The Effects of Opt-out vs Opt-in Tobacco Treatment on Engagement, Cessation, and Costs: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

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.

Quitting Smoking before and after Pregnancy: Study Methods and Baseline Data from a Prospective Cohort Study.

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.

Race moderates the effects of Motivational Interviewing on smoking cessation induction.

OBJECTIVE: Health disparities necessitate exploration of how race moderates response to smoking cessation treatment. Data from a randomized clinical trial of Motivational Interviewing (MI) for smoking cessation induction were used to explore differential treatment response between African American (AA) vs Non-Black (NB) smokers. METHODS: Adult tobacco smokers (138 AA vs 66 NB) with low desire to quit were randomly assigned to four sessions of MI or health education (HE). Outcomes (e.g., quit attempts) were assessed 3- and 6-months. RESULTS: There was evidence of a Race by Treatment interaction such that MI was less effective than HE in AA smokers. Mean Cohen's d for the interaction effect was -0.32 (95% CI [-0.44, -0.20]). However, the race interaction could be accounted for by controlling for baseline relationship status and communication preference (wants directive approach). CONCLUSIONS: MI may be less effective for smoking cessation induction in AA vs NB smokers when compared to another active and more directive therapy. The differential response between races may be explained by psychosocial variables. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: MI may not be an ideal choice for all African American smokers. Patients' relationship status and preference for a directive counseling approach might explain disparities in response to MI treatment.

Insurance coverage and utilization of nicotine patches after receipt of a prescription.

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.

Direct observation of Medicaid beneficiary attempts to fill prescriptions for nicotine replacement medications.

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.

Medicaid Coverage of Smoking Cessation Counseling and Medication Is Underutilized for Pregnant Women.

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.

Impact of the 2015 CMS Inpatient Psychiatric Facility Quality Reporting Rule on Tobacco Treatment.

INTRODUCTION: In its fiscal year 2015 final rule, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) required reporting of tobacco treatment quality measures as part of the Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities Prospective Payment System (IPF PPS). This pre-intervention, post-intervention policy analysis evaluates the impact of that policy at a large academic medical center that opted to improve performance as it implemented reporting measures. METHODS: Electronic medical record data were collected retrospectively for all adult (≥18 years) inpatient psychiatric admissions from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2015. Data from admissions were analyzed to determine changes in the provision of tobacco treatment including the proportions of patients screened for tobacco use, receiving tobacco cessation counseling, and receiving tobacco cessation medication(s) using a chi-square test. Covariate analysis of treatment differences based on psychiatric diagnosis was analyzed using Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel and Breslow-Day test. RESULTS: Post-policy screening for admissions increased significantly (85% vs. 97%; p < .001). Referral to cessation counseling increased 18-fold (4% vs. 74%; p < .001). Receipt of Counselling (8% vs. 67%; p < .001) and referral for cessation medication (32% vs. 68%; p < .001) also increased dramatically. Though statistically non-significant, the number of tobacco users who actually received medications increased markedly between 2014 and 2015, 24% versus 35%. Gains in screening, referral, and treatment did not differ by psychiatric diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities Quality Reporting (IPFQR) Program resulted in a 10-fold increase in the number of smokers who received inpatient tobacco treatment. Should CMS link prospective payment to performance, it could have a major impact on quality of care for tobacco dependence. IMPLICATIONS: This is the first study to examine the implementation and impact of new 2015 IPFQR program tobacco measures. This study may illustrate the potential effect that performance based penalties can have should facilities be required to do more than simply report on these tobacco measures. This study exemplifies the impact these new reporting measures can have when psychiatric facilities move beyond letter of the policy, to continually assess organizational performance and implement changes to improve treatment delivery.

Pharmaceutical assistance programs to support smoking cessation medication access.

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.

Comparative and cost effectiveness of telemedicine versus telephone counseling for smoking cessation.

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).

Design and participant characteristics of a randomized-controlled trial of telemedicine for smoking cessation among rural smokers.

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.

Capacity of US drug treatment facilities to provide evidence-based tobacco treatment.

Although people with drug problems consume a large proportion of cigarettes smoked in the United States, few drug treatment facilities offer tobacco treatment. Our analysis of 405 facilities showed that most had the skills but few had policies, leadership, or financial resources to provide evidence-based tobacco treatment. For-profits reported significantly fewer tobacco treatment resources than nonprofits. The Affordable Care and Mental Health Parity acts will improve treatment access for drug-dependent persons. To realize these acts' full promise, policymakers should ensure that clients have access to tobacco treatment.

Screening and brief intervention for alcohol and other drug use in primary care: associations between organizational climate and practice.

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have demonstrated that positive organizational climates contribute to better work performance. Screening and brief intervention (SBI) for alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use has the potential to reach a broad population of hazardous drug users but has not yet been widely adopted in Brazil's health care system. We surveyed 149 primary health care professionals in 30 clinics in Brazil who were trained to conduct SBI among their patients. We prospectively measured how often they delivered SBI to evaluate the association between organizational climate and adoption/performance of SBI. METHODS: Organizational climate was measured by the 2009 Organizational Climate Scale for Health Organizations, a scale validated in Brazil that assesses leadership, professional development, team spirit, relationship with the community, safety, strategy, and remuneration. Performance of SBI was measured prospectively by weekly assessments during the three months following training. We also assessed self-reported SBI and self-efficacy for performing SBI at three months post-training. We used inferential statistics to depict and test for the significance of associations. RESULTS: Teams with better organizational climates implemented SBI more frequently. Organizational climate factors most closely associated with SBI implementation included professional development and relationship with the community. The dimensions of leadership and remuneration were also significantly associated with SBI. CONCLUSIONS: Organizational climate may influence implementation of SBI and ultimately may affect the ability of organizations to identify and address drug use.

Low incidence of adverse events following varenicline initiation among opioid dependent smokers with comorbid psychiatric illness.

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

Using "warm handoffs" to link hospitalized smokers with tobacco treatment after discharge: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

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.

Smoking cessation pharmacotherapy preferences in rural primary care.

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.

Smoking cessation in homeless populations: a pilot clinical trial.

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.

Homelessness and smoking cessation: insights from focus groups.

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.