Medicaid, Private Insurance, and the Availability of Smoking Cessation Interventions in Substance Use Disorder Treatment
Abstract
Objective:
Integration of smoking cessation services in substance use disorder treatment would benefit many patients. Although prior studies have identified organizational characteristics associated with delivery of these services, less is known regarding associations between financial factors and the availability of smoking cessation services. This study examined whether reliance on Medicaid and private insurance revenues is associated with the availability of a formal counseling-based smoking cessation program and medications (sustained-release bupropion, varenicline, and nicotine replacement) within U.S. specialty treatment organizations.
Methods:
Administrators of a national sample of 372 treatment organizations participated in face-to-face structured interviews from October 2011 to December 2013. Participants provided data regarding smoking cessation services, revenue sources, and other organizational characteristics. Multiple imputation was used to address missing data, and models were estimated by using logistic regression with adjustment for clustering of organizations within states.
Results:
Greater reliance on Medicaid revenues was positively associated with the odds of offering counseling-based smoking cessation programs, sustained-release bupropion, varenicline, and nicotine replacement. For example, a 10-percentage point increase in Medicaid revenues was associated with a 12% increase in the odds of offering a smoking cessation program. Reliance on private insurance revenues was positively associated with the odds of offering the three medications.
Conclusions:
The findings point to future potential increases in the availability of smoking cessation services in the context of expanding insurance coverage under health care reform. Longitudinal research will be needed to examine whether this impact is realized.
Rates of cigarette smoking among individuals in the United States with substance-related diagnoses typically exceed 70%, according to epidemiological data (1–3) and reports from treatment organizations (4,5). Much of the excess mortality experienced by individuals with substance-related disorders is attributable to tobacco use (6,7). Among individuals receiving substance abuse treatment, continued smoking is a significant risk factor for relapse (8,9).
These observations regarding prevalence, mortality, and relapse have led to calls for greater integration of smoking cessation into substance abuse treatment services (10–13). Such integration is consistent with the Preventive Health Service’s practice guideline Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence (14). Many of the guideline’s recommended practices draw upon clinical skills that parallel the counseling delivered in specialty treatment. However, research has shown that counseling-based smoking cessation programs are rare in these settings (15,16), and few counselors explicitly address tobacco use with their clients (17–20). Data also show relatively low use of smoking cessation medications (5,21,22), despite strong evidence regarding effectiveness, particularly when these medications are combined with counseling (23).
Numerous reports have examined the diffusion of smoking cessation interventions while considering organizational structure, cultural norms, and perceived barriers to adoption (5,15,16,24–27). Measures of organizational structure provide important information about where smoking cessation services are more likely to be delivered, and cultural research highlights potential strategies to increase the uptake of smoking cessation services (28).
Less is known about whether patterns of treatment funding are associated with the availability of smoking cessation services. The omission of financial variables in prior research is a distinct oversight because of the importance of external resources in shaping organizational behavior. Resource dependence theory suggests that an organization’s strategic decisions frequently reflect its efforts to manage relationships with entities that provide financial resources (29–31). Specialty treatment programs vary considerably in funding: some organizations rely heavily on federal block grant funding, others receive substantial revenue from Medicaid and private insurance, and many juggle numerous public and private funding streams (32–34).
The literature on the adoption of medications to treat addiction documents relationships between funding and availability. Medicaid revenues are positively associated with both the adoption (that is, any use) and the implementation (that is, extent of use) of such medications (35,36). Comparisons of privately funded treatment programs with those that rely on governmental grants and contracts have revealed sizable differences in adoption of medications (36,37), and the percentage of patients insured by health maintenance organizations has been shown to be positively associated with the adoption of naltrexone (38). These studies suggest that receipt of Medicaid and private insurance revenues may be associated with smoking cessation pharmacotherapy. It is less clear whether these funding streams are relevant for the availability of counseling-based smoking cessation programs.
In this study, Medicaid and private insurance were examined as correlates of smoking cessation services. Such an analysis is timely given the ongoing changes in the financing of health care associated with the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Provisions in the ACA that allow young adults to remain on their parents’ insurance have already reduced the percentage who are uninsured and who lack access to care (39). About half of the states are expanding Medicaid (40), and it is anticipated that individuals with substance use disorders will represent a sizable percentage of those who become insured via Medicaid (41). The ACA’s individual insurance mandate is likely to further increase the percentage of individuals who are insured.
The ACA is likely to affect the substance abuse treatment system. However, major efforts to enroll individuals in the health insurance exchanges began in late 2013 (42), and it will thus be some time before these impacts can be analyzed. These measurement challenges are not unique to the treatment system. Recent commentary has noted the difficulties and time lags in measuring changes in insurance coverage under the ACA (43). In the interim, this study offers a method of considering the potential impact of health reform by examining whether Medicaid and private insurance are associated with two types of interventions: counseling-based smoking cessation programs and cessation medications.
