"I Thought Cancer was a Tobacco Issue": Perspectives of Veterans with and without HIV on Cancer and Other Health Risks Associated with Alcohol and Tobacco/Nicotine Use.

U.S. Veterans and people living with HIV (PWH) experience higher rates of unhealthy alcohol and tobacco/nicotine use than non-Veterans and people without HIV (PWoH). Both groups are susceptible to adverse health outcomes associated with alcohol and tobacco/nicotine use. We explored awareness of alcohol- and tobacco/nicotine-related cancer and immune health risks among Veterans Health Administration (VA) patients with and without HIV. Among a sample of 41 (46% PWH; 73% male; 39% Black) purposively-selected VA patients receiving care 2020-2021 we conducted semi-structured interviews via telephone; interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using a Rapid Assessment Process. Purposive selection was based on HIV status, alcohol and/or tobacco/nicotine use, and demographics. Among participants, 66% reported current smoking, and most screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use. Participants had high awareness of cancer and other health risks related to smoking but low awareness of synergistic risks and cancer risks associated with alcohol use despite awareness of a range of other alcohol-related risks. Awareness of alcohol and/or tobacco/nicotine's impacts on the immune system was variable. Findings did not distinctly differ between PWH and PWoH. Low awareness of alcohol-related cancer risk, risks of co-occurring use, and varying awareness of the impacts of alcohol and tobacco/nicotine on the immune system suggest a need for improved messaging regarding substance use-related cancer and immune risk. This may be especially important among PWH, for whom the prevalence and adverse effects of alcohol and tobacco use, and immune dysfunction are higher.

Behavioral Activation mHealth Application for Smoking Cessation: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial.

BACKGROUND: Behavioral activation (BA) is an effective intervention for both depression and substance use disorders. Combining BA with a standard smoking cessation intervention may improve quit rates by addressing depressive symptoms, a key barrier to quitting. This study preliminarily evaluated the acceptability and efficacy of the BA-based Actify! mobile health application (mHealth app) for smoking cessation. METHODS: We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial (n=242) comparing Actify! with the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) app for smoking cessation (QuitGuide) on acceptability (user satisfaction, app openings), smoking abstinence, and mechanisms of change (behavioral activation and depressive symptoms) at 8 weeks and 6 months post-randomization. Participants were US adults recruited online who smoked daily. RESULTS: Treatment satisfaction was uniformly higher in the Actify! arm. Number of app openings was similar across arms (M=34.3 openings over 8 weeks in both arms). Self-reported 30-day point prevalence abstinence (PPA) at 8 weeks was 12.6% for Actify! vs. 7.3% for QuitGuide. Differences in 30-day PPA continued through 6 months (18.5% for Actify! vs. 12.2% for QuitGuide). Changes between baseline and 8 weeks in depressive symptoms and behavioral activation favored Actify!. Planned subgroup analyses suggested greater benefit of Actify! among participants with pre-treatment mild to moderate depression symptom severity compared to those with no depression symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Actify! showed considerable promise as a novel mHealth treatment, as evidenced by high usage and higher user satisfaction and quit rates than QuitGuide at both short- and long-term follow-up. The next step is to evaluate Actify! in a fully-powered efficacy trial. IMPLICATIONS: Study findings demonstrate the promise of a behavioral activation (BA)-based mobile health app (Actify!) for smoking cessation as a population-level intervention that can effectively address depressive symptoms as a risk factor for worse smoking treatment outcomes. The Actify! app is the first standalone BA-based app to demonstrate potential for improved acceptability and efficacy relative to a standard care comparison app, with user satisfaction and smoking quit rates descriptively exceeding those of the National Cancer Institute's QuitGuide app.

Acceptability and Adherence to Home, Kiosk, and Clinic Blood Pressure Measurement Compared to 24-H Ambulatory Monitoring.

