Introduction

Implementing tobacco-free policies in substance use disorders (SUD) treatment may reduce tobacco-related, health disparities. This study examined adoption of tobacco-related policy and practices in six residential programs participating in a California-sponsored, 18-month, tobacco-free policy intervention.

Methods

Directors (N=6) completed surveys of tobacco-related policies before and after the intervention. Staff completed cross-sectional surveys assessing tobacco-related training, beliefs, practices, workplace smoking policy, tobacco cessation program services, and smoking status pre- (n=135) and post-intervention (n=144).

Results

Director surveys indicated no programs had tobacco-free grounds, one provided tobacco-related staff training, and two provided nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) pre-intervention. At post-intervention, 5 programs had implemented tobacco-free grounds, 6 provided tobacco cessation training, and 3 provided NRT. Across all programs, staff were more likely to report smoke-free workplaces (AOR = 5.76, 95% CI1.14,29.18) post- versus pre-intervention. Staff positive beliefs towards addressing tobacco use were higher post-intervention (p<0.001). Odds of clinical staff reporting tobacco-related training participation (AOR = 19.63, 95% CI14.21,27.13) and program-level provision of NRT (AOR = 4.01, 95% CI 1.54, 10.43) increased post- versus pre-intervention. Clinical staff reporting they provided tobacco cessation services were also higher post-intervention (p= 0.045). There were no changes in smoking prevalence or quit intention among smoking staff.

Conclusion

A tobacco-free policy intervention in SUD treatment was associated with implementation of tobacco-free grounds, tobacco-related training among staff, more positive staff beliefs towards and delivery of tobacco cessation services to clients. The model may be improved with greater emphasis on staff policy awareness, facilitating availability of NRT, and reducing staff smoking.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.18332/tid/160974.].

OBJECTIVE: To understand providers perceptions of how a patients experience of racism may impact the successful implementation of a brief posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) treatment in the safety net integrated primary care setting. To conduct a developmental formative evaluation prior to a hybrid type I effectiveness-implementation trial. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING: From October 2020 to January 2021, in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with integrated primary care stakeholders (N = 27) at the largest safety net hospital in New England, where 82% of patients identify as racial or ethnic minorities. STUDY DESIGN: Interviews with clinical stakeholders were used to (a) contextualize current patient and provider experiences and responses to racism, (b) consider how racism may impact PTSD treatment implementation, (c) gather recommendations for potential augmentation to the proposed PTSD treatment (e.g., culturally responsive delivery, cultural adaptation), and (d) gather recommendations for how to shift the integrated primary care practice to an antiracist framework. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Interview data were gathered using remote data collection methods (video conferencing). Participants were hospital employees, including psychologists, social workers, primary care physicians, community health workers, administrators, and operations managers. We used conventional content analysis. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Clinical stakeholders acknowledged the impact of racism, including racial stress and trauma, on patient engagement and noted the potential need to adapt PTSD treatments to enhance engagement. Clinical stakeholders also characterized the harms of racism on patients and providers and provided recommendations such as changes to staff training and hiring practices, examination of racist policies, and increases in support for providers of color. CONCLUSIONS: This study contextualizes providers perceptions of racism in the integrated primary care practice and provides some suggestions for shifting to an antiracist framework. Our findings also highlight how racism in health care may be a PTSD treatment implementation barrier.

