Dissemination of the nurse-administered Tobacco Tactics intervention versus usual care in six Trinity community hospitals: study protocol for a comparative effectiveness trial

Sonia A Duffy, David L Ronis, Marita G Titler, Frederic C Blow, Neil Jordan, Patricia L Thomas, Gay L Landstrom, Lee A Ewing, Andrea H Waltje, Sonia A Duffy, David L Ronis, Marita G Titler, Frederic C Blow, Neil Jordan, Patricia L Thomas, Gay L Landstrom, Lee A Ewing, Andrea H Waltje

Abstract

Background: The objectives of this smoking cessation study among hospitalized smokers are to: 1) determine provider and patient receptivity, barriers, and facilitators to implementing the nurse-administered, inpatient Tobacco Tactics intervention versus usual care using face-to-face feedback and surveys; 2) compare the effectiveness of the nurse-administered, inpatient Tobacco Tactics intervention versus usual care across hospitals, units, and patient characteristics using thirty-day point prevalence abstinence at thirty days and six months (primary outcome) post-recruitment; and 3) determine the cost-effectiveness of the nurse-administered, inpatient Tobacco Tactics intervention relative to usual care including cost per quitter, cost per life-year saved, and cost per quality-adjusted life-year saved.

Methods/design: This effectiveness study will be a quasi-experimental design of six Michigan community hospitals of which three will get the nurse-administered Tobacco Tactics intervention and three will provide their usual care. In both the intervention and usual care sites, research assistants will collect data from patients on their smoking habits and related variables while in the hospital and at thirty days and six months post-recruitment. The intervention will be integrated into the experimental sites by a research nurse who will train Master Trainers at each intervention site. The Master Trainers, in turn, will teach the intervention to all staff nurses. Research nurses will also conduct formative evaluation with nurses to identify barriers and facilitators to dissemination.Descriptive statistics will be used to summarize the results of surveys administered to nurses, nurses' participation rates, smokers' receipt of specific cessation services, and satisfaction with services. General estimating equation analyses will be used to determine differences between intervention groups on satisfaction and quit rates, respectively, with adjustment for the clustering of patients within hospital units. Regression analyses will test the moderation of the effects of the interventions by patient characteristics. Cost-effectiveness will be assessed by constructing three ratios including cost per quitter, cost per life-year saved, and cost per quality-adjusted life-year saved.

Discussion: Given that nurses represent the largest group of front-line providers, this intervention, if proven effective, has the potential for having a wide reach and thus decrease smoking, morbidity and mortality among inpatient smokers.

Trial registration: Dissemination of Tobacco Tactics for Hospitalized Smokers NCT01309217.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Recruitment flow chart.

