Panagis Galiatsatos1,2, Alexandria Soybel3, Mandeep Jassal4, Sergio Axel Perez Cruz3, Caroline Spartin3, Katie Shaw5, Jodi Cunningham6, Norma Fox Kanarek7,8. 1. Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. panagis@jhmi.edu. 2. Medicine for the Greater Good, Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA. panagis@jhmi.edu. 3. Medicine for the Greater Good, Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA. 4. Division of Pediatric Pulmonary, Department of Pediatrics, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 5. Department of Urban Residency, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 6. The Community Builders, Inc, Cincinnati, OH, USA. 7. Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. 8. Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As a further extension of smoke-free laws in indoor public places and workplaces, the Department of Housing and Urban Development's declaration to propose a regulation that would make housing units smoke-free was inevitable. Of note is the challenge this regulation poses to current tenants of housing units who are active smokers. We aimed to assess the efficacy of a tobacco treatment clinic in public housing. The utilization of the clinic by tenants and tenants' respective outcomes regarding smoking status were used to determine the intervention's effectiveness. METHODS: Tobacco treatment clinics were held in two urban-based housing units for 1-year. The clinics provided on-site motivational interviewing and prescriptions for pharmacological agents if warranted. Outcomes collected include the tenants' clinic attendance and 3- and 6-month self-reported smoking status. RESULTS: Twenty-nine tobacco treatment clinic sessions were implemented, recruiting 47 tenants to participate in smoking cessation. The mean age of the cohort was 53 ± 12.3 years old. Of the 47 tenants who participated, 21 (44.7%) attended three or more clinic sessions. At the 3-month mark, five (10.6%) tenants were identified to have quit smoking; at 6-months, 13 (27.7%) tenants had quit smoking. All 13 of the tenants who quit smoking at the end of 6-months attended three or more sessions. CONCLUSION: An on-site tobacco treatment clinic to provide strategies on smoking cessation was feasible. Efforts are warranted to ensure more frequent follow-ups for tenants aiming to quit smoking. While further resources should be allocated to help tenants comply with smoke-free housing units' regulations, we believe an on-site tobacco treatment clinic is impactful.
BACKGROUND: As a further extension of smoke-free laws in indoor public places and workplaces, the Department of Housing and Urban Development's declaration to propose a regulation that would make housing units smoke-free was inevitable. Of note is the challenge this regulation poses to current tenants of housing units who are active smokers. We aimed to assess the efficacy of a tobacco treatment clinic in public housing. The utilization of the clinic by tenants and tenants' respective outcomes regarding smoking status were used to determine the intervention's effectiveness. METHODS:Tobacco treatment clinics were held in two urban-based housing units for 1-year. The clinics provided on-site motivational interviewing and prescriptions for pharmacological agents if warranted. Outcomes collected include the tenants' clinic attendance and 3- and 6-month self-reported smoking status. RESULTS: Twenty-nine tobacco treatment clinic sessions were implemented, recruiting 47 tenants to participate in smoking cessation. The mean age of the cohort was 53 ± 12.3 years old. Of the 47 tenants who participated, 21 (44.7%) attended three or more clinic sessions. At the 3-month mark, five (10.6%) tenants were identified to have quit smoking; at 6-months, 13 (27.7%) tenants had quit smoking. All 13 of the tenants who quit smoking at the end of 6-months attended three or more sessions. CONCLUSION: An on-site tobacco treatment clinic to provide strategies on smoking cessation was feasible. Efforts are warranted to ensure more frequent follow-ups for tenants aiming to quit smoking. While further resources should be allocated to help tenants comply with smoke-free housing units' regulations, we believe an on-site tobacco treatment clinic is impactful.
Authors: Jeffrey Drope; Alex C Liber; Zachary Cahn; Michal Stoklosa; Rosemary Kennedy; Clifford E Douglas; Rosemarie Henson; Jacqui Drope Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2018-01-31 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Amy J H Kind; Steve Jencks; Jane Brock; Menggang Yu; Christie Bartels; William Ehlenbach; Caprice Greenberg; Maureen Smith Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2014-12-02 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Kate Frazer; Joanne E Callinan; Jack McHugh; Susan van Baarsel; Anna Clarke; Kirsten Doherty; Cecily Kelleher Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2016-02-04
Authors: David M Homa; Linda J Neff; Brian A King; Ralph S Caraballo; Rebecca E Bunnell; Stephen D Babb; Bridgette E Garrett; Connie S Sosnoff; Lanqing Wang Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2015-02-06 Impact factor: 17.586