Methods
Sample and Data Collection
This research drew on a nationally representative cross-section of U.S. treatment organizations offering specialty treatment for alcohol use disorders. The initial sample was constructed by using the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s online Substance Abuse Treatment Services Locator to randomly sample treatment organizations. Telephone screening identified eligible organizations, defined as treatment facilities that were open to the general public, reported that at least 25% of their patients had a primary diagnosis of an alcohol use disorder, employed at least two full-time-equivalent employees, and offered treatment that was equivalent to or greater than structured outpatient services. Additional details regarding the sampling methods and the data collected from 2009–2012 have been published elsewhere (44).
This study drew on more recent data collected from October 2011 to December 2013. The prior sample was recontacted by telephone to assess eligibility. To address attrition based on organization closures, ineligibility, and refusal to participate, the original sample was supplemented with randomly selected replacement organizations. This process identified 437 eligible organizations by using the eligibility criteria described above. Trained interviewers visited administrators and clinical directors from 372 treatment organizations who were willing to participate in face-to-face interviews (85% response rate). All participants provided written informed consent. The institutional review boards of the University of Georgia and the University of Kentucky approved this research. The sample was compared with the prior sample on the independent variables and control variables; the distributions of these variables were highly similar. Differences in instrumentation did not allow for similar comparisons of the dependent variables.
Measures
Four smoking cessation services were examined. First, administrators were asked whether the center offered a formal smoking cessation program. Additional questions addressed whether that program included individual or group counseling sessions (or both) dedicated to smoking cessation. Centers with dedicated sessions were coded 1 for having a counseling-based smoking cessation program (all others were coded 0). Administrators indicated (dichotomous measures) whether the center currently used sustained-release bupropion, varenicline, or nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in the form of the nicotine patch or gum. These are frontline medications for treating tobacco dependence (14).
Questions about the two funding variables were e-mailed to participants before the face-to-face interviews so that they could consult financial records. During the interview, administrators were asked to report the percentage of past-year revenues accounted for by Medicaid and the percentage accounted for private insurance.
Organizational structure, staffing, and treatment culture were controlled in the models because previous studies have suggested that these variables are associated with service delivery. Structural variables included government ownership, profit status, accreditation by the Joint Commission or the Commission on the Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities, and whether the organization offered only outpatient care. Staffing measures included the number of counselors employed, the percentage of counselors holding a master’s-level degree or greater, and a typology of access to physicians. This typology categorized organizations on the basis of whether they had any physicians on staff or any physicians on contract (if none on staff) or lacked access to staff or contract physicians. Four dichotomous variables measured treatment culture. Emphasis on the 12-step model and emphasis on the medical model of addiction were measured by two variables in which Likert responses (0, no extent; 5, very great extent) were dichotomized such that 4 and 5 were coded as the strong-emphasis group and all others were in the reference category (weak emphasis). The other two cultural variables were current use of motivational enhancement therapy and current use of cognitive-behavioral therapy. Similar to Aarons and colleagues (45), these dichotomous measures reflect treatment organizations that report current use and the presence of at least one counselor trained in the intervention. Region was coded as the four primary geographic regions defined by the U.S. Census Bureau (46).
Analysis
Descriptive statistics were computed for all measures. Prior to estimating multivariate models, multiple imputation by chained equations was implemented to address missing data and avoid the limitations of complete-case analysis (47). Using complete case analysis would have reduced the sample by 24% (N=88). Rates of missing values ranged from 1% to 8%. Our use of “mi impute chained” in Stata 13.1 included the four dependent variables, the two independent variables, and the control variables. Each variable was imputed by using the appropriate link function based on the level of measurement (for example, logistic regression if dichotomous and Poisson regression if a count). Twenty data sets were generated.
All dependent variables were dichotomous, and thus logistic regression was used for model estimation (48). All models included the “cluster” option in Stata, with clusters defined by the state in which the organization was located. The cluster option yields robust standard errors, which reduces potential bias from data clustering (49). This adjustment is important because states vary in how their Medicaid programs are structured, particularly in terms of which services are covered (50).
