Tobacco and COPD: presenting the World Health Organization (WHO) Tobacco Knowledge Summary.

The WHO recently published a Tobacco Knowledge Summary (TKS) synthesizing current evidence on tobacco and COPD, aiming to raise awareness among a broad audience of health care professionals. Furthermore, it can be used as an advocacy tool in the fight for tobacco control and prevention of tobacco-related disease. This article builds on the evidence presented in the TKS, with a greater level of detail intended for a lung-specialist audience. Pulmonologists have a vital role to play in advocating for the health of their patients and the wider population by sharing five key messages: (1) Smoking is the leading cause of COPD in high-income countries, contributing to approximately 70% of cases. Quitting tobacco is an essential step toward better lung health. (2) People with COPD face a significantly higher risk of developing lung cancer. Smoking cessation is a powerful measure to reduce cancer risk. (3) Cardiovascular disease, lung cancer and type-2 diabetes are common comorbidities in people with COPD. Quitting smoking not only improves COPD management, but also reduces the risk of developing these coexisting conditions. (4) Tobacco smoke also significantly impacts children's lung growth and development, increasing the risk of respiratory infections, asthma and up to ten other conditions, and COPD later in life. Governments should implement effective tobacco control measures to protect vulnerable populations. (5) The tobacco industry's aggressive strategies in the marketing of nicotine delivery systems and all tobacco products specifically target children, adolescents, and young adults. Protecting our youth from these harmful tactics is a top priority.

Sustainability of an Opt-Out Electronic-Health Record-Based Tobacco Treatment Consult Service at a Large Safety-Net Hospital: A 6-Year Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Our safety-net hospital implemented a hospital-based tobacco treatment intervention in 2016. We previously showed the intervention, an "opt-out" Electronic Health Record (EHR)-based Best Practice Alert (BPA)+ order-set that triggers consultation to an inpatient Tobacco Treatment Consult (TTC) service for all patients who smoke, improves smoking abstinence. We now report on sustainability, 6 years after inception. AIMS AND METHODS: We analyzed data collected between July 2016-June 2022 of patients documented as "currently smoking" in the EHR. Across the 6 years, we used Pearson's correlation analysis to compare Adoption (clinician acceptance of the BPA+ order-set, thus generating consultation to the TTC service); Reach (number of consultations completed by the TTC service); and Effectiveness (receipt of pharmacotherapy orders between patients receiving and not receiving consultations). RESULTS: Among 39 558 adult admissions (July 2016-June 2022) with "currently smoking" status in the EHR for whom the BPA triggered, clinicians accepted the TTC order set on 50.4% (19 932/39 558), though acceptance varied across services (eg, Cardiology [71%] and Obstetrics-Gynecology 12%]). The TTC service consulted on 17% (6779/39 558) of patients due to staffing constraints. Consultations ordered (r = -0.28, p = .59) and completed (r = 0.45, p = .37) remained stable over 6-years. Compared to patients not receiving consultations, patients receiving consultations were more likely to receive pharmacotherapy orders overall (inpatient: 50.8% vs. 35.1%, p < .0001; at discharge: 27.1% vs. 10%, p < .0001) and in each year. CONCLUSIONS: The "opt-out" EHR-based TTC service is sustainable, though many did not receive consultations due to resource constraints. Health care systems should elevate the priority of hospital-based tobacco treatment programs to increase reach to underserved populations. IMPLICATIONS: Our study shows that opt-out approaches that utilize the EHR are a sustainable approach to providing evidence-based tobacco treatment to all hospitalized individuals who smoke, regardless of readiness to stop smoking and clinical condition.

Research Priorities for Interventions to Address Health Disparities in Lung Nodule Management: An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.

