Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2014
Provider-delivered tobacco dependence treatment to Medicaid smokers.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ferketich Amy K, Pennell Michael, Seiber Eric E, Wang Ling, Farietta Thalia, Jin Yue, Wewers Mary Ellen
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Smoking prevalence is 49% among Medicaid enrollees in Ohio. The objective of this pilot project was to test a comprehensive tobacco dependence treatment program targeting rural Medicaid-enrolled smokers for both physician-level and smoker-level outcomes.
METHODS: Using a group-randomized trial design, intervention group physicians (n = 4) were exposed to systems-level changes in their clinics, and smokers in these clinics were offered 12 weeks of telephone cessation counseling. Control group physicians (n = 4) were given the clinician's version of the U.S. Public Health Serivce (USPHS) Clinical Practice Guideline, and smokers in these clinics were given information about the Ohio Tobacco Quitline. Physician-level and smoker-level outcomes were assessed at 1 week and 3 months, respectively. Costs per quit were estimated.
RESULTS: A total of 214 Medicaid smokers were enrolled. At 1 week, there were no reported differences in rates of being asked about tobacco use (68% intervention, 58% control) or advised to quit (69% intervention, 63% control). However, 30% of intervention and 56% of control smokers reported receiving a prescription for pharmacotherapy (p < .01). At 3 months, there were no differences in quit attempts (58% intervention, 64% control), use of pharmacotherapy (34% intervention, 46% control), or abstinence (24% intervention, 16% control for self-reported abstinence; 11% intervention, 3.5% control for cotinine-confirmed abstinence). The intervention group proved more cost-effective at achieving confirmed quits ($6,800 vs. $9,700).
CONCLUSIONS: We found few differences in outcomes between physicians exposed to a brief intervention and physicians who were intensively trained. Future studies should examine how tobacco dependence treatment can be further expanded in Medicaid programs.
METHODS: Using a group-randomized trial design, intervention group physicians (n = 4) were exposed to systems-level changes in their clinics, and smokers in these clinics were offered 12 weeks of telephone cessation counseling. Control group physicians (n = 4) were given the clinician's version of the U.S. Public Health Serivce (USPHS) Clinical Practice Guideline, and smokers in these clinics were given information about the Ohio Tobacco Quitline. Physician-level and smoker-level outcomes were assessed at 1 week and 3 months, respectively. Costs per quit were estimated.
RESULTS: A total of 214 Medicaid smokers were enrolled. At 1 week, there were no reported differences in rates of being asked about tobacco use (68% intervention, 58% control) or advised to quit (69% intervention, 63% control). However, 30% of intervention and 56% of control smokers reported receiving a prescription for pharmacotherapy (p < .01). At 3 months, there were no differences in quit attempts (58% intervention, 64% control), use of pharmacotherapy (34% intervention, 46% control), or abstinence (24% intervention, 16% control for self-reported abstinence; 11% intervention, 3.5% control for cotinine-confirmed abstinence). The intervention group proved more cost-effective at achieving confirmed quits ($6,800 vs. $9,700).
CONCLUSIONS: We found few differences in outcomes between physicians exposed to a brief intervention and physicians who were intensively trained. Future studies should examine how tobacco dependence treatment can be further expanded in Medicaid programs.