Mollie M Mustoe1, James M Clark1, Timothy T Huynh1, Elisa K Tong2, Terri P Wolf3, Lisa M Brown1, David T Cooke1. 1. Section of General Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California, Davis Health, Sacramento. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, University of California, Davis Health, Sacramento. 3. University of California Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, Sacramento.
Abstract
Importance: Smoking quitline programs effectively promote smoking cessation in outpatient primary care settings. Objective: To examine the factors associated with smoking quitline engagement and smoking cessation among patients undergoing thoracic surgery who consented to a quitline electronic referral. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2018, among 111 active smoking patients referred to the quitline from a thoracic surgery outpatient clinic visit. Patients were divided into operative and nonoperative cohorts. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were engagement rates in the quitline program and successful smoking cessation. Secondary outcomes were self-reported point prevalence abstinence at 1 month and 6 months after the smoking quit date. Results: Of 111 patients (62 men; mean [SD] age, 61.8 [11.2] years) who had a quitline referral, 58 (52%) underwent surgery, and 32 of these 58 patients (55%) participated in the program. Of the 53 nonoperative patients (48%), 24 (45%) participated in the program. In the operative cohort, there was no difference in the smoking cessation rate between quitline participants and nonparticipants (21 of 32 [66%] vs 16 of 6 [62%]; P = .79) or in point prevalence abstinence at 1 month (23 of 32 [72%] vs 14 of 25 [56%]; P = .27) or 6 months (14 of 28 [50%] vs 6 of 18 [33%]; P = .36). Similarly, in the nonoperative cohort, there was no difference in the smoking cessation rate between quitline participants and nonparticipants (8 of 24 [33%] vs 11 of 29 [38%]; P = .78) or in point prevalence abstinence at 1 month (7 of 24 [29%] vs 8 of 27 [30%]; P = .99) or 6 months (6 of 23 [26%] vs 6 of 25 [24%]; P = .99). Regardless of quitline participation, operative patients had a 1.8-fold higher proportion of successful smoking cessation compared with nonoperative patients (37 of 58 [64%] vs 19 of 53 [36%]; P = .004) as well as a 2.2-fold higher proportion of 1-month point prevalence abstinence (37 of 57 [65%] vs 15 of 51 [29%]; P < .001) and a 1.8-fold higher proportion of 6-month point prevalence abstinence (20 of 45 [44%] vs 12 of 48 [25%]; P = .05). Having surgery doubled the odds of smoking cessation (odds ratio, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.06-5.64; P = .04) and quitline engagement tripled the odds of remaining smoke free at 6 months (odds ratio, 3.57; 95% CI, 1.03-12.38; P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: Patients undergoing thoracic surgery were nearly twice as likely to quit smoking as those who did not have an operation, and smoking quitline participation further augmented point prevalence abstinence. Improved smoking cessation rates, even among nonoperative patients, were associated with appropriate outpatient counseling and intervention.
Importance: Smoking quitline programs effectively promote smoking cessation in outpatient primary care settings. Objective: To examine the factors associated with smoking quitline engagement and smoking cessation among patients undergoing thoracic surgery who consented to a quitline electronic referral. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2018, among 111 active smoking patients referred to the quitline from a thoracic surgery outpatient clinic visit. Patients were divided into operative and nonoperative cohorts. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were engagement rates in the quitline program and successful smoking cessation. Secondary outcomes were self-reported point prevalence abstinence at 1 month and 6 months after the smoking quit date. Results: Of 111 patients (62 men; mean [SD] age, 61.8 [11.2] years) who had a quitline referral, 58 (52%) underwent surgery, and 32 of these 58 patients (55%) participated in the program. Of the 53 nonoperative patients (48%), 24 (45%) participated in the program. In the operative cohort, there was no difference in the smoking cessation rate between quitline participants and nonparticipants (21 of 32 [66%] vs 16 of 6 [62%]; P = .79) or in point prevalence abstinence at 1 month (23 of 32 [72%] vs 14 of 25 [56%]; P = .27) or 6 months (14 of 28 [50%] vs 6 of 18 [33%]; P = .36). Similarly, in the nonoperative cohort, there was no difference in the smoking cessation rate between quitline participants and nonparticipants (8 of 24 [33%] vs 11 of 29 [38%]; P = .78) or in point prevalence abstinence at 1 month (7 of 24 [29%] vs 8 of 27 [30%]; P = .99) or 6 months (6 of 23 [26%] vs 6 of 25 [24%]; P = .99). Regardless of quitline participation, operative patients had a 1.8-fold higher proportion of successful smoking cessation compared with nonoperative patients (37 of 58 [64%] vs 19 of 53 [36%]; P = .004) as well as a 2.2-fold higher proportion of 1-month point prevalence abstinence (37 of 57 [65%] vs 15 of 51 [29%]; P < .001) and a 1.8-fold higher proportion of 6-month point prevalence abstinence (20 of 45 [44%] vs 12 of 48 [25%]; P = .05). Having surgery doubled the odds of smoking cessation (odds ratio, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.06-5.64; P = .04) and quitline engagement tripled the odds of remaining smoke free at 6 months (odds ratio, 3.57; 95% CI, 1.03-12.38; P = .04). Conclusions and Relevance: Patients undergoing thoracic surgery were nearly twice as likely to quit smoking as those who did not have an operation, and smoking quitline participation further augmented point prevalence abstinence. Improved smoking cessation rates, even among nonoperative patients, were associated with appropriate outpatient counseling and intervention.
Authors: Jean Wong; Amir Abrishami; Sheila Riazi; Naveed Siddiqui; Eric You-Ten; Jennifer Korman; Sazzadul Islam; Xin Chen; Maged S M Andrawes; Peter Selby; David T Wong; Frances Chung Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2017-08 Impact factor: 5.108
Authors: Angelica S Marrufo; Benjamin D Kozower; Daniel J Tancredi; Miriam Nuño; David T Cooke; Brad H Pollock; Patrick S Romano; Lisa M Brown Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2018-12-23 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Katy A Marino; Melissa A Little; Zoran Bursac; Jennifer L Sullivan; Robert Klesges; Benny Weksler Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2016-07-27 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Sharon E Cummins; Anthony C Gamst; Kendra Brandstein; Gregory B Seymann; Hillary Klonoff-Cohen; Carrie A Kirby; Elisa K Tong; Edward Chaplin; Gary J Tedeschi; Shu-Hong Zhu Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Amanda L Graham; Nathan K Cobb; George D Papandonatos; Jose L Moreno; Hakmook Kang; David G Tinkelman; Beth C Bock; Raymond S Niaura; David B Abrams Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2011-01-10
Authors: Sebastian T Lugg; Theofano Tikka; Paula J Agostini; Amy Kerr; Kerry Adams; Maninder S Kalkat; Richard S Steyn; Pala B Rajesh; Ehab Bishay; David R Thickett; Babu Naidu Journal: J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2017-06-19 Impact factor: 1.637
Authors: Ulrika Müssener; Marcus Bendtsen; Nadine Karlsson; Ian R White; Jim McCambridge; Preben Bendtsen Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2016-03 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Paul M Cinciripini; Maher Karam-Hage; George Kypriotakis; Jason D Robinson; Vance Rabius; Diane Beneventi; Jennifer A Minnix; Janice A Blalock Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2019-09-04
Authors: Sophia J Luo; Eunji Choi; Jacqueline V Aredo; Lynne R Wilkens; Martin C Tammemägi; Loïc Le Marchand; Iona Cheng; Heather A Wakelee; Summer S Han Journal: JNCI Cancer Spectr Date: 2021-08-23
Authors: Heather D'Angelo; Sarah D Hohl; Betsy Rolland; Robert T Adsit; Danielle Pauk; Michael C Fiore; Timothy B Baker Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2022-05-26 Impact factor: 3.626
Authors: Manan M Nayak; Emanuele Mazzola; Michael T Jaklitsch; Jeremy E Drehmer; Emara Nabi-Burza; Raphael Bueno; Jonathan P Winickoff; Mary E Cooley Journal: Tob Induc Dis Date: 2022-07-04 Impact factor: 5.163
Authors: Ryan Howard; Jeremy Albright; Nicholas Osborne; Michael Englesbe; Philip Goodney; Peter Henke Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2021-07-21 Impact factor: 4.860