Web-based smoking cessation intervention that transitions from inpatient to outpatient: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Trials

William C Bailey⁵  Thomas K Houston¹  Rajani S Sadasivam¹  Bin Zhang²  Maria Pisu⁶  Julie A McDougal³  Kathleen F Harrington⁴ 

[1] Division of Health Informatics and Implementation Science, University of Massachusetts Medical School – AC7-116, 55 Lake Avenue, North - Room S7-321, Worcester, Massachusetts, 01655, USA;Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, MLC 5401, 3333 Burnet Avenue, Cincinnati, OH, 45229, USA;UAB Department of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, 619 19th Street South – OHB 130-B, Birmingham, Alabama, 35249-7337, USA;Department of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary, Allergy & Critical Care Medicine, The University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB), 619 19th Street South – OHB 143, Birmingham, Alabama, 35249-7337, USA;UAB Department of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary, Allergy & Critical Care Medicine, 619 19th Street South – NHB 102, Birmingham, Alabama, 35249-7337, USA;UAB Division of Preventive Medicine and Center for Outcomes and Effectiveness Research and Education (COERE), 1700 11th Avenue South – MT 628, Birmingham, AL, 35249-4410, USA

关键词: Internet intervention;    Study protocol;    Hospitalized smokers;    Smoking cessation;    Tobacco;   

Others  :  1095435
DOI  :  10.1186/1745-6215-13-123

 received in 2011-09-30, accepted in 2012-06-08,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

E-health tools are a new mechanism to expand patient care, allowing supplemental resources to usual care, including enhanced patient-provider communication. These applications to smoking cessation have yet to be tested in a hospitalized patient sample. This project aims to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a tailored web-based and e-message smoking cessation program for current smokers that, upon hospital discharge, transitions the patient to continue a quit attempt when home (Decide2Quit).

Design

A randomized two-arm follow-up design will test the effectiveness of an evidence- and theoretically-based smoking cessation program designed for post-hospitalization.

Methods

A total of 1,488 patients aged 19 or older, who smoked cigarettes in the previous 30 days, are being recruited from 27 patient care areas of a large urban university hospital. Study-eligible hospitalized patients receiving usual tobacco cessation usual care are offered study referral. Trained hospital staff assist the 744 patients who are being randomized to the intervention arm with registration and orientation to the intervention website. This e-mail and web-based program offers tailored messages as well as education, self-assessment and planning aids, and social support to promote tobacco use cessation. Condition-blind study staff assess participants for tobacco use history and behaviors, tobacco use cost-related information, co-morbidities and psychosocial factors at 0, 3, 6, and 12 months. The primary outcome is self-reported 30-day tobacco abstinence at 6 months follow-up. Secondary outcomes include 7-day point prevalence quit rates at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up, 30-day point prevalence quit rates at 3 and 12 months, biologically confirmed tobacco abstinence at 6-month follow-up, and multiple point-prevalence quit rates based on self-reported tobacco abstinence rates at each follow-up time period. Healthcare utilization and quality of life are assessed at baseline, and 6- and 12-month follow-up to measure program cost-effectiveness from the hospital, healthcare payer, patient, and societal perspectives.

Discussion

Given the impact of tobacco use on medical resources, establishing feasible, cost-effective methods for reducing tobacco use is imperative. Given the minimal hospital staff burden and the automated transition to a post-hospitalization tailored intervention, this program could be an easily disseminated approach.