BACKGROUND: The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends measuring blood pressure (BP) outside of clinic/office settings. While various options are available, including home devices, BP kiosks, and 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), understanding patient acceptability and adherence is a critical factor for implementation. OBJECTIVE: To compare the acceptability and adherence of clinic, home, kiosk, and ABPM measurement. DESIGN: Comparative diagnostic accuracy study which randomized adults to one of three BP measurement arms: clinic, home, and kiosk. ABPM was conducted on all participants. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (18-85 years) receiving care at 12 Kaiser Permanente Washington primary care clinics (Washington State, USA) with a high BP (≥ 138 mmHg systolic or ≥ 88 mmHg diastolic) in the electronic health record with no hypertension diagnosis and on no hypertensive medications and with high BP at a research screening visit. MEASURES: Patient acceptability was measured using a validated survey which was used to calculate an overall acceptability score (range 1-7) at baseline, after completing their assigned BP measurement intervention, and after completing ABPM. Adherence was defined based on the pre-specified number of BP measurements completed. KEY RESULTS: Five hundred ten participants were randomized (mean age 59 years), with mean BP of 150/88. Overall acceptability score was highest (i.e. most acceptable) for Home BP (mean 6.2, SD 0.7) and lowest (least acceptable) for ABPM (mean 5.0, SD 1.0); scores were intermediate for Clinic (5.5, SD 1.1) and Kiosk (5.4, SD 1.0). Adherence was higher for Home (154/170, 90.6%) and Clinic (150/172, 87.2%) than for Kiosk (114/168, 67.9%)). The majority of participants (467/510, 91.6%) were adherent to ABPM. CONCLUSIONS: Participants found home BP measurement most acceptable followed by clinic, BP kiosks, and ABPM. Our findings, coupled with recent evidence regarding the accuracy of home BP measurement, further support the routine use of home-based BP measurement in primary care practice in the US. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03130257 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03130257.

Clinic, Home, and Kiosk Blood Pressure Measurements for Diagnosing Hypertension: a Randomized Diagnostic Study.

BACKGROUND: The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends blood pressure (BP) measurements using 24-h ambulatory monitoring (ABPM) or home BP monitoring before making a new hypertension diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: Compare clinic-, home-, and kiosk-based BP measurement to ABPM for diagnosing hypertension. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Diagnostic study in 12 Washington State primary care centers, with participants aged 18-85 years without diagnosed hypertension or prescribed antihypertensive medications, with elevated BP in clinic. INTERVENTIONS: Randomization into one of three diagnostic regimens: (1) clinic (usual care follow-up BPs); (2) home (duplicate BPs twice daily for 5 days); or (3) kiosk (triplicate BPs on 3 days). All participants completed ABPM at 3 weeks. MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcome was difference between ABPM daytime and clinic, home, and kiosk mean systolic BP. Differences in diastolic BP, sensitivity, and specificity were secondary outcomes. KEY RESULTS: Five hundred ten participants (mean age 58.7 years, 80.2% white) with 434 (85.1%) included in primary analyses. Compared to daytime ABPM, adjusted mean differences in systolic BP were clinic (-4.7mmHg [95% confidence interval -7.3, -2.2]; P<.001); home (-0.1mmHg [-1.6, 1.5];P=.92); and kiosk (9.5mmHg [7.5, 11.6];P<.001). Differences for diastolic BP were clinic (-7.2mmHg [-8.8, -5.5]; P<.001); home (-0.4mmHg [-1.4, 0.7];P=.52); and kiosk (5.0mmHg [3.8, 6.2]; P<.001). Sensitivities for clinic, home, and kiosk compared to ABPM were 31.1% (95% confidence interval, 22.9, 40.6), 82.2% (73.8, 88.4), and 96.0% (90.0, 98.5), and specificities 79.5% (64.0, 89.4), 53.3% (38.9, 67.2), and 28.2% (16.4, 44.1), respectively. LIMITATIONS: Single health care organization and limited race/ethnicity representation. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to ABPM, mean BP was significantly lower for clinic, significantly higher for kiosk, and without significant differences for home. Clinic BP measurements had low sensitivity for detecting hypertension. Findings support utility of home BP monitoring for making a new diagnosis of hypertension. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03130257 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03130257.

The United States National Cancer Institute's Coordinated Research Effort on Tobacco Use as a Major Cause of Morbidity and Mortality among People with HIV.

The use of antiretroviral therapy for people with HIV (PWH) has improved life expectancy. However, PWH now lose more life-years to tobacco use than to HIV infection. Unfortunately, PWH smoke at higher rates and have more difficulty maintaining abstinence than the general population, compounding their risk for chronic disease. In this Commentary, we describe a United States National Cancer Institute-led initiative to address the relative lack of research focused on developing, testing, and implementing smoking cessation interventions for PWH. This initiative supports seven clinical trials designed to systematically test and/or develop and test adaptations of evidence-based smoking cessation interventions for PWH (eg, combination of behavioral and pharmacological). We summarize each project, including setting/recruitment sites, inclusion/exclusion criteria, interventions being tested, and outcomes. This initiative provides critical opportunities for collaboration and data harmonization across projects. The knowledge gained will inform strategies to assist PWH to promote and maintain abstinence, and ensure that these efforts are adaptable and scalable, thereby addressing one of the major threats to the health of PWH. Reducing smoking behavior may be particularly important during the COVID-19 pandemic given that smokers who become infected with SARS-CoV-2 may be at risk for more severe disease. IMPLICATIONS: This Commentary describes a National Cancer Institute-led initiative to advance the science and practice of treating tobacco use among PWH, which is now responsible for more life years lost than HIV. We describe the scope of the problem, the objectives of the initiative, and a summary of the seven funded studies. Harmonization of data across projects will provide information related to treatment mediators and moderators that was not previously possible. Stakeholders interested in tobacco cessation, including researchers, clinicians and public health officials, should be aware of this initiative and the evidence-base it will generate to advance tobacco treatment among this high-risk population.