Background: Lung nodules are common incidental findings, and timely evaluation is critical to ensure diagnosis of localized-stage and potentially curable lung cancers. Rates of guideline-concordant lung nodule evaluation are low, and the risk of delayed evaluation is higher for minoritized groups. Objectives: To summarize the existing evidence, identify knowledge gaps, and prioritize research questions related to interventions to reduce disparities in lung nodule evaluation. Methods: A multidisciplinary committee was convened to review the evidence and identify key knowledge gaps in four domains: 1) research methodology, 2) patient-level interventions, 3) clinician-level interventions, and 4) health system-level interventions. A modified Delphi approach was used to identify research priorities. Results: Key knowledge gaps included 1) a lack of standardized approaches to identify factors associated with lung nodule management disparities, 2) limited data evaluating the role of social determinants of health on disparities in lung nodule management, 3) a lack of certainty regarding the optimal strategy to improve patient-clinician communication and information transmission and/or retention, and 4) a paucity of information on the impact of patient navigators and culturally trained multidisciplinary teams. Conclusions: This statement outlines a research agenda intended to stimulate high-impact studies of interventions to mitigate disparities in lung nodule evaluation. Research questions were prioritized around the following domains: 1) need for methodologic guidelines for conducting research related to disparities in nodule management, 2) evaluating how social determinants of health influence lung nodule evaluation, 3) studying approaches to improve patient-clinician communication, and 4) evaluating the utility of patient navigators and culturally enriched multidisciplinary teams to reduce disparities.

Association of Electronic Cigarette Use with Respiratory Symptom Development among U.S. Young Adults.

Rationale: Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use is highly prevalent among young adults. However, longitudinal data assessing the association between e-cigarette use and respiratory symptoms are lacking. Objectives: To determine whether e-cigarette use is associated with the development of respiratory symptoms in young adults. Methods: Data are derived from the PATH (Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health) study waves 2 (2014-2015), 3 (2015-2016), 4 (2016-2018), and 5 (2018-2019). Young adults aged 18-24 years at baseline with no prevalent respiratory disease or symptoms were included in the analyses. Binary logistic regression models with a generalized estimating equation were used to estimate time-varying and time-lagged associations of e-cigarette use during waves 2-4, with respiratory symptom development approximately 12 months later at waves 3-5. Measurements and Main Results: The per-wave prevalence of former and current e-cigarette use was 15.2% and 5.6%, respectively. Former e-cigarette use was associated with higher odds of developing any respiratory symptom (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.39) and wheezing in the chest (aOR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.08-1.83) in multivariable adjusted models. Current e-cigarette use was associated with higher odds for any respiratory symptom (aOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.06-1.65) and wheezing in the chest (aOR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.06-2.14). Associations persisted among participants who never smoked combustible cigarettes. Conclusions: In this nationally representative cohort of young adults, former and current e-cigarette use was associated with higher odds of developing wheezing-related respiratory symptoms, after accounting for cigarette smoking and other combustible tobacco product use.

Hospitalization as an opportunity to engage underserved individuals in shared decision-making for lung cancer screening: results from two randomized pilot trials.

PURPOSE: Medicare requires tobacco dependence counseling and shared decision-making (SDM) for lung cancer screening (LCS) reimbursement. We hypothesized that initiating SDM during inpatient tobacco treatment visits would increase LCS among patients with barriers to proactively seeking outpatient preventive care. METHODS: We collected baseline assessments and performed two pilot randomized trials at our safety-net hospital. Pilot 1 tested feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a nurse practitioner initiating SDM for LCS during hospitalization (Inpatient SDM). We collected qualitative data on barriers encountered during Pilot 1. Pilot 2 added a community health worker (CHW) to address barriers to LCS completion (Inpatient SDM + CHW-navigation). For both studies, preliminary efficacy was an intention-to-treat analysis of LCS completion at 3 months between intervention and comparator (furnishing of LCS decision aid only) groups. RESULTS: Baseline assessments showed that patients preferred in-person LCS discussions versus self-reviewing materials; overall 20% had difficulty understanding written information. In Pilot 1, 4% (2/52) in Inpatient SDM versus 2% (1/48, comparator) completed LCS (p = 0.6), despite 89% (89/100) desiring LCS. Primary care providers noted that competing priorities and patient factors (e.g., social barriers to keeping appointments) prevented the intervention from working as intended. In Pilot 2, 50% (5/10) in Inpatient SDM + CHW-navigation versus 9% (1/11, comparator) completed LCS (p < 0.05). Many patients were ineligible due to recent diagnostic chest CT (Pilot 1: 255/659; Pilot 2: 239/527). CONCLUSIONS: Inpatient SDM + CHW-navigation shows promise to improve LCS rates among underserved patients who smoke, but feasibility is limited by recent diagnostic chest CT among inpatients. Implementing CHW-navigation in other clinical settings may facilitate LCS for underserved patients. TRAIL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03276806 (8 September 2017); NCT03793894 (4 January 2019).

