR: 2.29; 95% CI: 1.32-4.02) or other insurance (OR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.01-2.86) were more likely to use pharmacotherapy postdischarge than those with no health care coverage. Less than one in four (23.8% of CCC; 22.2% of C) continued pharmacotherapy beyond 4 weeks., Conclusions: Supplemental care coordination did not improve use of postdischarge pharmacotherapy beyond that of inpatient treatment and behavioral counseling. Insurance coverage and use of medications during the hospitalization are associated with higher use of evidence-based treatment postdischarge., Implications: Many hospitalized smokers do not receive the benefits of cessation pharmacotherapy postdischarge and telephone quitline programs often fail to help smokers procure pharmacotherapy. Thus, effective strategies are needed to improve utilization and adherence to evidence-based cessation therapies when smokers leave the hospital. We found that use of postdischarge pharmacotherapy was strongly associated with receipt of pharmacotherapy during the hospitalization and with the availability of insurance to cover the costs of treatment. Additional efforts to coordinate pharmacotherapy services did not improve either utilization or adherence to therapy., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

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.)

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., (Copyright © 2016 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: It is important to consider the degree to which studies are explanatory versus pragmatic to understand the implications of their findings for patients, healthcare professionals, and policymakers. Pragmatic trials test the effectiveness of interventions in real-world conditions; explanatory trials test for efficacy under ideal conditions. The Consortium of Hospitals Advancing Research on Tobacco (CHART) is a network of seven NIH-funded trials designed to identify effective programs that can be widely implemented in routine clinical practice., Methods: A cross-sectional analysis of CHART trial study designs was conducted to place each study on the pragmatic-explanatory continuum. After reliability training, six raters independently scored each CHART study according to ten PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary (PRECIS) dimensions, which covered participant eligibility criteria, intervention flexibility, practitioner expertise, follow-up procedures, participant compliance, practitioner adherence, and outcome analyses. Means and SDs were calculated for each dimension of each study, with lower scores representing more pragmatic elements. Results were plotted on "spoke and wheel" diagrams. The rating process and analyses were performed in October 2014 to September 2015., Results: All seven CHART trials tended toward the pragmatic end of the spectrum, although there was a range from 0.76 (SD=0.23) to 1.85 (SD=0.58). Most studies included some explanatory design elements., Conclusions: CHART findings should be relatively applicable to clinical practice. Funders and reviewers could integrate PRECIS criteria into their guidelines to better facilitate pragmatic research. CHART study protocols, coupled with scores reported here, may help readers improve the design of their own pragmatic trials., (Copyright © 2016 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Little is known about effective methods to recruit unmotivated smokers into cessation induction trials, the reasons unmotivated smokers agree to participate, and the impact of those reasons on study outcomes. A mixed-method approach was used to examine recruitment data from a randomized controlled cessation induction trial that enrolled 255 adult smokers with low motivation to quit. Over 15 months, 33% of smokers who inquired about the study were enrolled. Common recruitment methods included word-of-mouth, print advertisements and clinic referrals. Frequently mentioned reasons for participating included to: gain financial incentives (44.7%), learn about research or help others quit (43%), learn about smoking and risks (40%) and help with future quits (i.e. Quit Assistance, 23.9%). Separate regression models predicting study outcomes at 26 weeks indicated that smokers who said they participated for Quit Assistance reported higher motivation to quit (B 1.26) and were more likely to have made a quit attempt (OR 2.03) compared to those not mentioning this reason, when baseline characteristics were controlled. Understanding reasons for unmotivated smokers' interest in treatment can help practitioners and researchers design effective strategies to engage this population., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Most persons living with HIV smoke cigarettes and tend to be highly dependent, heavy smokers. Few such persons receive tobacco treatment, and many die from tobacco-related illness. Although advancements in antiretroviral therapy (ART) have increased the quality and quantity of life, the health harms from tobacco use diminish these gains. Without cessation assistance, thousands will benefit from costly ART, only to suffer the consequences of tobacco-related disease and death. A study was conducted to examine in detail inpatient tobacco treatment for smokers with HIV., Methods: Data collected at hospital admission and data collected by tobacco treatment specialists were examined retrospectively for all inpatients with HIV who were admitted to an academic medical center for a five-year period. Specifically, the prevalence of cigarette smoking, factors predictive of referral to tobacco treatment, referral for tobacco treatment, treatment participation, and abstinence at six months posttreatment were measured. Differences in referral and treatment participation between all smokers and smokers with HIV were also assessed., Results: Among the 422 admitted persons with HIV, 54.5% smoked and 21.7% were referred to inpatient tobacco treatment services. Substance abuse and tobacco-related diagnoses were predictive of referral to inpatient tobacco treatment specialists. Among the 14 treatment participants reached for follow-up, 11 (78.6%) made quit attempts and 3 (21.4%) reported abstinence. Smokers with HIV were less likely to be referred to and treated by tobacco treatment services than all smokers admitted during the same time frame., Conclusions: Although tobacco is a major cause of mortality, few smokers with HIV are offered treatment during hospitalization. Those who are treated attempt to quit. Hospitalization offers a prime opportunity for initiating smoking cessation among those with HIV.

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.)

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.

This study, which tested two motivational interviewing treatment approaches, assessed the feasibility of conducting a community-based smoking cessation intervention among homeless smokers. Participants (N = 46) were recruited from multiple facilities in the Kansas City area and were randomized to two counseling conditions in which they received five individual motivational interviewing sessions, six group meetings, and their choice of 8 weeks of 21-mg nicotine patch or 4-mg nicotine lozenge. The two counseling conditions consisted of motivational interviewing targeted either to smoking behaviors exclusively (smoking only) or to smoking and other addictions or life events that could affect ability to quit (smoking plus). Group meetings were designed to provide educational information and social support. Measures of feasibility assessed included the proportion of participants who returned for randomization among those eligible, adherence to prescribed nicotine replacement therapies, retention rates at the week 26 final study visit, and biochemically verified 7-day abstinence at week 26. Most participants (69.6%) chose nicotine patches, and 32% of those participants reported using at least four patches per week. Carbon monoxide verified 7-day abstinence rates in the smoking-only and smoking-plus groups were 13.04% and 17.39% (ns), respectively, at week 8 and 8.70% and 17.39% (ns), respectively, at week 26. Participants who used at least four patches per week were more likely to have quit at 8 weeks than were those who used fewer patches (33.3% vs. 10.5%, p = .30). Results support the feasibility of conducting a smoking cessation intervention among homeless smokers. Findings also show promising effects for nicotine replacement therapy and counseling in this population. Developing programs to improve smoking cessation outcomes in underserved populations is an essential step toward achieving national health objectives and for ultimately reducing tobacco-related health disparities.

The vast majority of drug users smoke cigarettes. Most use marijuana and no other illicit drug. We analyzed adult responses to the 1997 NHSDA (n = 16,661) to explore relationships between marijuana use and cigarette smoking. Multivariate analyses controlled for other illicit drug use and other potential covariates. Nearly three-quarters of current marijuana users (74%) smoked cigarettes. Compared to nonusers, the adjusted odds of being a smoker were 5.43 for current marijuana users, 3.58 for past year marijuana users, and 2.02 for former marijuana users. Odds for cigarette smoking among current poly-drug users, compared to nonusers, were 2.3 to 1. Level of cigarette smoking was directly associated with frequency of marijuana use. Nationwide, an estimated 7 million adults smoke both substances and are at increased risk for respiratory illnesses and mortality. Cigarette smoking is a major co-morbidity of marijuana use and smoking cessation should be addressed among marijuana users in addition to their other illicit drug involvement.