Tobacco quitline engagement and outcomes among primary care patients reporting use of tobacco or dual tobacco and cannabis: An observational study.

Background: Dual use of tobacco and cannabis is increasingly common, but it is unclear how it impacts individuals' interest in or ability to stop smoking. If dual users fail to engage in treatment or have worse treatment outcomes, it would suggest that tobacco treatment programs may need to be tailored to the specific needs of those using cannabis and tobacco. Methods: We conducted an observational study using electronic treatment records from adults (18 years and older) who (a) were enrolled in a regional healthcare system in Washington state, (b) sought tobacco cessation treatment through an insurance-covered quitline from July 2016 to December 2018 and (c) had cannabis use frequency during the period of their quitline enrollment documented in their electronic health record (EHR) (n = 1,390). Treatment engagement was defined by the total number of quitline counseling calls and web-logins completed. Point prevalent self-reported tobacco abstinence was assessed 6 months post-quitline enrollment. Results: Thirty-two percent of participants (n = 441) reported dual use of tobacco and any cannabis during the observation period; 9.4% (n = 130) reported daily cannabis use. Among dual users reporting daily cannabis use, 13.9% had a diagnosed cannabis user disorder in the EHR. Neither engagement with quitline counseling nor long-term tobacco abstinence rates differed between those using tobacco-only and either dual-use group (i.e., persons using any cannabis or daily cannabis). Conclusions: Dual use of tobacco and cannabis is common among smokers seen in primary care and those enrolling in quitline care, but it may not undermine tobacco quitline engagement or smoking cessation. Opportunities exist in the US to leverage quitlines to identify and intervene with dual users of tobacco and cannabis.HIGHLIGHTSTobacco quitline care was equally engaging and effective among tobacco users and dual users of tobacco and cannabisMany daily cannabis users calling tobacco quitlines likely have a cannabis use disorderTobacco quitlines can be leveraged to identify and intervene with dual users of tobacco and cannabis.

Comparative Effectiveness of Group-Delivered Acceptance and Commitment Therapy versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Smoking Cessation: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Preliminary trial data suggest group-delivered acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) might be effective for smoking cessation. If so, this could offer a viable alternative to mainstream behavioral therapies, such as those grounded in cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). The goal of the current study was to compare the effectiveness of group-delivered ACT versus group-delivered CBT in a rigorous randomized trial design with long-term follow-up. METHODS: Participants (n = 450) were recruited from the Kaiser Permanente Washington health care system and randomized to either ACT-based group counseling or an attention-matched CBT-based group program. All were prescribed an 8-week course of nicotine patches. The primary outcome was self-reported 30-day point prevalence abstinence at 12 months post-randomization assessed with missing values imputed as smoking. Sensitivity analyses using multiple imputation and complete cases were examined, as were biochemically confirmed and 6-month outcomes. RESULTS: Thirty-day point prevalence abstinence rates at the 12-month follow-up did not differ between study arms in the primary analysis (13.8% ACT vs. 18.1% CBT, adjusted odds ratio = 0.68 [95% CI = 0.35 to 1.27], p = .23) or the sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Group-based ACT and CBT had similar long-term quit rates in this methodologically rigorous randomized trial. Group-based ACT is a reasonable alternative to group-based CBT for smoking cessation. IMPLICATIONS: This study compared the effectiveness of group-based ACT with group-based CBT for smoking cessation using a rigorous, large-scale, attention-matched, randomized trial with 1-year follow-up. One-year cessation rates did not differ between group-based ACT and CBT, suggesting ACT-based intervention is a reasonable alternative to CBT-based counseling for smoking cessation. The results add to the nascent but growing literature assessing ACT and other mindfulness-based treatments for smoking cessation.

Which Method of Assessing Depression and Anxiety Best Predicts Smoking Cessation: Screening Instruments or Self-Reported Conditions?

