Jonathan P Winickoff1, Emara Nabi-Burza2, Yuchiao Chang3, Susan Regan3, Jeremy Drehmer2, Stacia Finch4, Richard Wasserman5, Deborah Ossip6, Bethany Hipple2, Heide Woo7, Jonathan Klein8, Nancy A Rigotti3. 1. Center for Child and Adolescent Health Research and Policy, Division of General Academic Pediatrics, Massachusetts General Hospital for Children, Boston, Massachusetts; AAP Richmond Center of Excellence, and Tobacco Research and Treatment Center, and jwinickoff@partners.org. 2. Center for Child and Adolescent Health Research and Policy, Division of General Academic Pediatrics, Massachusetts General Hospital for Children, Boston, Massachusetts; Tobacco Research and Treatment Center, and. 3. Tobacco Research and Treatment Center, and General Medicine Division, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; 4. Pediatric Research in Office Settings, American Academy of Pediatrics, Elk Grove Village, Illinois; 5. Pediatric Research in Office Settings, American Academy of Pediatrics, Elk Grove Village, Illinois; Department of Pediatrics, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont; 6. University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York; and. 7. Pediatric Research in Office Settings, American Academy of Pediatrics, Elk Grove Village, Illinois; University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California. 8. AAP Richmond Center of Excellence, and.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether an evidence-based pediatric outpatient intervention for parents who smoke persisted after initial implementation. METHODS: A cluster randomized controlled trial of 20 pediatric practices in 16 states that received either Clinical and Community EffortAgainst Secondhand Smoke Exposure (CEASE) intervention or usual care. The intervention provided practices with training to provide evidence-based assistance to parents who smoke. The primary outcome, assessed by the 12-month follow-up telephone survey with parents, was provision of meaningful tobacco control assistance, defined as discussing various strategies to quit smoking, discussing smoking cessation medication, or recommending the use of the state quitline after initial enrollment visit. We also assessed parental quit rates at 12 months, determined by self-report and biochemical verification. RESULTS:Practices' rates of providing any meaningful tobacco control assistance (55% vs 19%), discussing various strategies to quit smoking (25% vs 10%), discussing cessation medication (41% vs 11%), and recommending the use of the quitline (37% vs 9%) were all significantly higher in the intervention than in the control groups, respectively (P < .0001 for each), during the 12-month postintervention implementation. Receiving any assistance was associated with a cotinine-confirmed quitting adjusted odds ratio of 1.89 (95% confidence interval: 1.13-3.19). After controlling for demographic and behavioral factors, the adjusted odds ratio for cotinine-confirmed quitting in intervention versus control practices was 1.07 (95% confidence interval: 0.64-1.78). CONCLUSIONS: Intervention practices had higher rates of delivering tobacco control assistance than usual care practices over the 1-year follow-up period. Parents who received any assistance were more likely to quit smoking; however, parents' likelihood of quitting smoking was not statistically different between the intervention and control groups. Maximizing parental quit rates will require more complete systems-level integration and adjunctive cessation strategies.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether an evidence-based pediatric outpatient intervention for parents who smoke persisted after initial implementation. METHODS: A cluster randomized controlled trial of 20 pediatric practices in 16 states that received either Clinical and Community Effort Against Secondhand Smoke Exposure (CEASE) intervention or usual care. The intervention provided practices with training to provide evidence-based assistance to parents who smoke. The primary outcome, assessed by the 12-month follow-up telephone survey with parents, was provision of meaningful tobacco control assistance, defined as discussing various strategies to quit smoking, discussing smoking cessation medication, or recommending the use of the state quitline after initial enrollment visit. We also assessed parental quit rates at 12 months, determined by self-report and biochemical verification. RESULTS: Practices' rates of providing any meaningful tobacco control assistance (55% vs 19%), discussing various strategies to quit smoking (25% vs 10%), discussing cessation medication (41% vs 11%), and recommending the use of the quitline (37% vs 9%) were all significantly higher in the intervention than in the control groups, respectively (P < .0001 for each), during the 12-month postintervention implementation. Receiving any assistance was associated with a cotinine-confirmed quitting adjusted odds ratio of 1.89 (95% confidence interval: 1.13-3.19). After controlling for demographic and behavioral factors, the adjusted odds ratio for cotinine-confirmed quitting in intervention versus control practices was 1.07 (95% confidence interval: 0.64-1.78). CONCLUSIONS: Intervention practices had higher rates of delivering tobacco control assistance than usual care practices over the 1-year follow-up period. Parents who received any assistance were more likely to quit smoking; however, parents' likelihood of quitting smoking was not statistically different between the intervention and control groups. Maximizing parental quit rates will require more complete systems-level integration and adjunctive cessation strategies.
Authors: Vilma E Cokkinides; Michael T Halpern; Elizabeth M Barbeau; Elizabeth Ward; Michael J Thun Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Jonathan P Winickoff; Erica A Healey; Susan Regan; Elyse R Park; Clare Cole; Joan Friebely; Nancy A Rigotti Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2010-02-01 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Neal L Benowitz; John T Bernert; Ralph S Caraballo; David B Holiday; Jiantong Wang Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2008-11-19 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: G E Matt; P J E Quintana; M F Hovell; J T Bernert; S Song; N Novianti; T Juarez; J Floro; C Gehrman; M Garcia; S Larson Journal: Tob Control Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Brian P Jenssen; Eric D Shelov; Christopher P Bonafide; Steven L Bernstein; Alexander G Fiks; Tyra Bryant-Stephens Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2016-05-25 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Emara Nabi-Burza; Jonathan P Winickoff; Jeremy E Drehmer; Julie A Gorzkowski; Jonathan D Klein; Douglas E Levy; Deborah J Ossip; Susan Regan; Nancy A Rigotti; Bethany Hipple Walters Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2020-10-08 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Deborah J Ossip; Tye Johnson; Vanessa Assibey-Mensah; Sijiu Wang; Donald McLaren; Karen Calabro; Alexander V Prokhorov; Scott McIntosh Journal: Health Educ Behav Date: 2017-12-04
Authors: Bradley N Collins; Stephen J Lepore; Jonathan P Winickoff; Uma S Nair; Beth Moughan; Tyra Bryant-Stephens; Adam Davey; Daniel Taylor; David Fleece; Melissa Godfrey Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Brian P Jenssen; Mary Kate Kelly; Jennifer Faerber; Chloe Hannan; David A Asch; Justine Shults; Robert A Schnoll; Alexander G Fiks Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2020-06-22 Impact factor: 7.124