Results
Descriptive statistics are presented in Table 1. The most commonly adopted smoking cessation medication was NRT. Only 31% (N=109) of the 354 treatment organizations providing medication-related data had adopted at least one medication. The availability of counseling-based smoking cessation programs was low (29%). Only 15% of organizations (N=54) offered at least one medication and had a counseling-based smoking cessation program. Other organizational characteristics are summarized in Table 1. The average program received only a small portion of its past-year revenues from Medicaid and private insurance.
| Variable | N | % |
|---|---|---|
| Smoking cessation services | ||
| Counseling-based smoking cessation program | ||
| Yes | 104 | 29 |
| No | 255 | 71 |
| Current use of sustained-release bupropion | ||
| Yes | 42 | 12 |
| No | 312 | 88 |
| Current use of varenicline | ||
| Yes | 42 | 12 |
| No | 311 | 88 |
| Current use of nicotine patch or gum | ||
| Yes | 102 | 29 |
| No | 252 | 71 |
| Typology of smoking cessation services | ||
| Counseling-based program and medication | 54 | 15 |
| Counseling-based program only | 50 | 14 |
| Medication only | 54 | 15 |
| Neither counseling-based program nor medication | 193 | 55 |
| Independent variable | ||
| Percentage of past-year revenues from Medicaid (M±SD) | 19.9±26.4 | |
| Percentage of past-year revenues from private insurance (M±SD) | 12.2±21.1 | |
| Ownership | ||
| Governmental | 32 | 9 |
| Private | 336 | 91 |
| Profit status | ||
| For profit | 86 | 23 |
| Nonprofit | 283 | 77 |
| Location | ||
| In a hospital | 24 | 7 |
| Nonhospital | 345 | 93 |
| Accreditation | ||
| Accredited | 153 | 42 |
| Not accredited | 208 | 58 |
| Services offered | ||
| Only outpatient treatment services | 215 | 60 |
| Any inpatient or residential services | 145 | 40 |
| N of counselors (M±SD) | 8.7±10.8 | |
| Percentage of counselors with master’s-level degree or greater (M±SD) | 43.3±35.5 | |
| Access to physicians | ||
| ≥1 physician on staff | 96 | 27 |
| ≥1 physician on contract | 117 | 33 |
| No physicians on staff or contract | 144 | 40 |
| Treatment culture | ||
| 12-step model | ||
| Strong emphasis | 170 | 46 |
| Weak emphasis | 196 | 54 |
| Medical model of addiction | ||
| Strong emphasis | 142 | 39 |
| Weak emphasis | 219 | 61 |
| Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) | ||
| Used, ≥1 counselor trained in CBT | 205 | 57 |
| Not used, no counselors trained in CBT | 153 | 43 |
| Motivational enhancement therapy (MET) | ||
| Used, ≥1 counselor trained in MET | 78 | 22 |
| Not used, no counselors trained in MET | 274 | 78 |
| Region | ||
| Northeast | 52 | 14 |
| Midwest | 108 | 29 |
| South | 100 | 27 |
| West | 112 | 30 |
Significant associations between the smoking cessation services were noted. Offering a counseling-based smoking cessation program was positively correlated with current use of varenicline (Pearson’s r=.17, p<.01), bupropion (r=.15, p<.01), and NRT (r=.32, p<.001). There were also strong correlations between the medications. Current use of varenicline was positively correlated with use of bupropion (r=.66, p<.001) and NRT (r=.52, p<.001), and current use of bupropion was positively associated with NRT (r=.48, p<.001).
Table 2 presents results of a multivariate analysis of variables as potential predictors of the availability of a counseling-based smoking cessation program. Greater reliance on Medicaid revenue was positively associated with the presence of a counseling-based smoking cessation program. A 10-percentage point increase in Medicaid revenues was associated with a 12% increase in the odds of offering a smoking cessation program [12=100(e(.011)(10)−1)]. Private insurance revenues were not associated with the availability of a smoking cessation program. Of the other organizational variables, only three were significantly associated with the availability of a counseling-based smoking cessation program: outpatient-only treatment, the percentage of master’s-level counselors, and region (organizations in the Midwest were less likely than those in the Northeast to offer a counseling-based smoking cessation program).