INTRODUCTION: Affective disorders and symptoms (ADS) are predictive of lower odds of quitting smoking. However, it is unknown which approach to assessing ADS best predicts cessation. This study compared a battery of ADS screening instruments with a single, self-report question on predicting cessation. Among those who self-reported ADS, we also examined if an additional question regarding whether participants believed the condition(s) might interfere with their ability to quit added predictive utility to the single-item question. METHODS: Participants (N = 2637) enrolled in a randomized controlled trial of web-based smoking treatments completed a battery of five ADS screening instruments and answered a single-item question about having ADS. Those with a positive self-report on the single-item question were also asked about their interference beliefs. The primary outcome was complete-case, self-reported 30-day point prevalence abstinence at 12 months. RESULTS: Both assessment approaches significantly predicted cessation. Screening positive for ≥ one ADS in the battery was associated with 23% lower odds of quitting than not screening positive for any (p = .023); those with a positive self-report on the single-item had 39% lower odds of quitting than self-reporting no mental health conditions (p < .001). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values for the two assessment approaches were similar (p = .136). Adding the interference belief question to the single-item assessment significantly increased the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve value (p = .042). CONCLUSIONS: The single-item question assessing ADS had as much predictive validity, and possibly more, than the battery of screening instruments for identifying participants at risk for failing to quit smoking. Adding a question about interference beliefs significantly increased the predictive utility of the single-item question. IMPLICATIONS: This is the first study to demonstrate that a single-item question assessing ADS has at least as much predictive validity, and possibly more, than a battery of validated screening instruments for identifying smokers at highest risk for cessation failure. This study also demonstrates adding a question about interference beliefs significantly adds to the predictive utility of a single, self-report question about mental health conditions. Findings from this study can be used to inform decisions regarding how to assess ADS in the context of tobacco treatment settings.

Long-Term Smoking Cessation Outcomes for Sexual Minority Versus Nonminority Smokers in a Large Randomized Controlled Trial of Two Web-Based Interventions.

INTRODUCTION: Despite greater smoking prevalence among sexual minority (SM) individuals relative to non-SM individuals, minimal research has examined whether SM smokers have differential success at quitting, and no prior treatment studies have examined differences within SM subgroups. There is also limited knowledge of the psychosocial characteristics of treatment-seeking SM smokers, which could inform targeted treatments. To address these gaps, we compared treatment outcomes and baseline characteristics for SM and non-SM smokers and for bisexual versus lesbian or gay smokers in a large randomized controlled trial of two web-based cessation treatments. METHODS: Trial participants completed a survey to assess baseline characteristics, including self-identification as either SM (n = 253; lesbian or gay, n = 122; bisexual, n = 131) or non-SM (n = 2384). The primary cessation outcome was complete-case, self-reported 30-day abstinence at 12 months after randomization. RESULTS: Cessation outcomes did not differ significantly for SM versus non-SM smokers (24% vs. 25%, adjusted OR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.65 to 1.28) or across SM subgroups (24% for bisexual vs. 23% for lesbian or gay, adjusted OR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.51 to 2.00), and there were no interactions with treatment group assignment. At baseline, SM smokers differed from non-SM smokers on most demographics, were more likely to screen positive for all mental health conditions assessed, and had greater exposure to other smokers in the home. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial differences in baseline characteristics of SM versus non-SM smokers and bisexual versus lesbian or gay smokers did not translate into differential treatment outcomes. Nonetheless, SM smokers' willingness or ability to quit smoking could be enhanced by taking their unique psychosocial profile into account when designing targeted interventions. IMPLICATIONS: The findings of this study, which included the largest sample of SM smokers in a prospective intervention trial to date, support those of a small extant body of literature showing no differences in treatment-assisted cessation outcomes between SM and non-SM smokers. Regardless of their quit rates relative to non-SM smokers, SM smokers' willingness or ability to quit smoking could potentially be enhanced by taking their unique psychosocial profile into account in intervention design, including their younger age, lower socioeconomic status, greater likelihood of being racial or ethnic minorities, and greater prevalence of mental health symptoms.

