Browsing by Author "Thomas, Leah C"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • No Thumbnail Available
    ItemOpen Access
    Comparison of referral methods into a smoking cessation program.
    (Journal of comparative effectiveness research, 2020-08-14) Davis, James M; Thomas, Leah C; Dirkes, Jillian Eh; Datta, Santanu K; Dennis, Paul A
    Rational, aims & objectives: The goal of this observational study was to compare three referral methods and determine which led to the highest utilization of the Duke Smoking Cessation Program (DSCP). Materials & methods: We conducted two assessments within the Duke health system: a 12-month assessment of Traditional Referral (a provider refers a patient during a patient visit) and Best Practice Advisory (BPA) (a provider refers a patient after responding to an alert within the electronic health record); and a 30-day assessment of Population Outreach (a list of smokers is generated through the electronic health record and patients are contacted directly). Results: Over the 12-month assessment, a total of 13,586 smokers were seen throughout health system clinics receiving services from the DSCP. During this period, the service utilization rate was significantly higher for Traditional Referral (3.8%) than for BPA (0.6%); p < 0.005. The 30-day pilot assessment of showed a service utilization rate for Population Outreach of 6.3%, significantly higher than Traditional Referral (3.8%); p < 0.005 and BPA (0.6%; p < 0.005). Conclusion: Population Outreach appears to be an effective referral method for increasing utilization of the DSCP.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Strategies for Referring Cancer Patients in a Smoking Cessation Program.
    (International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020-08-21) Davis, James M; Thomas, Leah C; Dirkes, Jillian EH; Swartzwelder, H Scott
    Most people who smoke and develop cancer are unable to quit smoking. To address this, many cancer centers have now opened smoking cessation programs specifically designed to help cancer patients to quit. An important question has now emerged-what is the most effective approach for engaging smokers within a cancer center in these smoking cessation programs? We report outcomes from a retrospective observational study comparing three referral methods-traditional referral, best practice advisory (BPA), and direct outreach-on utilization of the Duke Cancer Center Smoking Cessation Program. We found that program utilization rate was higher for direct outreach (5.4%) than traditional referral (0.8%), p < 0.001, and BPA (0.2%); p < 0.001. Program utilization was 6.4% for all methods combined. Inferring a causal relationship between referral method and program utilization was not possible because the study did not use a randomized design. Innovation is needed to generate higher utilization rates for cancer center smoking cessation programs.