Back to Annual Meeting

Back to Annual Meeting

APHA Scientific Session and Event Listing

Rakhi Khatri, MD, MPH¹, Staci Liker, BA¹, Arthur Hoffman, MD, MPH², David Goldberg, MD¹, Janet L. Johnson, PhD³, James O. Prochaska⁴, and Megan Mills, PhD². (1) Section of Preventive Medicine, John Stroger hospital of Cook County, 1900 W. Polk Street, 9th floor, Chicago, IL 60612, 312-864-4465, rkhatri@uic.edu, (2) Internal Medicine, Rush University Medical Centre, 1653 W. Congress, Chicago, IL 60612, (3) Pro-Change Behavior Systems, Inc., P.O. Box 755, West Kingston, RI 02892, (4) University of Rhode Island, 2 Chafee Road, Kingston, RI 02881

Background: The impact of a public health intervention is defined as participation rate x efficacy. For smokers in community settings, proactive recruitment (in-person appeals by study staff) with tailored messages (Transtheroretical Model intervention) has led to 80% participation rates. This study examines proactive recruitment for a study of smokers in a novel setting (inpatient) under novel guidelines (HIPAA). Methods: All patients in the General medicine and surgery wards from April 2004 to June 2005 were potential participants. A HIPAA approval to access their names was obtained from the Institutional Review Board. Patients were not screened if they were terminally ill, non-English speaking, being discharged within 24 hours, or had an altered mental status. Patients who had smoked within the last 30 days and had a reliable phone number were invited to participate. Results: An attempt was made to approach 10,532 patients. 8076 patients could not be screened. The most frequent reasons for non screening were sleeping (18%), isolation (15.5%), away for tests (13%), non English speaking (12%), and occupied by medical personnel (10%). Of the 2,456 patients screened, 471 were eligible and 263 (56%) agreed to participate. The participants were distributed equally across their stage of readiness to quit: 54% in action and 46% in pre-action. Conclusions: Despite the limitations of hospital, we had 56% participation using proactive recruitment with inclusive messages and assembled a cohort of smokers both willing and not willing to quit. Due to HIPAA regulations, we were not able to study how participants differed from non-participants

Learning Objectives:

• 1. Describe the results of proactive recruitment within the hospital settings.
• 2. Identify HIPAA compliant strategies that result in improved participation to in-patient smoking cessation interventions.

Keywords: Smoking Cessation,

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Not Answered