Text-messaging to promote smoking cessation among individuals with opioid use disorder: quantitative and qualitative evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Individuals with opioid use disorder (OUD) who smoke cigarettes have high tobacco-related comorbidities, lack of access to tobacco treatment, lack of inclusion in smoking cessation trials, and remain understudied in the mobile health field. The purpose of this study was to understand patients' with OUD perceptions of 1) text message programs to promote smoking cessation, 2) content and features to include in such a program, and 3) how message content should be framed. METHODS: From December 2018 to February 2019, we recruited 20 hospitalized individuals with a concurrent diagnosis of OUD and tobacco dependence at Boston Medical Center (BMC), the largest safety-net hospital in New England. We surveyed participants' cell phone use, their interest in a text message program to promote smoking cessation, and their reactions to and ratings of a series of 26 prototype texts. We then conducted open-ended interviews to elicit content and suggestions on how text message interventions can improve motivation to increase smoking cessation among individuals with OUD. The interviews also included open-ended inquiries exploring message ratings and message content, inquiries about preferences for message duration, frequency, and personalization. RESULTS: Quantitative analysis of questionnaire data indicated that the majority of participants owned a cell phone (95%, 19/20). Most participants (60%, 12/20) reported that they would be interested or very interested in receiving text messages about smoking cessation. Text messages about the health benefits of quitting were rated the highest among various categories of text messages. Qualitative analysis showed that almost every participant felt that text messages would help motivate smoking cessation given the support it would provide. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that individuals with OUD who smoke cigarettes perceive that a text message program designed to promote smoking cessation would motivate and support smoking cessation efforts. Our findings demonstrate that such a program is feasible as participants own cell phones, frequently send and receive text messages, and have unlimited text message plans. Findings from this study provide valuable insight into content and features to include when developing text message programs to address barriers to smoking cessation in individuals who have OUD and smoke cigarettes.

A mixed methods study to inform and evaluate a longitudinal nurse practitioner/community health worker intervention to address social determinants of health and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease self-management.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with low socioeconomic status experience higher prevalence and worse outcomes of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We undertook a quality improvement initiative at our safety net hospital in which a nurse practitioner (NP)/community health worker (CHW) team followed patients with COPD, frequent admissions, and unmet SDOH needs from hospitalization through one month post-discharge. We report our mixed methods approach to inform development and preliminary evaluation of this intervention. METHODS: We first assessed characteristics of patients admitted with COPD in 2018 (n = 1811), performing multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with ≥ 2 admissions per year. We then tested a standardized tool to screen for unmet SDOH needs in a convenience sample of 51 frequently hospitalized patients with COPD. From January-July 2019, we pilot tested the NP/CHW intervention with 57 patients, reviewed NP/CHW logs, and conducted qualitative interviews with 16 patient participants to explore impressions of the intervention. RESULTS: Patients with Medicaid insurance, mental health disorders, cardiac disease, and substance use disorder had increased odds of having ≥ 2 admissions. COPD severity, comorbidities, and unmet SDOH needs made COPD self-management challenging. Seventy-four percent of frequently admitted patients with COPD completing SDOH screening had unmet SDOH needs. Patients perceived that the NP/CHW intervention addressed these barriers by connecting them to resources and providing emotional support. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients with COPD admitted at our safety-net hospital experience unmet SDOH needs that impede COPD self-management. A longitudinal NP/CHW intervention to address unmet SDOH needs following discharge appears feasible and acceptable.

Initiating Pharmacologic Treatment in Tobacco-Dependent Adults. An Official American Thoracic Society Clinical Practice Guideline.

Background: Current tobacco treatment guidelines have established the efficacy of available interventions, but they do not provide detailed guidance for common implementation questions frequently faced in the clinic. An evidence-based guideline was created that addresses several pharmacotherapy-initiation questions that routinely confront treatment teams.Methods: Individuals with diverse expertise related to smoking cessation were empaneled to prioritize questions and outcomes important to clinicians. An evidence-synthesis team conducted systematic reviews, which informed recommendations to answer the questions. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach was used to rate the certainty in the estimated effects and the strength of recommendations.Results: The guideline panel formulated five strong recommendations and two conditional recommendations regarding pharmacotherapy choices. Strong recommendations include using varenicline rather than a nicotine patch, using varenicline rather than bupropion, using varenicline rather than a nicotine patch in adults with a comorbid psychiatric condition, initiating varenicline in adults even if they are unready to quit, and using controller therapy for an extended treatment duration greater than 12 weeks. Conditional recommendations include combining a nicotine patch with varenicline rather than using varenicline alone and using varenicline rather than electronic cigarettes.Conclusions: Seven recommendations are provided, which represent simple practice changes that are likely to increase the effectiveness of tobacco-dependence pharmacotherapy.