| Variable | AOR | 95% CI | p |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percentage of past-year revenues from Medicaid | 1.01 | 1.00–1.02 | .036 |
| Percentage of past-year revenues from private insurance | 1.00 | .98–1.01 | ns |
| Governmental ownership (reference: private ownership) | 1.80 | .83–3.90 | ns |
| For profit (reference: nonprofit) | .89 | .41–1.93 | ns |
| Located in a hospital (reference: nonhospital) | 1.84 | .71–4.71 | ns |
| Accredited (reference: not accredited) | 1.47 | .64–3.38 | ns |
| Offers only outpatient treatment services (reference: offers any inpatient or residential services) | .46 | .26–.81 | .007 |
| N of counselors | 1.01 | .98–1.04 | ns |
| Percentage of counselors with master’s-level degree or greater | .99 | .99–.999 | .021 |
| Access to physicians (reference: ≥1 physician on staff) | |||
| ≥1 physician on contract | .74 | .36–1.54 | ns |
| No physicians on staff or contract | .95 | .43–2.09 | ns |
| Strong emphasis on 12-step model (reference: weak emphasis) | .97 | .62–1.49 | ns |
| Strong emphasis on medical model of addiction (reference: weak emphasis) | .89 | .52–1.52 | ns |
| Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) used and ≥1 counselor trained in CBT (reference: CBT not used, no counselors trained in CBT) | 1.63 | .99–2.71 | ns |
| Motivational enhancement therapy (MET) used and ≥1 counselor trained in MET (reference: MET not used, no counselors trained in MET) | .91 | .45–1.84 | ns |
| Region (reference: Northeast) | |||
| Midwest | .21 | .05–.89 | .034 |
| South | .44 | .13–1.49 | ns |
| West | .86 | .23–3.17 | ns |
| Constant | .84 | .22–3.16 | ns |
a
Results from 20 imputed data sets with 372 cases in each data set. AOR, adjusted odds ratio. The model adjusted for clustering of treatment organizations within states.
Results of three multivariate analyses of variables as potential correlates of current use of bupropion, varenicline, and NRT are summarized in Table 3. Medicaid revenues were positively associated with the three medications. For a 10-percentage point increase in Medicaid revenues, there was a 25% increase in the odds of currently using bupropion [25=100(e(.022)(10)−1)], a 35% increase in the odds of using varenicline [35=100(e(.030)(10)−1)], and a 13% increase in the odds of using NRT [13=100(e(.012)(10)−1)].
| Variable | Bupropion | Varenicline | Nicotine replacement | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AOR | 95% CI | p | AOR | 95% CI | p | AOR | 95% CI | p | |
| Percentage of past-year revenues from Medicaid | 1.02 | 1.01–1.04 | .002 | 1.03 | 1.01–1.05 | <.001 | 1.01 | 1.00–1.02 | .026 |
| Percentage of past-year revenues from private insurance | 1.03 | 1.02–1.05 | <.001 | 1.05 | 1.02–1.08 | <.001 | 1.03 | 1.01–1.06 | .004 |
| Governmental ownership (reference: private ownership) | 3.96 | 1.82–8.61 | .001 | 3.55 | 1.30–9.67 | .013 | 2.36 | .74–7.49 | ns |
| For profit (reference: nonprofit) | .79 | .28–2.19 | ns | .66 | .18–2.39 | ns | .56 | .17–1.86 | ns |
| Located in a hospital (reference: nonhospital) | 1.46 | .51–4.17 | ns | .80 | .26–2.45 | ns | 3.20 | 1.16–8.85 | .025 |
| Accredited (reference: not accredited) | 3.11 | 1.35–7.19 | .008 | 1.43 | .64–3.20 | ns | 1.25 | .59–2.68 | ns |
| Offers only outpatient treatment services (reference: offers any inpatient or residential services) | .91 | .36–2.31 | ns | .75 | .31–1.84 | ns | .33 | .17–.64 | .001 |
| N of counselors | 1.02 | 1.00–1.04 | .029 | 1.03 | 1.00–1.05 | .024 | 1.04 | 1.01–1.07 | .009 |
| Percentage of counselors with master’s-level degree or greater | 1.00 | .99–1.01 | ns | 1.00 | .99–1.01 | ns | .96 | .99–1.00 | ns |
| Access to physicians (reference: ≥1 physician on staff) | |||||||||
| ≥1 physician on contract | .60 | .26–1.38 | ns | .45 | .21–.98 | .045 | .47 | .26–.87 | .015 |
| No physicians on staff or contract | .40 | .14–1.17 | ns | .53 | .18–1.53 | ns | .37 | .16–.88 | .024 |
| Strong emphasis on 12-step model (reference: weak emphasis) | 1.32 | .70–2.48 | ns | 1.36 | .71–2.59 | ns | 1.25 | .75–2.09 | ns |
| Strong emphasis on medical model of addiction (reference: weak emphasis) | .84 | .41–1.74 | ns | 1.07 | .45–2.54 | ns | 1.01 | .62–1.63 | ns |
| Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) used and ≥1 counselor trained in CBT (reference: CBT not used, no counselors trained in CBT) | .99 | .50–1.99 | ns | 1.02 | .42–2.48 | ns | 1.01 | .62–1.64 | ns |
| Motivational enhancement therapy (MET) used and ≥1 counselor trained in MET (reference: MET not used, no counselors trained in MET) | .93 | .29–3.00 | ns | .93 | .33–2.63 | ns | .93 | .42–2.06 | ns |
| Region (reference: Northeast) | |||||||||
| Midwest | 1.04 | .32–3.41 | ns | .97 | .30–3.09 | ns | .91 | .28–2.99 | ns |
| South | .42 | .14–1.21 | ns | .56 | .21–1.48 | ns | .63 | .18–2.24 | ns |
| West | 1.21 | .45–3.25 | ns | .95 | .40–2.26 | ns | 1.56 | .50–4.85 | ns |
| Constant | .03 | .01–.12 | <.001 | .03 | .01–.10 | <.001 | .44 | .09–2.07 | ns |
a
Results from 20 imputed data sets with 372 cases in each data set. AOR, adjusted odds ratio. The model adjusted for clustering of treatment organizations within states.