Reducing Sitting Time in Obese Older Adults: The I-STAND Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The authors tested the efficacy of the "I-STAND" intervention for reducing sitting time, a novel and potentially health-promoting approach, in older adults with obesity. METHODS: The authors recruited 60 people (mean age = 68 ± 4.9 years, 68% female, 86% White; mean body mass index = 35.4). The participants were randomized to receive the I-STAND sitting reduction intervention (n = 29) or healthy living control group (n = 31) for 12 weeks. At baseline and at 12 weeks, the participants wore activPAL devices to assess sitting time (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes included fasting glucose, blood pressure, and weight. Linear regression models assessed between-group differences in the outcomes. RESULTS: The I-STAND participants significantly reduced their sitting time compared with the controls (-58 min per day; 95% confidence interval [-100.3, -15.6]; p = .007). There were no statistically significant changes in the secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: I-STAND was efficacious in reducing sitting time, but not in changing health outcomes in older adults with obesity.

Comparing Treatment Acceptability and 12-Month Cessation Rates in Response to Web-Based Smoking Interventions Among Smokers Who Do and Do Not Screen Positive for Affective Disorders: Secondary Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Web-based cessation programs are now common for intervening with smokers. However, it remains unclear how acceptable or effective these interventions are among people with affective disorders and symptoms (ADS; eg, depression and anxiety). Research examining this is extremely limited, with mixed results on cessation rates. Additional large studies are needed to more fully understand whether Web-based interventions are similarly used and equally effective among people with and without affective disorder symptomology. If not, more targeted Web-based interventions may be required. OBJECTIVE: The goal of the research was to compare Web-based treatment acceptability (defined by satisfaction and use) and 12-month cessation outcomes between smokers with and without ADS. METHODS: Participants (N=2512) were adult smokers enrolled in a randomized, comparative effectiveness trial of two Web-based smoking interventions designed for the general population of smokers. At baseline, participants reported demographic and smoking characteristics and completed measures assessing ADS. Participants were then classified into subgroups based on their self-reported ADS-either into a no ADS group or into six nonmutually exclusive subgroups: depression, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), panic disorder (PD), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), social anxiety disorder (SAD), and more than one ADS. Surveys at 12 months postrandomization included subjective ratings of treatment acceptability and self-reported smoking cessation. Treatment use (ie, number of log-ins and total duration of exposure) was assessed via automated records. RESULTS: Relative to the no ADS group, all six ADS subgroups reported significantly greater satisfaction with their assigned Web treatment program, but they spent less time logged in than those with no ADS. For number of log-ins, a treatment arm by ADS group interaction was observed across all ADS subgroups except GAD, suggesting that relative to the no ADS group, they logged in less to one website but not the other. At the 12-month follow-up, abstinence rates in the no ADS group (153/520, 29.42%) were significantly higher than for participants who screened positive for depression (306/1267, 24.15%; P=.03), PTSD (294/1215, 24.19%; P=.03), PD (229/1003, 23.83%; P=.009), and two or more ADS (323/1332, 24.25%; P=.03). Post hoc analyses suggest the lower quit rates may be associated with differences in baseline nicotine dependence and levels of commitment to resist smoking in difficult situations. Website use did not explain the differential abstinence rates. CONCLUSIONS: Despite reporting higher levels of treatment satisfaction, most smokers with ADS used their assigned intervention less often and had lower quit rates than smokers with no ADS at treatment onset. The results support the need for developing more targeted interventions for smokers with ADS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov NCT01812278; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01812278 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/78L9cNdG4).

Oral Health Promotion and Smoking Cessation Program Delivered via Tobacco Quitlines: The Oral Health 4 Life Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of a novel oral health promotion program (Oral Health 4 Life; OH4L) delivered through state-funded tobacco quitlines. METHODS: Using a semipragmatic design to balance experimental control and generalizability, we randomized US quitline callers (n = 718) to standard care or standard care plus OH4L. We followed participants for 6 months to assess effects on professional dental care and smoking abstinence. We collected data between 2015 and 2017. RESULTS: Participants were racially diverse (42% non-White) and socioeconomically disadvantaged. Most (71%) reported fair or poor oral health, and all were overdue for routine dental care. At 6 months, professional dental care and abstinence did not significantly differ between arms, but abstinence favored the experimental arm and was significantly higher among experimental participants at 2 months in a complete case sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSIONS: OH4L was not effective for promoting dental care, but integrating oral health counseling with quitline counseling may offer some advantage for smoking cessation. Public Health Implications. We offer a model for conducting semipragmatic trials and partnering with tobacco quitlines to evaluate population-level public health interventions.