Patient-Physician Discussions on Lung Cancer Screening: A Missed Teachable Moment to Promote Smoking Cessation.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about whether patients and physicians perceive lung cancer screening (LCS) as a teachable moment to promote smoking cessation or the degree to which physicians in "real world" settings link LCS discussions with smoking cessation counseling. We sought to characterize patient and physician perspectives of discussions about smoking cessation during LCS. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study (interviews and focus groups) with 21 physicians and 28 smokers screened in four diverse hospitals. Transcripts were analyzed for characteristics of communication about smoking cessation and LCS, the perceived effect on motivation to quit smoking, the degree to which physicians leverage LCS as a teachable moment to promote smoking cessation, and suggestions to improve patient-physician communication about smoking cessation in the context of LCS. RESULTS: Patients reported that LCS made them more cognizant of the health consequences of smoking, priming them for a teachable moment. While physicians and patients both acknowledged that smoking cessation counseling was frequent, they described little connection between their discussions regarding LCS and smoking cessation counseling. Physicians identified several barriers to integrating discussions on smoking cessation and LCS. They volunteered communication strategies by which LCS could be leveraged to promote smoking cessation. CONCLUSIONS: LCS highlights the harms of smoking to patients who are chronic, heavy smokers and thus may serve as a teachable moment for promoting smoking cessation. However, this opportunity is typically missed in clinical practice. IMPLICATIONS: LCS highlights the harms of smoking to heavily addicted smokers. Yet both physicians and patients reported little connection between LCS and tobacco treatment discussions due to multiple barriers. On-site tobacco treatment programs and post-screening messaging tailored to the LCS results are needed to maximize the health outcomes of LCS, including smoking quit rates and longer-term smoking-related morbidity and mortality.

Combining smoking cessation interventions with LDCT lung cancer screening: A systematic review.

Providing smoking cessation treatment with annual low dose CT (LDCT) screening offers an opportunity to reduce smoking-related morbidity and mortality. However, the optimal approach for delivering cessation interventions in the LDCT screening context is unknown. We searched for randomized controlled trials and observational studies with a control group testing a smoking cessation intervention among adults undergoing LDCT screening through May 1, 2018 using MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Two reviewers independently reviewed each study to assess eligibility and extracted information using pre-specified protocols for included studies. Given significant differences in the interventions in each study, meta-analyses for the included studies could not be performed. Of 2513 identified studies, 9 met inclusion criteria. Five of the included studies were randomized controlled trials while 4 were observational studies with a control group. Studies were of varying quality, but overall were of poor to fair quality with significant potential for bias and limited generalizability. Based on the available studies, there was insufficient data to suggest a particular approach to smoking cessation counseling in the LDCT screening setting. While no studies compared combined pharmacotherapy and counseling to counseling alone or compared the various pharmacologic agents, we identified several studies underway investigating new approaches during LDCT screening. The optimal strategy for smoking cessation in patients undergoing LDCT screening remains unclear. Future studies should focus on evaluating effectiveness and implementation of combined counseling and pharmacotherapy to optimize smoking cessation during LDCT screening.

Recommendations for the Appropriate Structure, Communication, and Investigation of Tobacco Harm Reduction Claims. An Official American Thoracic Society Policy Statement.