Trial registration

Current Intervention Trial NCT01277250

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Harrington et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Tobacco-Related Costs and Expenditure in the United States. http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/index.htm webcite
• [2]CDC: State-specific prevalence and trends in adult cigarette smoking --- United States, 1998--2007. MMWR 2009, 58:221-226.
• [3]CDC: Cigarette smoking among adults---United States, 2007. MMWR 2008, 57:1221-1226.
• [4]Katz A, Goldberg D, Smith J, Trick WE: Tobacco, alcohol, and drug use among hospital patients: concurrent use and willingness to change. J Hosp Med 2008, 3:369-375.
• [5]Adult Smoking Prevalence. http.//www.dhs.ca.gov/tobacco webcite
• [6]Rigotti NA, Munafo MR, Stead LF: Smoking cessation interventions for hospitalized smokers: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med 2008, 168:1950-1960.
• [7]Mohiuddin SM, Mooss AN, Hunter CB, Grollmes TL, Cloutier DA, Hilleman DE: Intensive smoking cessation intervention reduces mortality in high-risk smokers with cardiovascular disease. Chest 2007, 131:446-452.
• [8]Committee on Quality of Health Care in America IoM: Crossing the Quality Chasm. National Academy Press, Washington, DC; 2001.
• [9]Personal Health Working Group: Connecting for Health. Markle Foundation, New York, NY; 2006. www.connectingforhealth.org webcite
• [10]Pagliari C, Detmer D, Singleton P: Potential of electronic personal health records. BMJ 2007, 335:330-333.
• [11]Computer Science and Telecommunications Board - National Research Council: Networking Health: Prescriptions for the Internet. National Academy Press, National Academy Press; 2000.
• [12]The value of personal health records: A joint position statement for consumers of healthcare by the American Health Information Management Association and the American Medical Informatics Association. J Ahima 2007, 78:22-24.
• [13]Tang PC, Ash JS, Bates DW, Overhage JM, Sands DZ: Personal health records: definitions, benefits, and strategies for overcoming barriers to adoption. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2006, 13:121-126.
• [14]Anderson JG, Rainey MR, Eysenbach G: The impact of CyberHealthcare on the physician-patient relationship. J Med Syst 2003, 27:67-84.
• [15]Murtaugh D: Internet access hardest to come by in Mississippi, Alabama. 2010. In Press-Register. Mobile
• [16]eRisk Guidelines: ERisk Working Group for Healthcare. 2005. http://wwwmedemcom/phy/phy_eriskguidelinescfm webcite
• [17]Hobbs J, Wald J, Jagannath YS, Kittler A, Pizziferri L, Volk LA, Middleton B, Batesa DW: Opportunities to enhance patient and physician e-mail contact. Int J Med Inf 2003, 70:1-9.
• [18]Japuntich SJ, Zehner ME, Smith SS, Jorenby DE, Valdez JA, Fiore MC, Baker TB, Gustafson DH: Smoking cessation via the internet: a randomized clinical trial of an internet intervention as adjuvant treatment in a smoking cessation intervention. Nicotine Tob Res 2006, 8(Suppl 1):S59-S67.
• [19]Myung SK, McDonnell DD, Kazinets G, Seo HG, Moskowitz JM: Effects of Web- and computer-based smoking cessation programs: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med 2009, 169:929-937.
• [20]Bock BC, Graham AL, Whiteley JA, Stoddard JL: A review of web-assisted tobacco interventions (WATIs). J Med Internet Res 2008, 10:e39.
• [21]Shahab L, McEwen A: Online support for smoking cessation: a systematic review of the literature. Addiction 2009, 104:1792-1804.
• [22]Bandura A: Social Foundations of Thought and Action. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.; 1986.
• [23]Prochaska JO, Redding CA, Evers KE: The transtheoretical model and stages of change. In Health behavior and health education. Edited by Glanz K, Lewis FN, Rimer BK. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA; 1997.
• [24]Houston TK, Ford DE: A tailored Internet-delivered intervention for smoking cessation designed to encourage social support and treatment seeking: usability testing and user tracing. Inform Health Soc Care 2008, 33:5-19.