Evaluation of a population-level strategy to promote tobacco treatment use among insured smokers: a pragmatic, randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Most smokers do not use evidence-based smoking cessation treatment. Increasing utilization of these services is an important public health goal. Health care systems and insurers are well positioned to support this goal within their patient populations. We tested whether a brief, mail-based intervention increased utilization of tobacco cessation services among insured smokers. METHODS: Adult smokers were identified via automated health plan data and randomized to one of five treatment arms (n = 4767). Randomization was stratified by gender, age, and type of health plan coverage. Three arms received a letter containing motivational content and treatment referral information. Motivational content emphasized either the financial, health, or values-based benefits of quitting. One arm received a referral letter with no motivational content, and one arm received no letter. Enrollment in the referred tobacco cessation program was monitored for 5 months. Treatment was available to all participants through their insurance. RESULTS: Across all four letter conditions, 0.8% of participants enrolled in tobacco treatment compared to 0.9% in the no letter reference group (p = .69). No single letter condition was superior to the others (p = .71), but treatment uptake was greater among participants who received their care and coverage from the health plan versus those with insurance coverage only (1.2% vs. 0.3%, p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: A one-time, mailed letter is not a cost-effective strategy for promoting use of covered smoking cessation treatment within large health plan populations, particularly when the message source is an insurance provider only and does not also provide clinical care. Health plans and insurers should consider alternative outreach efforts to promote treatment uptake among smokers. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: TRN registered retrospectively with ISRCTN registry ( www.isrctn.com ). Registered on 11/01/2018. Registration number: ISRCTN32311137 .

Acceptability of a sitting reduction intervention for older adults with obesity.

BACKGROUND: Older adults spend more time sitting than any other age group, contributing to poor health outcomes. Effective behavioral interventions are needed to encourage less sitting among older adults, specifically those with obesity, but these programs must be acceptable to the target population. We explored participant acceptance of a theory-based and technology-enhanced sitting reduction intervention designed for older adults (I-STAND). METHODS: The 12-week I-STAND intervention consisted of 6 health coaching contacts, a study workbook, a Jawbone UP band to remind participants to take breaks from sitting, and feedback on sitting behaviors (generated from wearing an activPAL device for 7 days at the beginning and mid-point of the study). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 participants after they completed the intervention. Interview transcripts were iteratively coded by a team, and thematic analysis was used to identify and refine emerging themes. RESULTS: Overall, participants were satisfied with the I-STAND intervention, thought the sedentary behavior goals of the intervention were easy to incorporate, and found the technologies to be helpful additions to (but not substitutes for) health coaching. Barriers to standing more included poor health, ingrained sedentary habits, lack of motivation to change sedentary behavior, and social norms that dictate when it is appropriate to sit/stand. Facilitators to standing more included increased awareness of sitting, a sense of accountability, daily activities that involved standing, social support, and changing ways of interacting in the home environment. Participants reported that the intervention improved physical health, increased energy, increased readiness to engage in physical activity, improved mood, and reduced stress. CONCLUSIONS: The technology-enhanced sedentary behavior reduction intervention was acceptable, easy to incorporate, and had a positive perceived health impact on older adults with obesity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The I-STAND study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT02692560 ) February 2016.

Participant Recruitment and Retention in Remote eHealth Intervention Trials: Methods and Lessons Learned From a Large Randomized Controlled Trial of Two Web-Based Smoking Interventions.

BACKGROUND: Despite having many advantages, online eHealth trials are not without challenges-notably, participant recruitment, and outcome data retention. Moreover, publications from these trials rarely provide detailed information on the methods used for recruitment and retention or discuss implications of the methods for future studies. OBJECTIVE: To address this need for empirical guidance regarding recruitment and outcome data retention planning, we aim to describe the methods and lessons learned from the recruitment and retention procedures used in a large randomized trial of 2 Web-based smoking cessation interventions. METHODS: To ensure a demographically and geographically diverse participant sample, we used the recruitment strategies (1) traditional, (2) Web-based, and (3) online survey panel methods and adaptively modified each in response to recruitment success. At baseline, participants indicated how they heard about the study and answered demographic questions. To maximize trial retention at each of the 3-, 6-, and 12-month assessment points, 4 survey modalities (first Web, followed by phone, mail, and postcard) were sequentially timed over a 30-day period. Participants received US $25 for submitting their responses, regardless of modality, and received an additional US $10 bonus for completing the Web survey within 24h of electronic notification. RESULTS: We randomized 2637 smokers in 16 months and achieved 88% retention at 12-months. Participants (79.26% female, 72.60% Caucasian) were recruited from all 50 states. The majority of participants were recruited through Facebook (49.43%), followed by the survey panel (20.85%), free internet sources (14.54%), traditional media (11.34%), and Google ads (3.84%). Descriptively, participant demographics varied by recruitment source. Of the completed follow-up surveys, most were completed by Web (92%). Retention rates did not vary by recruitment source. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous monitoring and refinement of multiple recruitment methods, particularly of online advertising campaigns, allowed us to maximize the effectiveness of recruitment strategies in recruiting a large, diverse sample of smokers. Likewise, offering multiple follow-up survey modalities in sequential order along with time-dependent bonus incentives enabled us to obtain outcome data from a very high level of enrolled participants for the duration of the trial protocol. These strategies may be similarly useful in other trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01812278; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01812278 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/71gy5GLvO).