Reliance on private insurance was also positively associated with the three medications. A 10-percentage point increase in private insurance revenues was associated with a 39% increase in the odds of currently offering bupropion [39=100(e(.033)(10)−1)], a 62% increase in the odds of offering varenicline [62=100(e(.048)(10) −1)], and a 40% increase in the odds of offering NRT [40=100(e(.034)(10)−1)].
A limited number of associations were found between the organizational control variables and the three medications. The number of counselors was positively correlated with the odds of offering bupropion, varenicline, and NRT. Government-owned organizations were significantly more likely than privately owned organizations to offer bupropion and varenicline. For varenicline and NRT, organizations with at least one physician on contract were less likely to offer the medication than those with at least one physician on staff. Organizations with no physicians were less likely than organizations with at least one physician on staff to offer NRT. Accreditation was positively correlated with offering bupropion. Outpatient-only programs were less likely to offer NRT, and hospital-based programs were more likely to offer NRT. Profit status, the percentage of master’s-level counselors, the four treatment culture variables, and region were not associated with offering any of the medications.
Discussion
Although the literature on the delivery of smoking cessation services in substance abuse treatment has grown considerably over the past decade, few studies have examined the associations between financing and availability of these services. This study found that greater reliance on Medicaid was positively associated with the availability of counseling-based smoking cessation programs and medications. Greater reliance on private insurance was positively associated with the current use of bupropion, varenicline, and NRT but was not associated with availability of counseling-based smoking cessation programs.
Examining the role of financing is particularly timely given the ongoing implementation of health reform under the ACA. Despite ongoing court challenges, the ACA is likely to have an impact on the financing of specialty substance abuse treatment, particularly in states that expand Medicaid. An empirical question remains: to what extent do state-level decisions about the Medicaid expansion affect the financing of treatment and, subsequently, the strategic decisions made by organizations regarding service delivery? Such a question points to two issues for future research—namely, the need for ongoing longitudinal studies of treatment organizations and for multilevel models that estimate the impact of the Medicaid expansion on these organizations.
Future research using multilevel modeling is also needed to address the variability within state Medicaid plans regarding coverage of smoking cessation interventions. Recent data suggest fairly widespread coverage of medications by state Medicaid programs in all Medicaid plans for all populations: programs in 38 states cover varenicline, and programs in 45 states cover the nicotine patch (51). However, coverage for counseling is much more variable, with 27 states covering individual counseling and just 8 states covering group counseling in all Medicaid plans. What is striking is that, at least in the context of specialty substance abuse treatment, the overall impact of Medicaid funding on availability of smoking cessation services was found to be positive despite these variations. Some variability may decrease because as of 2014 the ACA mandates that state Medicaid programs cannot exclude from coverage medications approved for smoking cessation by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). States are still expected to vary in terms of limiting the number of annual quit attempts, limiting the duration of treatment, and requiring prior authorization (51). Thus continued research on the intersection between state Medicaid programs and service delivery in specialty treatment organizations is warranted.
Although both types of revenue were associated with the three medications, Medicaid revenues were positively associated with offering a counseling-based smoking cessation program, whereas private insurance revenues were not. This lack of association may reflect variability and uncertainty regarding coverage of cessation counseling in private health plans. An analysis of 39 private plans found that ten plans excluded group counseling from coverage and another 20 plans did not provide sufficient detail to determine whether group cessation counseling was covered (52). Treatment organizations commonly rely on the modality of group counseling, and thus this heterogeneity may partly explain why private insurance revenues were not associated with counseling-based cessation programs. The ongoing implementation of the ACA may improve coverage because many health plans are now required to cover smoking cessation counseling (53). Recent guidance from the U.S. Department of Labor, prepared in collaboration with the Department of Health and Human Services, notes that “nongrandfathered” group health plans as well as policies sold in the individual and group markets must cover at least four counseling sessions during two cessation attempts per year plus FDA-approved smoking cessation medications (54).
