Medical student INtervention to promote effective nicotine dependence and tobacco HEalthcare (MIND-THE-GAP): single-centre feasibility randomised trial results.

BACKGROUND: Although brief cessation advice from healthcare professionals increases quit rates, smokers typically do not get this advice during hospitalisation, possibly due to resource issues, lack of training and professionals' own attitudes to providing such counselling. Medical students are a potentially untapped resource who could deliver cessation counselling, while upskilling themselves and changing their own attitudes to delivering such advice in the future; however, no studies have investigated this. We aimed to determine if brief student-led counselling could enhance motivation to quit and smoking cessation behaviours among hospitalised patients. METHODS: A mixed-methods, 2-arm pilot feasibility randomised controlled trial with qualitative process evaluation enrolled 67 hospitalised adult smokers, who were recruited and randomized to receive a brief medical student-delivered cessation intervention (n = 33) or usual care (n = 34); 61 medical students received standardised cessation training and 33 were randomly assigned to provide a brief in-hospital consultation and follow-up support by phone or in-person one week post-discharge. Telephone follow-up at 3- and 6-months assessed scores on the Motivation to Stop Smoking Scale (MTSS; primary outcome) and several other outcomes, including 7-day point prevalent abstinence, quit attempts, use of cessation medication, and ratings of student's knowledge and efficacy. Data were analysed as intention to treat (ITT) using penalised imputation, per protocol, and random effects repeated measures. Focus group interviews were conducted with students post-intervention to elicit their views on the training and intervention process. RESULTS: Analyses for primary and most secondary outcomes favoured the intervention group, although results were not statistically significant. Point prevalence abstinence rates were significantly higher for the intervention group during follow-up for all analyses except 6-month ITT analysis. Fidelity was variable. Patients rated students as being "very" knowledgeable about quitting and "somewhat" helpful. Qualitative results showed students were glad to deliver the intervention; were critical of current cessation care; felt constrained by their inability to prescribe cessation medications and wanted to include cessation and other behavioural counselling in their normal history taking. CONCLUSIONS: It appears feasible for medical students to be smoking cessation interventionists during their training, although their fidelity to the intervention requires further investigation. A definitive trial is needed to determine if medical students are effective cessation counsellors and if student-led intervention could be tailored for other health behaviours. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02601599 (retrospectively registered 1 day after first participant recruited on November 3rd 2015).

Evidence from a Smoking Management Service in a University Teaching Hospital in Dublin, Ireland monitored by repeat surveys, 1997-2022.

St Vincent's University Hospital (SVUH) has a comprehensive smoking management programme and since 1997 has conducted periodic surveys of inpatients, outpatients, staff and visitors to establish prevalence of smoking and associated attitudes towards the hospital's smoke-free campus policy pioneered in 2009. We report trends and describe also the online community stop smoking course (SSC) developed more recently in response to COVID-19. A questionnaire examining attitudes and smoking status was administered by census surveys of inpatients, quota or random sub-sample surveys of staff, and quota surveys with outpatients and visitors in the time period of 1997-2018. Chi square test for trend was used. Smoking rates declined in all groups but significantly so in outpatients (19.5% vs. 10%; p < 0.01), visitors (27.4% vs. 9.5%; p < 0.0001) and staff (30.0% vs. 10.8%; p < 0.0001). Use of E-Cigarettes was low in all cohorts. Rates of smoking were borderline higher in inpatients eligible by income for state-funded General Medical Services (33.2% vs 26.8%, p = 0.099). Support for and awareness of the ban increased over time. Demographic and quit data was compared between participants of in-person or online SSC. The online courses were successful with a maintenance of quit rates (End of Course: 54.7% vs. 55.0%, 1 Month: 50.4% vs. 54.0%, 3 Month: 19.8% vs. 22.5%). While the hospital community's smoking prevalence has decreased over time and attitudes to the smoking ban have been increasingly positive, the campus is not without difficulties in keeping it smoke-free. We continue to advocate for hospital staff support in enacting this flagship initiative.