Trajectories of 12-Month Usage Patterns for Two Smoking Cessation Websites: Exploring How Users Engage Over Time.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how individuals engage with electronic health (eHealth) interventions over time and whether this engagement predicts health outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study, by using the example of a specific type of eHealth intervention (ie, websites for smoking cessation), were to determine (1) distinct groups of log-in trajectories over a 12-month period, (2) their association with smoking cessation, and (3) baseline user characteristics that predict trajectory group membership. METHODS: We conducted a functional clustering analysis of 365 consecutive days of log-in data from both arms of a large (N=2637) randomized trial of 2 website interventions for smoking cessation (WebQuit and Smokefree), with a primary outcome of 30-day point prevalence smoking abstinence at 12 months. We conducted analyses for each website separately. RESULTS: A total of 3 distinct trajectory groups emerged for each website. For WebQuit, participants were clustered into 3 groups: 1-week users (682/1240, 55.00% of the sample), 5-week users (399/1240, 32.18%), and 52-week users (159/1240, 12.82%). Compared with the 1-week users, the 5- and 52-week users had 57% higher odds (odds ratio [OR] 1.57, 95% CI 1.13-2.17; P=.007) and 124% higher odds (OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.45-3.43; P<.001), respectively, of being abstinent at 12 months. Smokefree users were clustered into 3 groups: 1-week users (645/1309, 49.27% of the sample), 4-week users (395/1309, 30.18%), and 5-week users (269/1309, 20.55%). Compared with the 1-week users, 5-week users (but not 4-week users; P=.99) had 48% higher odds (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.05-2.07; P=.02) of being abstinent at 12 months. In general, the WebQuit intervention had a greater number of weekly log-ins within each of the 3 trajectory groups as compared with those of the Smokefree intervention. Baseline characteristics associated with trajectory group membership varied between websites. CONCLUSIONS: Patterns of 1-, 4-, and 5-week usage of websites may be common for how people engage in eHealth interventions. The 5-week usage of either website, and 52-week usage only of WebQuit, predicted a higher odds of quitting smoking. Strategies to increase eHealth intervention engagement for 4 more weeks (ie, from 1 week to 5 weeks) could be highly cost effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01812278; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01812278 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6yPO2OIKR).

Positive Affect as a Predictor of Smoking Cessation and Relapse: Does It Offer Unique Predictive Value among Depressive Symptom Domains?

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have suggested that, among the domains of depressive symptoms, low positive affect (PA) may have a distinct relationship with smoking cessation and relapse. However, the empirical basis for PA-focused interventions cessation is limited, with some mixed findings. OBJECTIVES: Using a large, diverse sample of treatment-seeking smokers, this study tested the hypothesis that PA adds unique predictive value beyond the effects of the other symptom domains in models of cessation and relapse. METHODS: Adult smokers participating in a smoking cessation trial (n = 450) were included in this post hoc analysis. Cessation outcomes included smoking abstinence at end of treatment and at 6-month follow-up. Relapse was defined as recurrence of smoking at 6-month follow-up among the end-of-treatment abstainers. Depressive symptoms were assessed at baseline using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression (CES-D) scale. RESULTS: With the exception of PA, all of the CES-D domains predicted reduced likelihood of smoking abstinence at end of treatment and cotinine-confirmed (but not self-reported) abstinence at 6 months, as did total CES-D score (all p-values < .05). None of the symptom domains predicted relapse. Conclusions/Importance: Our results provide further evidence that current depressive symptoms predict worse cessation outcomes, but they fail to support recent work suggesting that low PA has incremental predictive value for cessation or relapse beyond the other depressive symptom domains. To improve quit rates for smokers with depressive symptoms, evidence-based mood management interventions should be included in treatment planning.