An additional contribution of this study is the estimation of models by using the same covariates across multiple smoking cessation interventions. In general, relatively few of the organizational characteristics, beyond the two financial measures, were significantly correlated with smoking cessation services. The associations between organizational size and availability of pharmacotherapy are consistent with our prior work (21). The null findings for treatment culture, specifically 12-step orientation, align with recent work by Muilenburg and colleagues (24).
One puzzling finding was that the typology of access to physicians did not show an expected difference in medication availability between organizations with a physician on staff and those without a physician. Additional models that excluded the two financial variables (not shown) indicated significant differences in the odds of medication availability between organizations with a staff physician and those without a physician. Further analyses indicated that greater reliance on Medicaid and private insurance reduced the odds that organizations lacked access to physicians, which may explain why the comparison between organizations with a physician on staff and those without access to physicians was not significant in the multivariate models of medication availability.
A second unexpected finding was that the percentage of master’s-level counselors, an indicator of professionalism, was inversely associated with the availability of a counseling-based smoking cessation program. A previous study of counselors found no association between educational attainment and the delivery of smoking cessation counseling (17,18). One possible explanation is that more highly educated counselors are less cognizant of the importance of cessation counseling because they are less likely to have a personal smoking history (55). Additional research is needed to clarify the relationship between the education of the counseling workforce and availability of counseling-based smoking cessation services.
Several limitations are notable. First, the analyses relied on cross-sectional data, and, therefore, causality cannot be determined. Second, the dependent variables measured availability of cessation programs and medications, not the level of implementation within treatment programs. Measuring the extent to which tobacco-using individuals actually engage in counseling-based smoking cessation programs or receive cessation medications is important for future research. Third, these findings may not generalize to organizations that were excluded from participating, such as treatment programs that treat only individuals with drug disorders (for example, methadone programs), corrections-based programs, or programs in the Veterans Health Administration. Finally, all data were self-reported by program leaders, which may be subject to social desirability or recall bias. The relatively limited availability of services may assuage some of those concerns.
Conclusions
Although smoking cessation services in specialty substance use disorder treatment remain limited, these findings suggest that the major changes in financing under health care reform may be relevant for the diffusion of smoking cessation services. Reliance on Medicaid and on private insurance were both significantly associated with the availability of smoking cessation services, and these sources of funding are anticipated to expand through the implementation of the ACA. Currently, these funding sources are rather limited in most treatment centers. Responding to the changing funding landscape will represent a substantial shift for many treatment organizations. Longitudinal research is needed to fully understand whether financing changes under the ACA result in the expanded delivery of smoking cessation interventions.
Footnote
NIAAA and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) had no role in the research design, collection of data, data analysis, or writing of the report. The contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not represent the official views of NIAAA or NIH.
References
1.
McClure EA, Acquavita SP, Dunn KE, et al: Characterizing smoking, cessation services, and quit interest across outpatient substance abuse treatment modalities. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 46:194–201, 2014
2.
Guydish J, Passalacqua E, Tajima B, et al: Smoking prevalence in addiction treatment: a review. Nicotine and Tobacco Research 13:401–411, 2011
3.
Teater B, Hammond GC: Exploring smoking prevalence, quit attempts, and readiness to quit cigarette use among women in substance abuse treatment. Social Work in Health Care 49:176–192, 2010
4.
Cupertino AP, Hunt JJ, Gajewski BJ, et al: The index of tobacco treatment quality: development of a tool to assess evidence-based treatment in a national sample of drug treatment facilities. Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy 8:13, 2013
5.
Muilenburg JL, Laschober TC, Eby LT: Organizational factors as predictors of tobacco cessation pharmacotherapy adoption in addiction treatment programs. Journal of Addiction Medicine 8:59–65, 2014
6.
Hurt RD, Offord KP, Croghan IT, et al: Mortality following inpatient addictions treatment. Role of tobacco use in a community-based cohort. JAMA 275:1097–1103, 1996
7.
Hser YI, McCarthy WJ, Anglin MD: Tobacco use as a distal predictor of mortality among long-term narcotics addicts. Preventive Medicine 23:61–69, 1994
8.
Tsoh JY, Chi FW, Mertens JR, et al: Stopping smoking during first year of substance use treatment predicted 9-year alcohol and drug treatment outcomes. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 114:110–118, 2011
9.
Prochaska JJ, Delucchi K, Hall SM: A meta-analysis of smoking cessation interventions with individuals in substance abuse treatment or recovery. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 72:1144–1156, 2004
10.
Hall SM, Prochaska JJ: Treatment of smokers with co-occurring disorders: emphasis on integration in mental health and addiction treatment settings. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 5:409–431, 2009
11.
Schroeder SA, Morris CD: Confronting a neglected epidemic: tobacco cessation for persons with mental illnesses and substance abuse problems. Annual Review of Public Health 31:297–314, 2010
12.
