Caravella McCuistian1, Kwinoja Kapiteni2, Thao Le3, Jessica Safier4, Kevin Delucchi5, Joseph Guydish6. 1. Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California San Francisco, 490 Illinois St., Floor 7 San Francisco, CA 94158, United States of America. Electronic address: caravella.mccuistian@ucsf.edu. 2. Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California San Francisco, 490 Illinois St., Floor 7 San Francisco, CA 94158, United States of America. 3. Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California San Francisco, 490 Illinois St., Floor 7 San Francisco, CA 94158, United States of America. Electronic address: thao.le@ucsf.edu. 4. Smoking Cessation Leadership Center, University of California San Francisco, 3333 California Street, Ste. 430, San Francisco, CA 94143, United States of America. Electronic address: jessica.safier@ucsf.edu. 5. Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Francisco, 401 Parnassus Ave, San Francisco, CA 94143, United States of America. Electronic address: kevin.delucchi@ucsf.edu. 6. Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California San Francisco, 490 Illinois St., Floor 7 San Francisco, CA 94158, United States of America. Electronic address: joseph.guydish@ucsf.edu.
Abstract
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.
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.
Authors: Joseph Guydish; Barbara Tajima; Agatha Kulaga; Roberto Zavala; Lawrence S Brown; Alan Bostrom; Douglas Ziedonis; Mable Chan Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2012-03-15 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Jamie J Hunt; Byron J Gajewski; Yu Jiang; A Paula Cupertino; Kimber P Richter Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2013-08-15 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Joseph Guydish; Valerie A Gruber; Thao Le; Barbara Tajima; K Blakely Andrews; Hannah Leo; Shaina K Zura; Roland Miller; Janice Y Tsoh Journal: J Subst Abuse Treat Date: 2015-12-28
Authors: Jessica M Yingst; Nicolle M Krebs; Candace R Bordner; Andrea L Hobkirk; Sophia I Allen; Jonathan Foulds Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-02-12 Impact factor: 3.390