Background: Telehealth methods, including video chat counseling, have been growing in popularity within the behavioral health counseling field for over a decade. While video-based counseling methods have been shown to be effective and convenient, they have unique challenges stemming from the technology they use. Technical challenges can negatively impact appointment flow, intervention effectiveness, and the satisfaction of both patients and clinicians. Methodology: The Y2TEC (Youth to Text or Telehealth for Engagement in HIV Care) study is a pilot randomized control trial examining the feasibility and acceptability of a video counseling series provided to young adults (ages 18-29) living with HIV. The study's clinicians provided about 500 video-based counseling sessions through the Zoom videoconferencing platform. The study team then developed recommendations for overcoming technical challenges through a review of the best practice literature, insights from the clinicians and study coordinator, engaging in consultations during supervision meetings, receiving verbal feedback from participants, and reviewing logs of technical challenges. Results: Through our experience, we have found that quality of video-based counseling services can be greatly improved with minor intentional technological modifications in preparation and provision of services. We provide an overview of common challenges and corresponding recommendations to address them. Conclusion: This article can help clinicians improve their quality of telehealth sessions by identifying several common technological challenges that can occur during video chat sessions, exploring the impact of these challenges on session dynamics and providing concise, best practice-based recommendations to mitigate these issues that clinicians face.

Few studies explore racial/ethnic disparities in tobacco use and access to cessation services among people with substance use disorders (SUD). We collected data from Hispanics (n = 255), non-Hispanic Whites (n = 195), and non-Hispanic Blacks (n = 126) across 24 Californian residential SUD treatment programs. Data were analyzed via regression models adjusting for demographics, cigarettes per day, past quit attempts, intent to quit in the next 30 days, and physical health status. Non-Hispanic Whites smoked at a higher rate (68.7%) than both Hispanics (54.9%) and non-Hispanic Blacks (55.6%) and smoked more cigarettes per day (M = 11.2, SD = 6.5). Hispanics were more likely than non-Hispanic Whites to receive a referral to a cessation specialist (adjusted odds ratio; AOR = 2.34, 95% CI = 1.15, 4.78) and tobacco-cessation counseling (AOR = 2.68, 95% CI = 1.28, 5.62). Non-Hispanic Blacks were also more likely than non-Hispanic Whites to receive cessation counseling (AOR = 3.61, 95% CI = 1.01, 12.87) and NRT/pharmacotherapy (AOR = 2.65, 95% CI = 1.57, 4.47). Despite their decreased smoking prevalence and severity, REMs were accessing smoking cessation services while in treatment, suggesting that SUD treatment could serve as a place to address tobacco-related racial inequities.

Introduction

Smoking is highly prevalent in substance use disorder (SUD) programs, but few studies have explored the tobacco-related attitudes of staff and clients in the same program. The aim of this study was to compare staff and client reports on 10 tobacco-related items and associate them with tobacco measures implemented in the programs.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was conducted in 18 residential SUD programs from 2019 to 2020. Overall, 534 clients and 183 clinical staff self-reported their tobacco use, knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and practices/services regarding smoking cessation. Ten comparable items were asked of both clients and staff. Differences in their responses were tested using bivariate analyses. We examine the association between selected tobacco-related items on making a quit attempt and planning to quit in the next 30 days.

Results

In all, 63.7% of clients were current cigarette users versus 22.9% of staff. About half of clinicians (49.4%) said they had the skills to help patients quit smoking, while only 34.0% of clients thought their clinicians had these skills (p=0.003). About 28.4% of staff reported encouraging their patients to use nicotine replacement treatment (NRT), and 23.4% of patients said they had been encouraged to use these products. Client reports of planning a quit attempt were positively correlated with whether both staff and clients reported that the use of NRT was encouraged (clients: r=0.645 p=0.004; staff: r=0.524 p=0.025).

Conclusions

A low level of tobacco-related services was provided by staff and received by clients. In programs where smokers were encouraged to use NRT, a higher percentage of smokers planned a quit attempt. Tobacco-related training among staff, and communication about tobacco use with clients, should be improved to make tobacco services more visible and accessible in SUD treatment.

Background

Smoking prevalence is high among people in substance use disorder (SUD) treatment, and program interventions to address smoking are often complex and lengthy. This cluster-randomized trial tested whether a brief multi-component intervention impacted tobacco outcomes among staff and clients.

Methods

Seven SUD treatment programs were randomly assigned to the multi-component intervention or to waitlist control. The 6-month intervention included a leadership motivation assessment, program incentives, 4 staff training sessions and a leadership learning community session. Survey data were collected from staff and clients at pre- and post-intervention. Outcomes were first compared across condition (intervention vs waitlist control), and then examined pre- to post-intervention with condition collapsed.