Richter KP, Arnsten JH: A rationale and model for addressing tobacco dependence in substance abuse treatment. Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy 1:23, 2006
13.
Baca CT, Yahne CE: Smoking cessation during substance abuse treatment: what you need to know. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 36:205–219, 2009
14.
Fiore MC, Jaen CR, Baker TB, et al: Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence: 2008 Update. Rockville, Md, US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, 2008
15.
Friedmann PD, Jiang L, Richter KP: Cigarette smoking cessation services in outpatient substance abuse treatment programs in the United States. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 34:165–172, 2008
16.
Knudsen HK, Muilenburg J, Eby LT: Sustainment of smoking cessation programs in substance use disorder treatment organizations. Nicotine and Tobacco Research 15:1060–1068, 2013
17.
Knudsen HK, Studts JL: The implementation of tobacco-related brief interventions in substance abuse treatment: a national study of counselors. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 38:212–219, 2010
18.
Knudsen HK, Studts CR, Studts JL: The implementation of smoking cessation counseling in substance abuse treatment. Journal of Behavioral Health Services and Research 39:28–41, 2012
19.
Hunt JJ, Cupertino AP, Garrett S, et al: How is tobacco treatment provided during drug treatment? Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 42:4–15, 2012
20.
Rothrauff TC, Eby LT: Substance abuse counselors’ implementation of tobacco cessation guidelines. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 43:6–13, 2011
21.
Knudsen HK, Studts JL: Availability of nicotine replacement therapy in substance use disorder treatment: longitudinal patterns of adoption, sustainability, and discontinuation. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 118:244–250, 2011
22.
Rothrauff TC, Eby LT: Counselors’ knowledge of the adoption of tobacco cessation medications in substance abuse treatment programs. American Journal on Addictions 20:56–62, 2011
23.
Tobacco Use in Adults and Pregnant Women: Counseling and Interventions, April 2009. Rockville, Md, US Preventive Services Task Force, 2009. Available at www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/ClinicalSummaryFinal/tobacco-use-in-adults-and-pregnant-women-counseling-and-interventions. Accessed Feb 2, 2015
24.
Muilenburg JL, Laschober TC, Eby LT: Climate for innovation, 12-step orientation, and tobacco cessation treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 46:447–455, 2014
25.
Knudsen HK, Studts JL, Boyd S, et al: Structural and cultural barriers to the adoption of smoking cessation services in addiction treatment organizations. Journal of Addictive Diseases 29:294–305, 2010
26.
Hunt JJ, Gajewski BJ, Jiang Y, et al: Capacity of US drug treatment facilities to provide evidence-based tobacco treatment. American Journal of Public Health 103:1799–1801, 2013
27.
Eby LT, Laschober TC, Muilenburg JL: Sustained, new, never, and discontinued tobacco cessation services adopters. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 49:8–14, 2015
28.
Guydish J, Ziedonis D, Tajima B, et al: Addressing Tobacco Through Organizational Change (ATTOC) in residential addiction treatment settings. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 121:30–37, 2012
29.
Pfeffer J: A resource dependence perspective on intercorporate relations; in Intercorporate Relations: The Structural Analysis of Business. Edited by Mizruchi MS, Schwartz M. Cambridge, England, Cambridge University Press, 1987
30.
Pfeffer J: New Directions for Organization Theory: Problems and Prospects. New York, Oxford University Press, 1997
31.
Fennell ML, Warnecke RB: The Diffusion of Medical Innovations: An Applied Network Analysis. New York, Plenum, 1988
32.
Stewart MT, Horgan CH: Health services and financing of treatment. Alcohol Research & Health 33:389–394, 2011
33.
Rieckmann TR, Kovas AE, Fussell HE, et al: Implementation of evidence-based practices for treatment of alcohol and drug disorders: the role of the state authority. Journal of Behavioral Health Services and Research 36:407–419, 2009
34.
Terry-McElrath YM, Chriqui JF, McBride DC: Factors related to Medicaid payment acceptance at outpatient substance abuse treatment programs. Health Services Research 46:632–653, 2011
35.
Knudsen HK, Roman PM: Financial factors and the implementation of medications for treating opioid use disorders. Journal of Addiction Medicine 6:280–286, 2012
36.
Knudsen HK, Roman PM: The transition to medication adoption in publicly funded substance use disorder treatment programs: organizational structure, culture, and resources. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 75:476–485, 2014
37.
Abraham AJ, Knudsen HK, Rieckmann T, et al: Disparities in access to physicians and medications for the treatment of substance use disorders between publicly and privately funded treatment programs in the United States. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 74:258–265, 2013
38.
