Transition to telehealth: Challenges and benefits of conducting group-based smoking and alcohol treatment virtually.

In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, many research and clinical teams have transitioned their projects to a remote-based format, weighing the pros and cons of making such a potentially disruptive decision. One key aspect of this decision is related to the patient population, with underserved populations possibly benefiting from the increased reach of telehealth, while also encountering technology barriers that may limit accessibility. Early in the pandemic, our team shifted a group-based, smoking cessation and alcohol modification treatment trial to a remote-based format. Our population included individuals who concurrently wanted to quit smoking and modify their alcohol use. This paper describes technical and logistical considerations of transitioning from in-person to remote-based delivery for group-based treatment, including the impact upon study staff, group facilitators, participants, and the institution. Remotely-delivered group treatment may be valuable not only in response to pandemic-related restrictions, but it may also offer an alternative treatment-delivery modality with independent benefits in terms of population reach, costs, and pragmatics for clients, staff, and institutions.

Targeted smoking cessation for dual users of combustible and electronic cigarettes: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although many smokers use electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) to quit smoking, most continue to smoke while vaping. This dual use might delay cessation and increase toxicant exposure. We aimed to test the efficacy of a self-help intervention designed to help dual users to quit smoking. METHODS: In this three-arm randomised controlled trial we recruited individuals in the USA using Facebook and multimedia advertisements. Included participants were 18 years or older, smoked at least weekly in the preceding year, and vaped at least weekly in the preceding month. We used computer generated randomisation with balanced-permuted blocks (block size 10, with 2-4-4 ratio) to allocate participants to assessment only (ASSESS group), generic smoking cessation self-help booklets (GENERIC group), or booklets targeting dual users (eTARGET group). Individuals in the generic or targeted intervention groups received monthly cessation materials for 18 months, with assessments every 3 months for 24 months. The main outcome was self-reported 7-day point-prevalence smoking abstinence at each assessment point. All randomly allocated participants were included in primary analyses using generalised estimating equations for each of 20 datasets created by multiple imputation. Analysis of the χ2s produced an F test. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02416011, and is now closed. FINDINGS: Between July 12, 2016, and June 30, 2017, we randomly assigned 2896 dual users (575 to assessment, 1154 to generic intervention, and 1167 to targeted self-help). 7-day point-prevalence smoking abstinence increased from 14% at 3 months to 42% at 24 months (F7,541·7=67·1, p<0·0001) in the overall sample. Targeted self-help resulted in higher smoking abstinence than did assessment alone throughout the treatment period (F1,973·8=10·20, p=0·0014 [α=0·017]). The generic intervention group had abstinence rates between those of the assessment and targeted groups, but did not significantly differ from either when adjusted for multiple comparisons (GENERIC vs eTARGET F1,1102·5=1·79, p=0·18 [α=0·05]; GENERIC vs ASSESS F1,676·7=4·29, p=0·039 [α=0·025]). Differences between study groups attenuated after the interventions ended. INTERPRETATION: A targeted self-help intervention with high potential for dissemination could be efficacious in promoting smoking cessation among dual users of combustible cigarettes and e-cigarettes. FUNDING: National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Cancer Institute.