We examined relationships of smoking status and tobacco-related variables with health-related quality of life (HRQoL), a metric of disease burden, among clients in substance use disorders (SUDs) treatment. Participants (N = 2,068; 46.6% female) completed surveys reporting demographics, smoking status, and past-month days they experienced physical and/or mental health distress. Smokers (n = 1,596; 77.2% of sample) answered questions on tobacco-related variables. Multinomial regression models assessed relationships between tobacco-related variables (smoking status, nicotine dependence, menthol smoking, electronic-cigarette use, health concerns, and cost as reasons affecting reducing/quitting smoking, past and future quit attempts) with HRQol in four categories (good health, physical health distress, mental health distress, or both physical and mental health distress). Current smokers were more likely than former smokers to report frequent physical and mental health distress than good health (OR = 1.97, 95% CI = 1.16, 3.34), as were smokers with higher nicotine dependence (OR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.03, 1.35). Smokers reporting both frequent physical and mental health distress were more sensitive to cigarettes' cost (OR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.06, 2.29), and less likely to use e-cigarettes (OR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.38, 0.94). Findings of poor HRQoL among nicotine-dependent smokers with additional SUDs strengthen the imperative to provide smoking cessation interventions in addictions treatment.

Smoke-free laws and policies have contributed significantly to the decline in smoking in the U.S, but are not often applied in high-prevalence smoking populations where they are most needed. Smoking among clients in publicly funded substance use disorder (SUD) treatment is 3-4 times higher than the general population, and little is known about tobacco policies programs have adopted. To identify the prevalence of tobacco-free grounds and other smoking policies in California's publicly funded, adult, residential SUD programs. Using a California DHCS contact list of 1,921 publicly funded, non-medical, SUD programs, 362 were eligible to participate in a brief semi-structured phone survey concerning indoor and outdoor smoking for staff and clients and other tobacco policies. Of 259 programs that completed the survey, 28 (10.8%) reported tobacco-free grounds. 91 (35.1%) expressed interest in implementing tobacco-free policies and 23 have plans to do so. Nearly all programs (n = 253, 97.7%) had some policy restricting e-cigarette use, and 110 (43.5%) of these reported a complete ban on e-cigarette use. 124 (47.9%) had policies prohibiting staff and clients smoking together. Most California residential SUD programs allow outdoor smoking for staff and clients and few have adopted tobacco-free grounds policies. Given the reported interest in adopting tobacco-free policies, the high density of smokers in the SUD population, and the association of tobacco-free policies with lower client and staff smoking rates, state licensing and regulatory agencies, as well as county health departments, should work with SUD programs to adopt tobacco-free policies.

Objectives

Research on sex differences in responses to cigarette graphic warning labels (GWLs) has been limited despite tobacco-related, health disparities for women. We examined whether women had stronger responses to certain labels than to others, whether this pattern differed from men's, and whether there were overall sex ratings differences.

Methods

Smokers (N = 881) in 24, addictions treatment programs rated 3 of 9 Food and Drug Administration-developed labels on credibility, message reactance, quit motivation, and negative emotions. Participants rated one label depicting a woman and/or baby, and 2 depicting tobacco-related disease or male images.

Results

Women's (n = 432) ratings of labels depicting women/babies versus other labels did not differ from men's (n = 449) ratings. Women had higher ratings than men across all labels combined on credibility (p < .001), quit motivation (p = .007), and negative emotions (p < .001). Individual labels were analyzed for sex differences. Women's ratings were higher on credibility for 3 of 9 labels, and on negative emotions for 7 of 9 labels.

Conclusions

Female smokers in addictions treatment had generally stronger responses to GWLs than men, supporting GWL implementation in the United States to help close the sex gap in smoking cessation.

This study examined whether living in a Medicaid-expanded state or having health insurance was associated with receipt of smoking cessation services or smoking behaviors among substance use disorder (SUD) treatment clients. In 2015 and 2016, 1702 SUD clients in 14 states were surveyed for health insurance status, smoking cessation services received in their treatment program, and smoking behaviors. Services and behaviors were then compared by state Medicaid expansion and health insurance status independently. Clients in Medicaid-expanded states were more likely to be insured (89.9% vs. 54.4%, p < 0.001) and to have quit smoking during treatment (AOR = 3.77, 95% CI = 2.47, 5.76). Insured clients had higher odds of being screened for smoking status in their treatment program and making quit attempts in the past year. Medicaid expansion supports greater health insurance coverage of individuals in SUD treatment and may enhance smoking cessation.

Graphic warning labels (GWLs) on cigarette packs have been tested among diverse groups at high risk for tobacco use. However, little is known about the effectiveness of GWL interventions for persons with substance use disorders, whose smoking prevalence is 3 to 4 times that of the general population. After an experimental study which exposed clients in residential addiction treatment to GWLs for 30 days, we conducted five focus groups with trial participants (N = 33) to explore how exposure to the labels may have impacted their readiness to quit smoking. Focus group interviews were analyzed thematically. Interviewees reported that GWLs were more effective than text-based warnings for increasing quit intentions due to greater cognitive and emotional impact. Male and female interviewees expressed gender-specific reactions to the labels. Addiction treatment programs are a strategic site for GWL and other tobacco interventions due to the tobacco-vulnerable populations they serve.

Objective

Specialty addiction programs treat people who are addicted to alcohol, opioids, stimulants, and other drugs. This study identified the proportion of addiction program clients who received tobacco-related services and factors associated with receipt of such services.

Methods

In 2015 and 2016, clients (N=2,119) in 24 programs were surveyed for receipt of services aligning with three of the five As of tobacco cessation: ask, advise, assist. Multivariate analyses examined factors associated with receipt of each service.

