Tobacco use treatment is not prioritized in substance use treatment centers (SUTCs), leading to tobacco-related health inequities for patients with substance use disorders (SUDs) and necessitating efforts to enhance providers’ care provision. Training providers on how to treat tobacco use increases their intervention on patients’ smoking, but limited work addresses its effects on their non-cigarette tobacco use intervention provision. This study redressed this gap using data from 15 unaffiliated SUTCs in Texas (serving 82,927 patients/year) participating in a tobacco-free workplace program (TFWP) that included provider education on treating tobacco use, including non-cigarette tobacco use. SUTC providers completed surveys before (n = 259) and after (n = 194) TFWP implementation. Past-month screening/intervention provision for non-cigarette tobacco use (the 5A’s; ask, advise, assess, assist, arrange) and provider factors theoretically and practically presumed to underlie change [i.e., beliefs about concurrently treating tobacco use disorder (TUD) and other SUDs, self-efficacy for tobacco use assessment (TUA) delivery, barriers to treating tobacco dependence, receipt of tobacco intervention training] were assessed. Generalized linear or linear mixed models assessed changes over time from before to after TFWP implementation; low vs. high SUTC-level changes in provider factors were examined as moderators of changes in 5A’s delivery. Results indicated significant improvement in each provider factor and increases in providers’ asking, assisting, and arranging for non-cigarette tobacco use over time (ps < 0.04). Relative to their counterparts, SUTCs with high changes in providers’ beliefs in favor of treating patients’ tobacco use had greater odds of advising, assessing, assisting, and arranging patients, and SUTCs with greater barrier reductions had greater odds of advising and assisting patients. Results suggest that TFWPs can address training deficits and alter providers’ beliefs about treating non-tobacco TUD during SUD care, improve their TUA delivery self-efficacy, and reduce intervention barriers, ultimately increasing intervention provision for patients’ non-cigarette tobacco use. SUTCs with the greatest room for improvement in provider beliefs and barriers to care provision seem excellent candidates for TFWP implementation aimed at increasing non-cigarette tobacco use care delivery.

Rates of non-cigarette (colloquially, other) tobacco use is elevated among adults with behavioral health conditions. Little is known about whether behavioral health providers are using brief interventions, including the evidence-based 5As (Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, and Arrange) for other tobacco use, or what provider factors may be associated with use of these interventions. The current study redressed this gap. Overall, 86 providers in Texas (9 Federally Qualified Health Centers, 16 Local Mental Health Authorities (LMHAs) that provide a broad range of mental and behavioral health services, 6 substance use treatment programs in LMHAs, and 55 stand-alone substance use treatment programs) took a survey assessing their beliefs regarding (1) patients’ concerns about other tobacco use; (2) their desire to quit; (3) importance of intervening on other tobacco use with cessation counseling; (4) perceived skills to intervene; (5) knowledge of referral options for treatment. Logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine the association between each factor and use of the 5As. Results showed that 70.9% of providers asked patients about other tobacco use status, 65.1% advised them to quit, 59.3% assessed quit interest, 54.7% assisted with a quit attempt, and 31.4% arranged a follow-up. Providers who believed patients were concerned about other tobacco use, recognized the importance of offering other tobacco use cessation counseling, believed they had the necessary skills to treat other tobacco use, and possessed knowledge of referral options, respectively, were more likely to deliver the 5As (ps < 0.05). Results add to a limited literature on provider intervention practices for other tobacco use in settings where behavioral health care is provided, highlighting the significance of provider beliefs, perceived skills, and referral knowledge to care delivery. Findings reveal opportunities to increase delivery of the 5As for other tobacco use to behavioral health patients and suggest provider factors that could be targeted to build this capacity.

Background: People with substance use disorders smoke cigarettes at much higher rates than the general population in the United States and are disproportionately affected by tobacco-related diseases. Many substance use treatment centers do not provide evidence-based tobacco cessation treatment or maintain comprehensive tobacco-free workplace policies. The goal of the current work is to identify barriers and facilitators to a successful and sustainable implementation of a tobacco-free workplace program, which includes a comprehensive tobacco-free policy and evidence-based cessation treatment services, in a substance use treatment center. Methods: This study is based on an ethnographic approach and uses a qualitative case study design. Data were collected via interviews with staff (n = 6) and clients (n = 16) at the substance use treatment center and site visits (n = 8). Data were analyzed using thematic analysis guided by the extended Normalization Process Theory designed to inform the implementation of innovations in healthcare practice. Results: Staff at the substance use treatment center supported the implementation of the program and shared a good understanding of the purpose of the intervention and its potential benefits. However, the study identified significant challenges faced by the center during implementation, including widespread tobacco use among clients, contributing to attitudes among staff that tobacco cessation was a low-priority problem due to a perceived lack of interest in quitting and inability to quit among their clients. We identified several factors that contributed to changing this attitude, including provision of tobacco training to staff, active leadership support, low number of staff members who smoked, and access to material resources, including nicotine replacement products. The implementation and active enforcement of a comprehensive tobacco-free workplace program contributed to a gradual change in attitudes and improved the provision of evidence-based tobacco cessation care at the substance use treatment center. Conclusions: Substance use treatment centers can integrate tobacco cessation practices in their daily operations, despite multiple challenges they face due to the complex behavioral health and socioeconomic needs of their clients. With proper support, substance use treatment centers can provide much needed tobacco cessation care to their clients who are disproportionately affected by tobacco-related health conditions and systemic health inequities.

Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of death in America and is elevated among patients with non-tobacco substance use disorders. Substance use treatment centers (SUTCs) do not commonly address their patients’ tobacco use. Lack of knowledge on treating tobacco use with counseling and medication may be a barrier that underlies this inaction. A multi-component tobacco-free workplace program implemented in Texas SUTCs educated providers on treating tobacco use with evidence-based medication (or referral) and counseling. This study examined how center-level changes in knowledge from pre- to post-implementation (i.e., over time) affected center-level behavioral changes in providers’ provision of tobacco use treatment over time. Providers from 15 SUTCs completed pre- and post-implementation surveys (pre N = 259; post N = 194) assessing (1) perceived barriers to treating tobacco use, specifically, a lack of knowledge on treating tobacco use with counseling or medication; (2) receipt of past-year education on treating tobacco use with counseling or medication; and (3) their intervention practices, specifically, the self-reported regular use of (a) counseling or (b) medication intervention or referral with patients who use tobacco. Generalized linear mixed models explored associations between provider-reported knowledge barriers, education receipt, and intervention practices over time. Overall, recent counseling education receipt was endorsed by 32.00% versus 70.21% of providers from pre- to post-implementation; the regular use of counseling to treat tobacco use was endorsed by 19.31% versus 28.87% from pre- to post-implementation. Recent medication education receipt was endorsed by 20.46% versus 71.88% of providers from pre- to post-implementation; the regular use of medication to treat tobacco use was endorsed by 31.66% versus 55.15% from pre- to post-implementation. All changes were statistically significant (ps < 0.05). High versus low reductions in the provider-reported barrier of “lack of knowledge on pharmacotherapy treatment” over time were a significant moderator of effects, such that SUTCs with high reductions in this barrier were more likely to report greater increases in both medication education receipt and medication treatment/referral for patients who use tobacco over time. In conclusion, a tobacco-free workplace program implementation strategy that included SUTC provider education improved knowledge and resulted in increased delivery of evidence-based treatment of tobacco use at SUTCs; however, treatment provision rates—in particular, offering tobacco cessation counseling—remained less than desirable, suggesting that barriers beyond lack of knowledge may be important to address to improve tobacco use care in SUTCs. Moderation results suggest (1) differences in the mechanisms underlying uptake of counseling education versus medication education and (2) that the relative difficulty of providing counseling versus providing medication persists regardless of knowledge gains.

People with substance-use disorders have elevated rates of tobacco use compared with the general population, yet rarely receive tobacco-dependence treatment within substance-use treatment settings (SUTS). One barrier to delivering evidence-based interventions in SUTS is providers’ misconception that treating tobacco use and non-nicotine substance use concurrently jeopardizes clients’ substance-use recovery, although research indicates that it enhances support for recovery and relapse prevention. A total of 86 treatment providers employed in SUTS (i.e., 9 Federally Qualified Health Centers, 16 Local Mental Health Authorities (LMHAs), 6 substance-use treatment programs in LMHAs, and 55 stand-alone substance-use treatment centers) in Texas, USA, answered survey questions about their (1) thoughts about treating tobacco during substance-use treatment, and (2) delivery of the 5A’s tobacco-use intervention (Ask, Advise, Assess, Assist, Arrange). Twenty-six providers and leaders were interviewed about attitudes toward tobacco-free workplace policies and tobacco dependence and the relative importance of treating tobacco (vs. other substance-use disorders) at their center. Providers who did not believe tobacco use should be addressed as soon as clients begin treatment (i.e., endorsed responses of after 1 year, it depends on the client, or never) had lower odds of Asking clients about their tobacco use (OR = 0.195), Advising clients to quit smoking (OR = 0.176), and Assessing interest in quitting smoking (OR = 0.322). Qualitative results revealed barriers including beliefs that clients need to smoke to relieve the stress of substance-use recovery, are disinterested in quitting, fears that concurrent treatment would jeopardize substance use, and limited resources; additional training and education resources was the key facilitator theme. The results demonstrate a critical need to eliminate barriers to tobacco-treatment provision for clients in SUTS through education to correct misperceptions, specialized training to equip providers with knowledge and skills, and resources to build center capacity. Integrating evidence-based smoking interventions into routine care is key to support the recovery efforts of clients in SUTS.

Annual lung cancer screening using low dose computed tomography (LDCT) effectively reduces mortality from lung cancer and is recommended for persons who are at high risk of developing the disease. The utilization of the lung cancer screening, however, has remained low. Due to significantly higher cigarette smoking rates, patients with behavioral health disorders (those living with mental illness and/or substance use disorders) are more likely to be diagnosed with and die from lung cancer; at the same time, they are less likely to undergo cancer screenings. There is an urgent need for targeted efforts to improve access to lung cancer screening among this population disproportionately affected by the disease. In this commentary, we propose integrating lung cancer screening facilitation into services provided by behavioral health professionals who are uniquely positioned to reach these patients and deliver interventions to increase uptake of cancer screenings. We suggest several measures that could improve lung health outcomes of patients with behavioral health disorders: (1) training behavioral health professionals in lung cancer screening eligibility assessment; (2) providing patients with education materials; (3) integrating shared decision making counseling for lung cancer screening into behavioral healthcare settings; (4) providing practical support needed to access screening; (5) establishing effective partnerships with community organizations. Regardless of the level of engagement, possibly ranging from brief training to the implementation of comprehensive programs, any involvement will benefit patients. This integrated approach will contribute to reducing lung cancer mortality among patients with behavioral health disorders who have long experienced systemic health inequities. Lung Cancer Screening Recommendations and Current Uptake.