Results

Staff in the intervention (n = 48) and control conditions (n = 26) did not differ at post-intervention on smoking prevalence, self-efficacy to help clients quit, or practices used to help clients quit smoking. Intervention clients (n = 113) did not differ from controls (n = 61) in smoking prevalence or receipt of tobacco services. Pre-post comparisons collapsed across condition showed a decrease in client and staff smoking prevalence, which could not be attributed to the intervention, and a decrease in client receipt of cessation medication.

Conclusion

The brief multi-component intervention did not support changes in smoking prevalence or in tobacco-related services received by clients. Other intervention features are needed to reduce smoking among SUD clients.

Trial registration

Randomization occurred at the program level and outcomes measured are program-level measures. Accordingly, the trial is not registered.

Tobacco-related morbidity and mortality disproportionately affect people with substance use disorders (SUD). Encouraging overall wellness may support tobacco use cessation. We investigated relationships between wellness (health status, physical activity, sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption), cigarette smoking, and smoking cessation among SUD treatment patients to inform clinical care. Cross-sectional surveys were conducted with 395 patients in 20 California residential SUD programs. Using multivariate regression, we examined associations between smoking status and wellness. Among smokers, we examined associations between lifetime smoking exposure, cessation behaviors and attitudes, and wellness. Compared to nonsmokers (n = 121), smokers (n = 274) reported more SSB consumption, poorer physical health, and more respiratory symptoms. Among smokers, SSB consumption and respiratory symptoms increased per ten pack-years of smoking. Smokers with respiratory symptoms reported higher motivation to quit and more use of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Smokers with more days of poor mental health reported lower motivation to quit. Overall, cigarette smoking was associated with other health-risk behaviors among SUD treatment patients. Respiratory symptoms may increase, and poor mental health may decrease, SUD patients' intent to quit smoking. To reduce chronic disease risk among SUD patients, treatment programs should consider promoting overall wellness concurrently with smoking cessation.

Background

People in substance use disorder (SUD) treatment experience disproportionate rates of tobacco use. California has prioritized smoking cessation among these individuals through the Tobacco-Free for Recovery Initiative, which includes an intervention aimed at supporting programs in implementing tobacco-free grounds. The current study examined changes in client smoking prevalence, tobacco use behaviors, and receipt of cessation services among the first seven programs participating in the initiative.

Methods

Residential treatment program clients completed cross-sectional surveys at the start of the intervention (baseline: n = 249), at an interim timepoint post-baseline (interim: n = 275), and at the end of the intervention 15 months later (post-intervention: n = 219). All participants reported smoking status. Current smokers reported tobacco use behaviors, and both current smokers and those who quit in treatment reported receipt of cessation services. Univariate analyses explored differences across the three timepoints and multivariate logistic regression assessed change from baseline to interim and baseline to post-intervention.

Results

Client smoking prevalence decreased from 54.2% at pre- to 26.6% at post-intervention (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] = 0.25, 95% CI = 0.13, 0.45). Current smokers and those who quit while in treatment reported an increase in NRT/pharmacotherapy (11.9% vs. 25.2%; AOR = 3.02, CI = 1.24, 7.35). When comparing baseline to the interim timepoint (a timepoint before the COVID-19 pandemic), data analyses also demonstrated a significant decrease in smoking prevalence (54.2% vs. 41.8%; AOR = 0.62, CI = 0.42, 0.92) and increase in NRT/pharmacotherapy (11.9% vs. 24.5%; AOR = 3.68, CI = 1.11, 12.19).

Conclusion

An intervention to promote tobacco-free grounds implemented in residential SUD treatment programs was associated with a significant reduction in client smoking and an increase in NRT/pharmacotherapy. These associations were observed both before the COVID-19 pandemic and in the early stages of the pandemic, suggesting that they may be due to the intervention rather than to the pandemic.