Results

Most clients (76%) were asked about smoking. Among smokers (N=1,630), 53% were advised to quit, 41% received counseling, 26% received cessation medication, and 17% received counseling and medication. Clients were more likely to receive tobacco-related services if they wanted help quitting smoking or were enrolled in programs with tobacco-free grounds.

Conclusions

These correlational findings suggest that increasing client motivation to quit and implementing tobacco-free policies on the grounds of treatment centers may increase tobacco-related services in addiction treatment.

Objective

This study assessed changes in smoking-related outcomes in two cross-sectional samples of clients enrolled in addiction treatment and whether tobacco-free grounds policies were associated with smoking-related outcomes.

Method

Clients in 25 programs were surveyed in 2015 (N=1176) and 2016 (N=1055). The samples were compared on smoking prevalence, cigarettes per day (CPD), thinking of quitting, past year quit attempts, staff and clients smoking together, attitudes towards quitting, and tobacco-related services. Second, programs with (n=6) and without (n=17) tobacco-free grounds at both time points were compared on smoking-related outcomes. Last, we examined changes in these measures for two programs that adopted tobacco-free grounds between 2015 and 2016.

Results

There was one difference across years, such that the mean score for the tobacco Program Service scale increased from 2.37 to 2.48 (p=0.043, effect size=0.02). In programs with tobacco-free grounds policies, compared to those without, both CPD and the rate of staff and clients smoking together were significantly lower. In the two programs where tobacco-free grounds were implemented during study years, client smoking prevalence decreased (92.5% v. 67.6%, p=0.005), the rate of staff and clients smoking together decreased (35.6% v. 4.2%, p=0.031), mean CPD decreased (10.62v. 8.24, p<0.001) and mean tobacco services received by clients increased (2.08v. 3.05, p<0.001).

Conclusion

Addiction treatment programs, and agencies responsible for licensing, regulating and funding these programs, should implement tobacco-free grounds policies.

Little is known about how older adults with a current or recent experience of homelessness navigated the switch to telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. We examined the perceptions and use of telehealth in a purposive sample of 37 homeless-experienced older adults in mid-late 2020 through semi-structured qualitative interviews. We purposively recruited participants from a larger longitudinal study on homeless-experienced older adults in Oakland, CA. We subjected the data to content analysis. We found that most participants who used telehealth used audio-only phone calls for care. We found that (1) participants experienced challenges accessing the necessary technologies for telehealth, (2) perceptions of telehealth for physical health differed based on the modality (video vs. audio-only), and (3) participants had generally positive perceptions of telehealth for mental healthcare. Our findings suggest that clinicians interacting with homeless-experienced older adults should address the potential skepticism of audio-only telehealth patients, and assess their access to, and knowledge of, video conferencing technology.

Background

Disparities in tobacco use prevalence, behaviors, and services have been identified among people of different racial and ethnic groups in the United States general population. Persons in addiction treatment have among the highest smoking prevalence of any population. However, little is known about racial and ethnic disparities in tobacco use prevalence, behaviors, and services among persons in addiction treatment.

Methods

Survey data were used from 1840 clients from 24 addiction treatment programs from the NIDA Clinical Trials Network. Multivariate regression analyses were conducted to assess associations between race/ethnicity (White, African American, Hispanic) and patterns of tobacco and other tobacco product use, as well as quitting behaviors and receipt of tobacco cessation services among current smokers (n = 1425) while in treatment.

Results

There was no difference in cigarette smoking prevalence across racial/ethnic groups. In the multivariate models, Hispanics and African Americans, compared to Whites, were less likely to be daily smokers, use smokeless tobacco, or use e-cigarettes. African Americans and Hispanics reported more past-year quit attempts and higher use of menthol compared to Whites. Hispanics were more interested in quitting while in treatment than Whites. Contrary to expectations, African Americans reported receiving more tobacco cessation advice and services while in treatment than Whites.

Conclusions

Some findings reflected broader population patterns (e.g., tobacco use behaviors, other tobacco product use), while others did not (e.g., no difference in tobacco use prevalence by race/ethnicity). The reasons for greater receipt of cessation services among African Americans are unclear. Findings indicate the need for continued engagement of African Americans and Hispanics in cessation services while in addiction treatment, and for addressing heavier tobacco use and lack of interest in cessation during treatment among White clients.

Smoking is endemic in drug abuse treatment populations, and smoking prevalence in this population appears unresponsive to existing tobacco control strategies. Clinical and policy guidelines encourage programs to address smoking among clients, and research has identified key barriers to doing so. This report explores the practice of staff and clients smoking together in drug treatment programs, and how this practice is associated with other tobacco-related measures. Clients (N=1113) were surveyed and program directors were interviewed in a national sample of 24 drug abuse treatment programs affiliated with the NIDA Clinical Trials Network. Clients were asked whether they observed staff and clients smoking together in their program and, using program as the unit of analysis, this measure was tested for its association with client-level and program-level tobacco-related outcomes. Higher rates of staff and client smoking together were associated with higher staff smoking prevalence (p=0.006), lower rates of client thoughts about quitting in the next 30days (p=0.027), more negative client attitudes toward quitting smoking (p=0.004), and with clients receiving fewer tobacco-related services (p=0.024). These findings illuminate an actionable, low cost policy intervention to address smoking in drug abuse treatment, which is to prohibit the practice of staff smoking together with clients. In the interest of the health of clients whom they serve, counselors, program directors, state regulatory agencies, and federal funding agencies should act to end this practice.