Cited by 66Smoking Behavior and CessationHealth Policy Implementation ScienceSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

Implementing tobacco interventions in the real world of managed care

Open access
Hollis, J. F·2000·Tobacco Control

Abstract

Over the years we have been working to develop, test, and implement tobacco control interventions as a part of routine care within Kaiser Permanente.Most of our work has been in Kaiser Permanente's northwest division, based in Portland, Oregon, but we have also implemented similar approaches in several other divisions, including Ohio, Hawaii, and Georgia.I will first describe our general approach, which we call the TRAC model ("tobacco reduction, assessment, and care"), and then share both our progress and some very real diYculties we have encountered in trying to implement the program throughout the health care system.The rationale for delivering brief tobacco intervention during routine care is familiar to those who work in cessation.1 Tobacco remains the most important cause of preventable disease.We know that most smokers see clinicians frequently, and that these visits create teachable moments when patients are receptive to advice and intervention.When we routinely ignore these intervention opportunities, we are, in eVect, failing our patients.Indeed, metaanalyses from the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR) clinical guideline 2 show that brief advice and support lead to modest but consistent long term eVects on smoking cessation.We also know that brief tobacco interventions are among the most cost eVective of all medical care procedures we routinely oVer.3 4 It is for these reasons that the Health Plan Employer Data Information Set (HEDIS) and other quality monitoring groups are holding health care systems accountable for addressing tobacco during clinical care.For me, however, the most important reasons to oVer cessation advice and assistance are that our patients want, need, and expect this kind of support.How are we doing as a nation in delivering cessation advice during medical care visits? Figure 1 displays time trend data 5 from the National Household Interview Survey 6-8 and the Current Population Survey from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. 5 Both surveys use national probability samples to estimate the percent of smokers with visits in the preceding year who report that a physician has ever advised them to quit smoking.Back in 1974, few smokers reported ever receiving cessation advice.Advice rates rose sharply by 1986 and have continued to slowly improve up through the mid 1990s.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/tc.9.suppl_1.i18

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Translation research is relatively uncommon.

    “Despite its importance, such translation research is relatively rare (6–8), perhaps because using current approaches translation can be arduous and slow, sometimes taking 15 to 20 years (9, 10).”
  • The Gordian Knot of clinical tobacco control is an inability to achieve more consistent delivery of evidence-based tobacco cessation interventions by real-world healthcare personnel.

    “The Gordian Knot of clinical tobacco control is an inability to achieve more consistent delivery of evidence-based tobacco cessation interventions by real-world healthcare personnel (6, 49–52).”
  • Burden and complexity is a leading cause of poor translation.

    “Investigators using MOST to optimize the effectiveness of interventions may wish to include intervention components of varying resource intensity because burden and complexity is a leading cause of poor translation (6).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Hollis J. Population impact of clinician eVorts to reduce tobacco. In: Burns DM, ed. Population Based smoking cessa- tion monograph. National Cancer Institute and the Califor- nia Department of Health Services, Tobacco Control Sec- tion. In press.
  2. CDC. Physician and other health care professional counsel- ling of smokers to quit-United States, 1991. JAMA 1993;270:2536-7.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hollis, J. F.
Affiliations
Kaiser Permanente (US)
Corresponding author
Hollis, J. F
Venue
Tobacco Control
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2000-03-01
Volume
9
Issue
90001
Pages
18i-24
ISSN
0964-4563 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2015649675
Cited by
66
References
15
Citations by year
2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2
FWCI
3.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Tobacco Control (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01hl050007-04)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL50007)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
tobacco control interventions, smoking cessation, managed care, Kaiser Permanente, usual care, implementation barriers, cost-effectiveness
MeSH terms
Georgia, Hawaii, Health Maintenance Organizations, Health Promotion, Humans, Ohio, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Tobacco Use Disorder, Program Evaluation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review