References

    1. Freund M, Campbell E, Paul C, Sakrouge R, McElduff P, Walsh RA, Wiggers J, Knight J, Girgis A. Increasing smoking cessation care provision in hospitals: a meta-analysis of intervention effect. Nicotine Tob Res. 2009;11:650–662. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntp056.
    1. Rice VH, Stead LF. Nursing interventions for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004. p. CD001188.
    1. Duffy SA, Reeves P, Hermann C, Karvonen C, Smith P. In-hospital smoking cessation programs: what do VA patients and staff want and need? Appl Nurs Res. 2008;21:199–206. doi: 10.1016/j.apnr.2006.11.002.
    1. Duffy SA, Ronis DL, Valenstein M, Lambert MT, Fowler KE, Gregory L, Bishop C, Myers LL, Blow FC, Terrell JE. A tailored smoking, alcohol, and depression intervention for head and neck cancer patients. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006;15:2203–2208. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0880.
    1. Duffy SA, Karvonen-Gutierrez CA, Ewing LA, Smith PM, Veterans Integrated Services Network (VISN) 11 Tobacco Tactics Team. Implementation of the Tobacco Tactics Program in the Department of Veterans Affairs. J Gen Intern Med. 2010. pp. 3–10.
    1. Weinreich N. What is Social Marketing? .
    1. Design of quasi-experiments. .
    1. Quasi-experimental and experimental designs: more powerful evaluation designs. .
    1. Terrell JE, Ronis DL, Fowler KE, Bradford CR, Chepeha DB, Prince ME, Teknos TN, Wolf GT, Duffy SA. Clinical predictors of quality of life in patients with head and neck cancer. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;130:401–408. doi: 10.1001/archotol.130.4.401.
    1. Duffy SA, Ronis DL, Valenstein M, Fowler KE, Lambert MT, Bishop C, Terrell JE. Depressive symptoms, smoking, drinking, and quality of life among head and neck cancer patients. Psychosomatics. 2007;48:142–148. doi: 10.1176/appi.psy.48.2.142.
    1. Dillman DA. Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method. John Wiley & Sons, New York; 1978.
    1. Faseru B, Turner M, Casey G, Ruder C, Befort CA, Ellerbeck EF, Richter KP. Evaluation of a hospital-based tobacco treatment service: outcomes and lessons learned. J Hosp Med. 2011;6:211–218. doi: 10.1002/jhm.835.
    1. Regan S, Reyen M, Lockhart AC, Richards AE, Rigotti NA. An interactive voice response system to continue a hospital-based smoking cessation intervention after discharge. Nicotine Tob Res. 2011;13(4):255–260. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntq248.
    1. Thomson O'Brien MA, Freemantle N, Oxman AD, Wolf F, Davis DA, Herrin J. Continuing education meetings and workshops: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes (review) Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001. p. CD003030.
    1. Bandura A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social-Cognititve Theory. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ; 1986.
    1. Marlatt GA, Gordon JR. Relapse Prevention: Maintenance Strategies in the Treatment of Addiction. Guilford Press, New York; 1985.
    1. Kottke TE, Battista RN, DeFriese GH, Brekke ML. Attributes of successful smoking cessation interventions in medical practice. A meta-analysis of 39 controlled trials. JAMA. 1988;259:2883–2889. doi: 10.1001/jama.259.19.2883.
    1. Fiore MC, Jaén CR, Baker TB, Bailey WC, Benowitz NL, Curry SJ, Dorfman SF, Froelicher ES, Goldstein MG, Healton CG, Henderson PN, Heyman RB, Koh HK, Kottke TE, Lando HA, Mechlenburg RE, Mermelstein RJ, Mullen PD, Orleans CT, Robinson L, Stitzer ML, Tommasello AC, Villejo L, Wewers ME. Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence: 2008 Update. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service, Rockville, MD; 2008.
    1. Lancaster T, Stead L. Physician advice for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004. p. CD000165.
    1. An LC, Zhu SH, Nelson DB, Arikian NJ, Nugent S, Partin MR, Joseph AM. Benefits of telephone care over primary care for smoking cessation: a randomized trial. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:536–542. doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.5.536.
    1. Lichtenstein E, Glasgow RE, Lando HA, Ossip-Klein DJ, Boles SM. Telephone counseling for smoking cessation: rationales and meta-analytic review of evidence. Health Educ Res. 1996;11:243–257. doi: 10.1093/her/11.2.243.
    1. Smith PM, Cameron R, McDonald PW, Kawash B, Madill C, Brown KS. Telephone counseling for population-based smoking cessation. Am J Health Behav. 2004;28:231–241. doi: 10.5993/AJHB.28.3.4.
    1. Lawrence K, Heisler M, Resnicow K, Halasyamani L, Mase R, Monroe M. Supported by the National Heart Lung, and Blood Institute. Developed by the University of Michigan and St Joseph Mercy Health System. The Regents of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; 2007. Tools for Being a Helpful Peer Partner (video recording)
    1. Thompson BT, Schoenfeld D. Usual care as the control group in clinical trials of nonpharmacologic interventions. Proc Am Thorac Soc. 2007;4:577–582. doi: 10.1513/pats.200706-072JK.
    1. Tobacco Free Nurses Initiative. Tobacco Free Nurses Fact Sheet on the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organization's (JCAHO) Smoking Cessation Counseling Performance Measures. .
    1. Perez-Rios M, Santiago-Perez MI, Alonso B, Malvar A, Hervada X, de Leon J. Fagerstrom test for nicotine dependence vs heavy smoking index in a general population survey. BMC Publ Health. 2009;9:493. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-9-493.
    1. Lowe B, Kroenke K, Grafe K. Detecting and monitoring depression with a two-item questionnaire (PHQ-2) J Psychosom Res. 2005;58:163–171. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2004.09.006.
    1. Bush K, Kivlahan DR, McDonell MB, Fihn SD, Bradley KA. The AUDIT alcohol consumption questions (AUDIT-C): an effective brief screening test for problem drinking. Ambulatory Care Quality Improvement Project (ACQUIP). Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158:1789–1795. doi: 10.1001/archinte.158.16.1789.
    1. Dawson DA, Grant BF, Stinson FS, Zhou Y. Effectiveness of the derived Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-C) in screening for alcohol use disorders and risk drinking in the US general population. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2005;29:844–854. doi: 10.1097/01.ALC.0000164374.32229.A2.
    1. Rabin R, de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med. 2001;33:337–343. doi: 10.3109/07853890109002087.
    1. Hardin JW, Hilbe JM. Generalized estimating equations. Chapman & Hall/CRC press, Boca Raton, FL; 2002.
    1. Morel JG, Bokossa MC, Neerchal NK. Small sample correction for the variance of GEE estimators. Biom J. 2003;45:395–409. doi: 10.1002/bimj.200390021.
    1. Javitz HS, Swan GE, Zbikowski SM, Curry SJ, McAfee TA, Decker DL, Patterson R, Jack LM. Cost-effectiveness of different combinations of bupropion SR dose and behavioral treatment for smoking cessation: a societal perspective. Am J Manag Care. 2004;10:217–226.
    1. Gold M, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC, editor. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Oxford University Press, New York, NY; 1996.
    1. Initial National Priorities for Comparative Effectiveness Research. .
    1. H.R. 1-111th Congress. American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. (database of federal legislation). 2009. 2009. .
    1. Benner JS, Morrison MR, Karnes EK, Kocot SL, McClellan M. An evaluation of recent federal spending on comparative effectiveness research: priorities, gaps, and next steps. Heal Aff. 2010;29:1768–1776. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0687.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbejdspartnere

Medicinske tilstande

Narkotikainterventioner

3
Abonner