"I Smoke Like This to Suppress These Issues That Are Flaws of My Character": Challenges and Facilitators of Cessation Among Smokers With Bipolar Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Smokers with bipolar disorder (BD) have low rates of successful quitting, yet no prior studies have evaluated the process of quitting among these smokers in the context of a current quit attempt. To facilitate development of more effective interventions, we conducted a qualitative exploration of challenges and facilitators of quitting in an intervention study for smokers with BD. METHODS: Participants were adult daily smokers with BD (n = 10) who completed a 10-week smoking cessation intervention consisting of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) and nicotine patch. We administered semistructured interviews focused on the quitting process at the end of treatment and used inductive content analysis to extract themes. RESULTS: Emergent themes representing challenges of quitting included social impediments, lack of awareness, avoidance, maladaptive beliefs, ambivalence, benefits of smoking, and difficulties with nicotine replacement. Themes representing change facilitators included positive treatment effects (ACT-specific, nonspecific, and nicotine patch-related), coping behaviors, reasons to quit, changes in self-perception, and social benefits. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest a need for assistance with obtaining social support and handling social impediments, interrupting the automaticity of smoking, expanding the behavioral repertoire to handle aversive internal states that tend to be avoided by smoking, preventing maladaptive beliefs from interfering with quitting, taking meaningful action toward change while experiencing ambivalence, either replacing the benefits of smoking or accepting their loss, and troubleshooting difficulties with nicotine replacement. Findings regarding facilitators of quitting supported previous quantitative findings that the ACT intervention impacted theory-based targets and highlighted the importance of the counseling relationship.

Factors associated with future dental care utilization among low-income smokers overdue for dental visits.

BACKGROUND: Smokers are at increased risk of oral disease. While routine dental care can help prevent and treat oral health problems, smokers have far lower rates of dental care utilization compared with non-smokers. We sought to better understand which factors may facilitate or hinder dental care utilization among low-income smokers participating in a randomized intervention trial in order to inform future intervention planning. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of data collected between 2015 and 2017 as part of the OralHealth4Life trial. Participants were eligible callers to the Louisiana, Nebraska, and Oregon state tobacco quitlines who had no dental appointment in the prior or upcoming six months. We examined the association between participants' baseline characteristics and their receiving professional dental care between baseline and the 6-month follow-up survey. RESULTS: Participants were racially diverse (42% non-White) and two-thirds had an annual household income under $20,000. Most (86.7%) had not had a dental cleaning in more than one year. Commonly cited barriers to dental care included cost (83.7%) and no dental insurance (78.1%). Those with dental insurance were more likely to see a dentist at follow-up (RR 1.66). Similarly, those reporting a dental insurance barrier to care were less likely to see a dentist at follow-up (RR 0.69); however, there was no significant utilization difference between those reporting a cost barrier vs. those who did not. After controlling for these financial factors, the following baseline characteristics were significantly associated with a higher likelihood of dental care utilization at 6 months: higher motivation (RR 2.16) and self-efficacy (RR 1.80) to visit the dentist, having a disability (RR 1.63), having a higher education level (RR 1.52), and having perceived gum disease (RR 1.49). Factors significantly associated with a lower likelihood of dental care utilization included being married (RR 0.68) and not having a last dental cleaning within the past year (RR 0.47). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide important insight into factors that may facilitate or deter use of professional dental care among low-income smokers. This information could inform the development of future interventions to promote dental care utilization. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT02347124 ; registered 27 January 2015.

Differential prevalence of established risk factors for poor cessation outcomes among smokers by level of social anxiety.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Despite clear associations between social anxiety (SA), high prevalence of smoking, and cessation failure, little is known about factors contributing to these relationships. Moreover, the extent to which smokers with moderate SA represent an at-risk group of smokers is also unknown. This study examined the extent to which established risk factors for poor cessation (eg, sociodemographic, smoking history, mental health comorbidity) are prevalent among smokers with low, moderate, and high levels of SA. METHODS: Participants (N = 2,637) were adult smokers from a web-based smoking cessation trial. Nineteen characteristics considered risk factors for poor cessation outcomes were assessed at baseline. Those associated with social anxiety were subsequently compared by SA level. RESULTS: Regression models indicated that 10/19 risk factors were associated with SA. Compared to smokers with low SA, those with moderate and high SA endorsed 4/10 and 10/10 risk factors as more prevalent or severe, respectively. Compared to smokers with low SA, High SA was associated with greater sociodemographic risk factors, while both moderate and high SA was associated with more severe mental health symptoms. CONCLUSIONS AND SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Smokers with moderate and high levels of SA endorse more risk factors for poor cessation outcomes than those with low levels of SA, particularly mental health symptoms. These factors may help explain the differential smoking outcomes of socially anxious smokers. Results suggest that smokers with both moderate and high levels of SA would likely benefit from cessation interventions that address and consider these risk factors. (Am J Addict 2017;26:176-182).