Smoking status as the new vital sign: effect on assessment and intervention in patients who smoke.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of expanding the vital signs to include smoking status. DESIGN: We prospectively conducted exit interviews with patients at a general internal medicine clinic in Madison, Wisconsin, during a 16-month period from 1991 to 1993. METHODS: Patients were surveyed briefly before (N = 870) and after (N = 994) the implementation of a simple institutional change in clinical practice. This change involved training the staff in how to use progress notepaper with a vital sign stamp that included smoking status (current, former, or never) along with the traditional vital signs. Included in the survey were questions about whether the patient smoked, whether the patient was asked that day about smoking status (by a clinician or other staff), and, for smokers, whether they were urged to quit smoking and given specific advice on how to do so. RESULTS: After expansion of the vital signs, patients were much more likely to report inquiries about their smoking status on the day of a clinic visit (an increase from approximately 58% at baseline to 81% at intervention; P < 0.0001). The vital sign intervention was associated with significant increases in the percentage of smokers who reported that their clinician advised them that day to quit smoking (from approximately 49% at baseline to 70% during the intervention; P < 0.01) and in the percentage who reported that their clinician gave them specific advice that day on how to stop smoking (from approximately 24% at baseline to 43% during the intervention; P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Expanding the vital signs to include smoking status was associated with a dramatic increase in the rate of identifying patients who smoke and of intervening to encourage and assist with smoking cessation. This simple, low-cost intervention may effectively prompt clinicians to inquire about use of tobacco and offer recommendations to smokers.

Are clinicians intervening with their patients who smoke? A "real-world" assessment of 45 clinics in the upper Midwest.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the level of intervention provided by primary care physicians to individuals who smoke. SETTING: 45 primary care clinics throughout the upper Midwest. PATIENTS: 6,086 men and women (M:F = 1:2), ages 50 to 68, who sought medical care at any one of the 45 primary care clinics and completed two questionnaires regarding preventive medical services received during the previous 3 years (1990-1993). RESULTS: Of patients who smoke, 92% reported that their clinician had asked about their smoking status. Additionally, 86% reported being informed at their clinic of the dangers of tobacco use. A smaller percentage of individuals (60.1%) reported being explicitly advised on how to quit, and fewer still (27.2%) reported being referred to a stop smoking program. CONCLUSIONS: While most clinicians inquire about their patients' smoking status and recommend they quit, there currently exists a deficiency in the translation of these recommendations into concise, explicit instructions on how to quit. By increasing the frequency of clinicians giving specific advice about how to quit, the overall success rate of the public health campaign against tobacco use will be greatly enhanced.

Tobacco dependence and the nicotine patch. Clinical guidelines for effective use.

OBJECTIVE: A comprehensive review of transdermal nicotine treatment for tobacco dependence, with recommendations derived from the research literature. DATA SOURCES: English-language clinical trials. STUDY SELECTION: Clinical trials using placebo-controlled, double-blind methodology (11 studies) with at least 6 months of follow-up after treatment (eight studies) and biochemical verification of smoking status. DATA SYNTHESIS: Nicotine patches produce end-of-treatment smoking cessation rates that range from 18% to 77%; these rates are about twice those of placebo-treated subjects. Nicotine patches produced 6-month abstinence rates of 22% to 42%, while placebo patches produced quit rates of 5% to 28%. Nicotine patches appear to reduce some, but not all, nicotine withdrawal symptoms. For instance, while the patch reduces craving for cigarettes and negative moods, it does not appear to reduce hunger or weight gain. The clinical trials literature suggests that proper adjuvant smoking cessation counseling is crucial in determining successful long-term outcome with the nicotine patch, and suggests that 6 to 8 weeks of patch therapy may be an adequate duration for most patients. CONCLUSIONS: Nicotine patches are an effective aid to tobacco dependence treatment. However, success rates vary greatly across research studies and may be influenced highly by the nature and intensity of adjuvant smoking cessation counseling. More research is needed to identify optimal duration, dosage, and individualization of patch therapy. The impact of nicotine patches (more than 5 million users with $1 billion in sales for 1992) also raises important ethical and public health issues.