• [25]Houston TK, Sadasivam RS, Ford DE, Richman J, Ray MN, Allison JJ: The QUIT-PRIMO provider-patient Internet-delivered smoking cessation referral intervention: a cluster-randomized comparative effectiveness trial: study protocol. Implement Sci 2010, 5:87. BioMed Central Full Text
• [26]Herdman M, Gudex C, Lloyd A, Janssen M, Kind P, Parkin D, Bonsel G, Badia X: Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res 2010, 20:1727-1736.
• [27]SRNT Subcommittee on Biochemical Verification: Biochemical verification of tobacco use and cessation. Nicotine Tob Res 2002, 4:149-159.
• [28]Gorber SC, Schofield-Hurwitz S, Hardt J, Levasseur G, Tremblay M: The accuracy of self-reported smoking: a systematic review of the relationship between self-reported and cotinine-assessed smoking status. Nicotine Tob Res 2009, 11:12-24.
• [29]Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco Subcommittee on Biochemical Verification: Biochemical verification of tobacco and cessation. Nicotine Tob Res 2002, 4:149-159.
• [30]Motalto NJ, Wells WO: Validation of self-reported smoking status using saliva continine: A rapid semiquantitative dipstick method. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007, 16:1858-1862.
• [31]Smokerlyzer CO Monitor. www.bedfont.com/smokerlyzer webcite
• [32]Division of Chronic Disease Prevention and Control: Illinois Department of Public Health Tobacco Burden in Illinois 2005. Illinois Department of Public Health, Springfield, IL; 2005.
• [33]Reid RD, Mullen KA, D'Angelo ME, Aitken DA, Papadakis S, Haley PM, McLaughlin CA, Pipe AL: Smoking cessation for hospitalized smokers: An evaluation of the “Ottawa Model”. Nicotine Tob Res 2010, 12:11-18.
• [34]Shields M: Smoking-prevalence, bans and exposure to second-hand smoke. Health Rep 2007, 18:67-85.
• [35]Benowitz NL, Schultz KE, Haller CA, Wu AH, Dains KM, Jacob P: Prevalence of smoking assessed biochemically in an urban public hospital: a rationale for routine cotinine screening. Am J Epidemiol 2009, 170:885-891.
• [36]Wolfenden L, Campbell E, Wiggers J, Walsh RA, Bailey LJ: Helping hospital patients quit: what the evidence supports and what guidelines recommend. Prev Med 2008, 46:346-357.
• [37]Fiore MC, Jaen CR, Baker TB, Bailey WC, Benowitz NL, Curry SJ, et al.: Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence: 2008 Update. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service, Rockville, MD; 2008.
• [38]Little RJA: Survey nonresponse adjustments for estimates of means. Intl Stat Rev 1986, 54:139-157.
• [39]Sherman S: Methods for Handling Missing Data. (personal communication via email to Kathleen Harrington). June 14. 2011.
• [40]Little RJA, Rubin DB: Statistical Analysis with Missing Data. 2nd edition. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, N.J.; 2002.
• [41]Little RJA: Pattern-mixture models for multivariate incomplete data. J Am Stat Assoc 1993, 88:125-134.
• [42]Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russel LB, Weinstein MC: Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Oxford University Press, New York, NY; 1996.
• [43]Briggs AH, O'Brien BJ, Blackhouse G: Thinking outside the box: recent advances in the analysis and presentation of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness studies. Annu Rev Public Health 2002, 23:377-401.
• [44]Doshi JA, Glick HA, Polsky D: Analyses of cost data in economic evaluations conducted alongside randomized controlled trials. Value Health 2006, 9:334-340.
• [45]Barber JA, Thompson SG: Analysis of cost data in randomized trials: an application of the non-parametric bootstrap. Stat Med 2000, 19:3219-3236.
• [46]Glick HA, Doshi JA, Sonnad SS, Polsky D: Economic Evaluation in Clinical Trials (Handbooks for Health Economic Evaluation). Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK; 2007.
• [47]Rigotti NA, Munafo MR, Murphy MF, Stead LF: Interventions for smoking cessation in hospitalised patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007, 3:CD001837.
• [48]Prochazka AV, Palisoc A: What is the best intervention to help hospitalized patients quit smoking? The Hospitalist 2008.