RATIONALE: The tobacco harm reduction literature is replete with vague language, far-reaching claims, and unwarranted certainty. The American Thoracic Society has increasingly recognized the need for a framework for reliably making such claims. Evidence-based standards improving the scientific value and transparency of harm reduction claims are expected to improve their trustworthiness, clarity, and consistency. METHODS: Experts from relevant American Thoracic Society committees identified key topic areas for discussion. Literature search strategy included English language articles across Medline, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Collaborative databases, with expanded search terms including tobacco, addiction, smoking, cigarettes, nicotine, and harm reduction. Workgroup members synthesized their evidentiary summaries into a list of candidate topics suitable for inclusion in the final report. Breakout groups developed detailed content maps of each topic area, including points to be considered for suggested recommendations. Successive draft recommendations were modified using an iterative consensus process until unanimous approval was achieved. Patient representatives ensured the document's relevance to the lay public. RESULTS: Fifteen recommendations were identified, organized into four framework elements dealing with: estimating harm reduction among individuals, making claims on the basis of population impact, appropriately careful use of language, and ethical considerations in harm reduction. DISCUSSION: This statement clarifies important principles guiding valid direct and inferential harm reduction claims. Ideals for effective communication with the lay public and attention to unique ethical concerns are also delineated. The authors call for formal systems of grading harm reduction evidence and regulatory assurances of longitudinal surveillance systems to document the impact of harm reduction policies.

Patient and Clinician Perspectives on Shared Decision-making in Early Adopting Lung Cancer Screening Programs: a Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend, and Medicare requires, shared decision-making between patients and clinicians before referring individuals at high risk of lung cancer for chest CT screening. However, little is known about the extent to which shared decision-making about lung cancer screening is achieved in real-world settings. OBJECTIVE: To characterize patient and clinician impressions of early experiences with communication and decision-making about lung cancer screening and perceived barriers to achieving shared decision-making. DESIGN: Qualitative study entailing semi-structured interviews and focus groups. PARTICIPANTS: We enrolled 36 clinicians who refer patients for lung cancer screening and 49 patients who had undergone lung cancer screening in the prior year. Participants were recruited from lung cancer screening programs at four hospitals (three Veterans Health Administration, one urban safety net). APPROACH: Using content analysis, we analyzed transcripts to characterize communication and decision-making about lung cancer screening. Our analysis focused on the recommended components of shared decision-making (information sharing, deliberation, and decision aid use) and barriers to achieving shared decision-making. KEY RESULTS: Clinicians varied in the information shared with patients, and did not consistently incorporate decision aids. Clinicians believed they explained the rationale and gave some (often purposely limited) information about the trade-offs of lung cancer screening. By contrast, some patients reported receiving little information about screening or its trade-offs and did not realize the CT was intended as a screening test for lung cancer. Clinicians and patients alike did not perceive that significant deliberation typically occurred. Clinicians perceived insufficient time, competing priorities, difficulty accessing decision aids, limited patient comprehension, and anticipated patient emotions as barriers to realizing shared decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Due to multiple perceived barriers, patient-clinician conversations about lung cancer screening may fall short of guideline-recommended shared decision-making supported by a decision aid. Consequently, patients may be left uncertain about lung cancer screening's rationale, trade-offs, and process.

Treatment of tobacco dependence: current state of the art.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' requirement to integrate tobacco treatment with lung cancer screening (LCS) has served as a catalyst for motivating pulmonary medicine clinicians to improve upon their ability to effectively treat tobacco dependence. To do so, clinicians need to be well versed in the behavioral and pharmacologic tools that promote smoking cessation. RECENT FINDINGS: The current review outlines current strategies for treating tobacco dependence, focusing on the important interplay between counseling and pharmacotherapy. Studies that have been found to be particularly effective in patients with smoking-related lung disease and in the LCS setting are reviewed. New therapies that are in the pipeline, as well as novel strategies aimed at improving both adoption and effectiveness of existing therapies, are discussed. SUMMARY: Treating tobacco dependence improves mortality and quality of life far more than the limited therapies available to treat smoking-related lung disease. Novel strategies to making tobacco treatment services more widely available, particularly to vulnerable patient populations, are needed to further decrease smoking-related morbidity and mortality. The Affordable Care Act's greater focus on prevention represents a moment of opportunity for healthcare providers and systems to engage in these efforts.

Stakeholder Research Priorities for Smoking Cessation Interventions within Lung Cancer Screening Programs. An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.