Roman PM, Johnson JA: Adoption and implementation of new technologies in substance abuse treatment. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 22:211–218, 2002
39.
Sommers BD, Buchmueller T, Decker SL, et al: The Affordable Care Act has led to significant gains in health insurance and access to care for young adults. Health Affairs 32:165–174, 2013
40.
A Closer Look at the Impact of State Decisions Not to Expand Medicaid on Coverage for Uninsured Adults. Menlo Park, Calif, Kaiser Family Foundation, 2014. Available at kaiserfamilyfoundation.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/8585-a-closer-look-at-the-impact-of-state-decisions-not-to-expand-medicaid.pdf
41.
Buck JA: The looming expansion and transformation of public substance abuse treatment under the Affordable Care Act. Health Affairs 30:1402–1410, 2011
42.
Health Reform Implementation Timeline. Menlo Park, Calif, Kaiser Family Foundation, 2014. Available at kff.org/interactive/implementation-timeline. Accessed on May 1, 2014
43.
Claxton G, Levitt L, Brodie M, et al: Measuring Changes in Insurance Coverage Under the Affordable Care Act. Menlo Park, Calif, Kaiser Family Foundation, 2014 Available at kaiserfamilyfoundation.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/8586-measuring-changes-in-insurance-coverage-under-the-affordable-care-act3.pdf. Accessed May 1, 2014
44.
Knudsen HK, Roman PM: Dissemination, adoption, and implementation of acamprosate for treating alcohol use disorders. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs 75:467–475, 2014
45.
Aarons GA, Sommerfeld DH, Walrath-Greene CM: Evidence-based practice implementation: the impact of public versus private sector organization type on organizational support, provider attitudes, and adoption of evidence-based practice. Implementation Science 4:83, 2009
46.
Census Regions and Divisions of the United States. Washington, DC, US Census Bureau, 2014. Available at http://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/maps/pdfs/reference/us_regdiv.pdf. Accessed Jan 21, 2015
47.
Allison PD: Missing data; in The SAGE Handbook of Quantitative Methods in Psychology. Edited by Millsap RE, Maydeu-Olivares A. Thousand Oaks, Calif, Sage, 2009
48.
Menard SW: Applied Logistic Regression Analysis. Thousand Oaks, Calif, Sage, 1995
49.
Long JS, Freese J: Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata, 2nd ed. College Station, Tex, StataCorp, 2006
50.
Garfield RL, Lave JR, Donohue JM: Health reform and the scope of benefits for mental health and substance use disorder services. Psychiatric Services 61:1081–1086, 2010
51.
Singleterry J, Jump Z, Lancet E, et al: State Medicaid coverage for tobacco cessation treatments and barriers to coverage—United States, 2008–2014. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 63:264–269, 2014
52.
Kofman M, Dunton K, Senkewicz MB: Implementation of Tobacco Cessation Coverage Under the Affordable Care Act: Understanding How Private Health Insurance Policies Cover Tobacco Cessation Treatments. Washington, DC, Georgetown University Health Policy Institute, 2012. Available at www.tobaccofreekids.org/pressoffice/2012/georgetown/coveragereport.pdf. Accessed Feb 2, 2015
53.
Helping Smokers Quit: Tobacco Cessation Coverage 2014. Washington, DC, American Lung Association, 2014. Available at www.lung.org/assets/documents/publications/smoking-cessation/helping-smokers-quit-2014.pdf. Accessed Feb 2, 2015
54.
FAQs About Affordable Care Act Implementation (Part XI). Washington, DC, United States Department of Labor, 2014. Available at www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq-aca19.html. Accessed Feb 2, 2015
55.
Knudsen HK, Boyd SE, Studts JL: Substance abuse treatment counselors and tobacco use: a comparison of comprehensive and indoor-only workplace smoking bans. Nicotine and Tobacco Research 12:1151–1155, 2010
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Cover: Horse Drawn Cabs at Evening, New York, by Childe Hassam, circa 1890. Watercolor. Daniel J. Terra Collection, 199.66. Terra Foundation for American Art. Photo credit: Terra Foundation for American Art, Chicago/Art Resource, New York City.
History
Received: 1 October 2014
Revision received: 4 February 2015
Accepted: 16 March 2015
Published online: 3 August 2015
Published in print: November 01, 2015
Authors
Competing Interests
The authors report no financial relationships with commercial interests.
Funding Information
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism10.13039/100000027: R01AA015974
This study was supported by grant R01AA015974 from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA).Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Export Citations
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.
View Options
View options
PDF/EPUB
View PDF/EPUBLogin options
Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.
Personal login Institutional Login Open Athens loginNot a subscriber?
PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.
Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).