Patient survey examining the experience of care of a hospital-based opt-out tobacco dependency treatment service (the CURE Project).

INTRODUCTION: Treating tobacco dependency in patients admitted to hospital is a key priority in the National Health Service long-term plan. This service evaluation assessed the perception, needs and experience of care within an opt-out hospital-based tobacco dependency treatment service (the Conversation, Understand, Replace, Experts and Evidence Base (CURE) team) in North-West England. METHODS: A survey was offered to all eligible patients between 1 July 2020 and 30 September 2020. Eligibility criteria were adult patients identified as an active smoker being approached by the CURE team as part of the standard opt-out service model, on a non-covid ward without a high suspicion of COVID-19 infection and able to read and write in English. RESULTS: 106 completed surveys were evaluated. Participants demonstrated high levels of tobacco dependency with an average of 37 years smoking history and 66% describing the onset of cravings within 30 min of hospital admission. The average number quit attempts in the previous 12 months was 1.3 but only 9% had used the most effective National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommended treatments. 100% felt the opt-out service model was appropriate and 96% stated the treatment and support they had received had prompted them to consider a further quit attempt. 82% of participants rated their experience of care as 9/10 or 10/10. Participants wanted a broad range of support post discharge with the most popular option being with their general practitioner. 66% and 65% of participants would have been interested in a vaping kit as stop smoking intervention and support vaping-friendly hospital grounds respectively. CONCLUSION: These results suggest this hospital-based, opt-out tobacco dependency treatment service delivers high-quality experience of care and meets the needs of the patients it serves. It also highlights the opportunity to enhance outcomes by providing access to NICE recommended most-effective interventions (varenicline, vaping and combination nicotine replacement therapy) and providing flexible, individualised discharge pathways.

Distinguishing viruses responsible for influenza-like illness.

The many respiratory viruses that cause influenza-like illness (ILI) are reported and tracked as one entity, defined by the CDC as a group of symptoms that include a fever of 100 degrees Fahrenheit, a cough, and/or a sore throat. In the United States alone, ILI impacts 9-49 million people every year. While tracking ILI as a single clinical syndrome is informative in many respects, the underlying viruses differ in parameters and outbreak properties. Most existing models treat either a single respiratory virus or ILI as a whole. However, there is a need for models capable of comparing several individual viruses that cause respiratory illness, including ILI. To address this need, here we present a flexible model and simulations of epidemics for influenza, RSV, rhinovirus, seasonal coronavirus, adenovirus, and SARS/MERS, parameterized by a systematic literature review and accompanied by a global sensitivity analysis. We find that for these biological causes of ILI, their parameter values, timing, prevalence, and proportional contributions differ substantially. These results demonstrate that distinguishing the viruses that cause ILI will be an important aspect of future work on diagnostics, mitigation, modeling, and preparation for future pandemics.

Protocol for a randomised controlled trial investigating an intervention to boost decentering in response to distressing mental experiences during adolescence: the decentering in adolescence study (DECADES).

INTRODUCTION: Decentering describes the ability to voluntarily adopt an objective self-perspective from which to notice internal, typically distressing, stressors (eg, difficult thoughts, memories and feelings). The reinforcement of this skill may be an active ingredient through which different psychological interventions accrue reductions in anxiety and/or depression. However, it is unclear if decentering can be selectively trained at a young age and if this might reduce psychological distress. The aim of the current trial is to address this research gap. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Adolescents, recruited from schools in the UK and Ireland (n=57 per group, age range=16-19 years), will be randomised to complete 5 weeks of decentering training, or an active control group that will take part in a combination of light physical exercise and cognitive training. The coprimary training outcomes include a self-reported decentering inventory (ie, the Experiences Questionnaire) and the momentary use of decentering in response to psychological stressors, using experience sampling. The secondary mental health outcomes will include self-reported inventories of depression and anxiety symptoms, as well as psychological well-being. Initial statistical analysis will use between-group analysis of covariance to estimate the effect of training condition on self-rated inventories, adjusted for baseline scores. Additionally, experience sampling data will be examined using hierarchical linear models. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the Cambridge Psychology Research Ethics Committee, University of Cambridge (PRE.2019.109). Findings will be disseminated through typical academic routes including poster/paper presentations at (inter)national conferences, academic institutes and through publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN14329613.

Understanding the enablers and barriers to implementing smoke-free NHS sites across acute care trusts in Greater Manchester: results of a hospital staff survey.

INTRODUCTION: The current study aims to identify enablers and barriers to implementing smoke-free NHS hospital grounds through a hospital staff survey. METHODS: Staff members from eight acute care NHS trusts in Greater Manchester were invited to complete a 15-minute web-based questionnaire. RESULTS: Five-hundred and eighty-eight participants completed the questionnaire. Nineteen per cent (114/588) of respondents were current smokers and 10% (61/588) were currently vaping. Sixty per cent (68/114) smoked at work and 66% (40/61) vaped at work. Sixty-seven per cent (314/468) supported dedicated on-site tobacco addiction treatment services for hospital staff with specific support for drop-in clinics and free pharmacotherapy for staff. Sixty-one per cent (290/477) and 67% (318/477) strongly agreed / agreed that patients/visitors and staff, respectively, should not smoke on hospital grounds. Seventeen per cent (83/484) had received training in very brief advice. Thirty-five per cent (190/547) felt vaping was less harmful than smoking, 19% (92/472) felt exhaled vapour was likely to be safe to bystanders, 36% (172/475) would support vaping-friendly hospital grounds and 31% (37/120) felt confident in discussing vaping. DISCUSSION: Enablers to a smoke-free NHS site include dedicated tobacco addiction services for staff and empowering staff through appropriate training to support smokers on the hospital grounds. Barriers include the lack of awareness and support for the harm reduction benefits of vaping.

Health economic analysis for the 'CURE Project' pilot: a hospital-based tobacco dependency treatment service in Greater Manchester.

INTRODUCTION: Treating tobacco dependency in patients admitted to acute care National Health Service (NHS) trusts is a key priority in the NHS 10-year plan. This paper sets out the results of a health economic analysis for 'The CURE Project' pilot; a new hospital-based tobacco dependency service. METHODS: A health economic analysis to understand the costs of the intervention (both for the inpatient service and postdischarge costs), the return on investment (ROI) and the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) of the CURE Project pilot in Greater Manchester. ROI and cost per QALY were calculated using the European Study on Quantifying Utility of Investment in Protection from Tobacco and Greater Manchester Cost Benefit Analysis Tools. RESULTS: The total intervention costs for the inpatient service in the 6-month CURE pilot were £96 224 with a cost per patient who smokes of £40.21. The estimated average cost per patient who was discharged on pharmacotherapy was £97.40. The cost per quit (22% quit rate for smokers at 12 weeks post discharge) was £475. The gross financial ROI ratio was £2.12 return per £1 invested with a payback period of 4 years. The cashable financial ROI ratio was £1.06 return per £1 invested with a payback period of 10 years. The public value ROI ratio was £30.49 per £1 invested. The cost per QALY for this programme was £487. DISCUSSION: The CURE Project pilot has been shown to be exceptionally cost-effective with highly significant ROI in this health economic analysis. This supports the NHS priority to embed high-quality tobacco addiction treatment services in acute NHS trusts, and the CURE Project provides a blueprint and framework to achieve this.