RATIONALE: Smoking cessation counseling in conjunction with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening is recommended in multiple clinical practice guidelines. The best approach for integrating effective smoking cessation interventions within this setting is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To summarize evidence, identify research gaps, prioritize topics for future research, and propose standardized tools for use in conducting research on smoking cessation interventions within the LDCT lung cancer screening setting. METHODS: The American Thoracic Society convened a multistakeholder committee with expertise in tobacco dependence treatment and/or LDCT screening. During an in-person meeting, evidence was reviewed, research gaps were identified, and key questions were generated for each of three research domains: (1) target population to study; (2) adaptation, development, and testing of interventions; and (3) implementation of interventions with demonstrated efficacy. We also identified standardized measures for use in conducting this research. A larger stakeholder panel then ranked research questions by perceived importance in an online survey. Final prioritization was generated hierarchically on the basis of average rank assigned. RESULTS: There was little consensus on which questions within the population domain were of highest priority. Within the intervention domain, research to evaluate the effectiveness in the lung cancer screening setting of evidence-based smoking cessation interventions shown to be effective in other contexts was ranked highest. In the implementation domain, stakeholders prioritized understanding strategies to identify and overcome barriers to integrating smoking cessation in lung cancer screening settings. CONCLUSIONS: This statement offers an agenda to stimulate research surrounding the integration and implementation of smoking cessation interventions with LDCT lung cancer screening.

Efficacy of Digital Outreach Strategies for Collecting Smoking Data: Pragmatic Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco smoking is an important risk factor for disease, but inaccurate smoking history data in the electronic medical record (EMR) limits the reach of lung cancer screening (LCS) and tobacco cessation interventions. Patient-generated health data is a novel approach to documenting smoking history; however, the comparative effectiveness of different approaches is unclear. OBJECTIVE: We designed a quality improvement intervention to evaluate the effectiveness of portal questionnaires compared to SMS text message-based surveys, to compare message frames, and to evaluate the completeness of patient-generated smoking histories. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients aged between 50 and 80 years with a history of tobacco use who identified English as a preferred language and have never undergone LCS to receive an EMR portal questionnaire or a text survey. The portal questionnaire used a "helpfulness" message, while the text survey tested frame types informed by behavior economics ("gain," "loss," and "helpfulness") and nudge messaging. The primary outcome was the response rate for each modality and framing type. Completeness and consistency with documented structured smoking data were also evaluated. RESULTS: Participants were more likely to respond to the text survey (191/1000, 19.1%) compared to the portal questionnaire (35/504, 6.9%). Across all text survey rounds, patients were less responsive to the "helpfulness" frame compared with the "gain" frame (odds ratio [OR] 0.29, 95% CI 0.09-0.91; P<.05) and "loss" frame (OR 0.32, 95% CI 11.8-99.4; P<.05). Compared to the structured data in the EMR, the patient-generated data were significantly more likely to be complete enough to determine LCS eligibility both compared to the portal questionnaire (OR 34.2, 95% CI 3.8-11.1; P<.05) and to the text survey (OR 6.8, 95% CI 3.8-11.1; P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: We found that an approach using patient-generated data is a feasible way to engage patients and collect complete smoking histories. Patients are likely to respond to a text survey using "gain" or "loss" framing to report detailed smoking histories. Optimizing an SMS text message approach to collect medical information has implications for preventative and follow-up clinical care beyond smoking histories, LCS, and smoking cessation therapy.

A Longitudinal Study of Perceptions of the Massachusetts Menthol Ban and Its Impact on Smoking Behaviors among Marginalized Individuals.

Menthol cigarettes have had a profound adverse effect on public health. On 1 June 2020, Massachusetts became the first state to ban the sale of menthol cigarettes. We explored how perceptions of the ban and smoking behaviors changed over time among a group of 27 individuals who smoked menthol cigarettes at our safety-net hospital. In a convergent mixed methods study, we administered questionnaires and interviews simultaneously at two timepoints: 1 month pre-ban and 6 months post-ban. Pre-ban, we assessed perceptions of the ban and anticipated smoking behaviors after the ban. Post-ban, we assessed participants' actual smoking behaviors and elicited suggestions to avoid unintended consequences that might undermine intended policy effects. Several respondents perceived the Massachusetts ban as positive because it could promote smoking cessation, prevent youth initiation, and mitigate unfair targeting of socioeconomically disadvantaged populations. Others perceived the ban as an overreach of government policy, financially motivated, and unfairly targeting the Black community. Many continued to smoke menthol cigarettes obtained outside Massachusetts. Individuals suggested promoting tobacco treatment for people affected by the ban and a national ban to circumvent out-of-state purchasing of menthol cigarettes. Our findings suggest that in order to be most effective, healthcare systems must promote tobacco treatment and ensure that treatment is accessible to all individuals affected by the ban.