Person:
Levy, Douglas

Profile Picture

Email Address

AA Acceptance Date

Birth Date

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Job Title

Last Name

Levy

First Name

Douglas

Name

Levy, Douglas
Author's Publications: search.filters.isAuthorOfPublication.448daed5-29bd-4a6d-9ab5-cc3cf93eace2

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 7 of 7
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Changes in Tobacco Smoke Exposure following the Institution of a Smoke-Free Policy in the Boston Housing Authority
    (Public Library of Science, 2015) Levy, Douglas; Adamkiewicz, Gary; Rigotti, Nancy; Fang, Shona C; Winickoff, Jonathan
    Introduction: To protect residents from tobacco smoke exposure (TSE), the Boston Housing Authority (BHA) prohibited smoking in BHA-owned apartments beginning in 2012. Our goal was to determine if the smoke-free policy reduced TSE for non-smoking BHA residents. Methods: We compared TSE before the smoke-free policy (2012) and one year later among BHA residents as well as residents of the neighboring Cambridge Housing Authority (CHA) where no such policy was in place. Participants were a convenience sample of adult non-smoking BHA and CHA residents cohabitating with only non-smokers. Main outcomes were 7-day airborne nicotine in participants’ apartments; residents’ saliva cotinine; and residents’ self-reported TSE. Results: We enrolled 287 confirmed non-smokers (192 BHA, 95 CHA). Seventy-nine percent (229) were assessed at follow-up. At baseline, apartment and resident TSE were high in both housing authorities (detectable airborne nicotine: 46% BHA, 48% CHA; detectable saliva cotinine: 49% BHA, 70% CHA). At follow-up there were significant but similar declines in nicotine in both sites (detectable: -33% BHA, -39% CHA, p = 0.40). Detectable cotinine rose among BHA residents while declining among CHA participants (+17% BHA vs. -13% CHA, p = 0.002). Resident self-reported TSE within and outside of the housing environment decreased similarly for both BHA and CHA residents. Conclusions: Apartment air nicotine decreased after the introduction of the smoke-free policy, though the decline may not have resulted from the policy. The BHA policy did not result in reduced individual-level TSE. Unmeasured sources of non-residential TSE may have contributed to BHA residents’ cotinine levels.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Comparative effectiveness of post-discharge strategies for hospitalized smokers: study protocol for the Helping HAND 2 randomized controlled trial
    (BioMed Central, 2015) Reid, Zachary Z; Regan, Susan; Kelley, Jennifer HK; Streck, Joanna M; Ylioja, Thomas; Tindle, Hilary A; Chang, Yuchiao; Levy, Douglas; Park, Elyse; Singer, Daniel; Carpenter, Kelly M; Reyen, Michele; Rigotti, Nancy
    Background: Smoking cessation interventions for hospitalized smokers are effective in promoting smoking cessation, but only if the tobacco dependence treatment continues after the patient leaves the hospital. Sustaining tobacco dependence treatment after hospital discharge is a challenge for health care systems. Our previous single-site randomized controlled trial demonstrated the effectiveness of an intervention that facilitated the delivery of comprehensive tobacco cessation treatment, including both medication and counseling, after hospital discharge. We subsequently streamlined the intervention model to increase its potential for dissemination. This new model is being tested in a larger multi-site trial with broader eligibility criteria in order to enroll a more representative sample of hospitalized smokers. This paper describes the trial design and contrasts it with the earlier study. Methods/Design A 2-arm, 3-site randomized controlled trial is testing the hypothesis that a multi-component Sustained Care intervention is more effective than Standard Care in helping hospitalized cigarette smokers stop smoking after hospital discharge. The trial enrolls adult daily cigarette smokers who are admitted to 1 of 3 participating hospitals in Massachusetts or Pennsylvania. Participants receive the same smoking cessation intervention in the hospital. They are randomly assigned to receive either Standard Care or Sustained Care after hospital discharge. Participants in the Sustained Care arm receive a free 3-month supply of FDA-approved smoking cessation medication and 5 interactive voice response calls that provide tailored motivational messages, medication refills, and access to a live tobacco treatment counselor. Participants in the Standard Care arm receive a smoking cessation medication recommendation and information about community resources. Outcomes are assessed at 1, 3, and 6 months after discharge. The primary outcome is biochemically-validated tobacco abstinence for the past 7 days at 6-month follow-up. Other outcome measures include self-reported tobacco abstinence measures, use of medication and counseling after discharge, hospital readmissions, and program cost-effectiveness. Discussion We adapted a proven intervention for hospitalized smokers to enhance its potential for dissemination and are testing it in a multi-site trial. Study enrollment data suggests that the trial achieved the goal of recruiting a broader sample of hospitalized smokers. Trial registration Comparative Effectiveness of Post-Discharge Strategies for Hospitalized Smokers (Helping HAND2) NCT01714323. Registered October 22, 2012.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Validity of Self-Reported Tobacco Smoke Exposure among Non-Smoking Adult Public Housing Residents
    (Public Library of Science, 2016) Fang, Shona C.; Chen, Shan; Trachtenberg, Felicia; Rokicki, Slawa; Adamkiewicz, Gary; Levy, Douglas
    Introduction: Tobacco smoke exposure (TSE) in public multi-unit housing (MUH) is of concern. However, the validity of self-reports for determining TSE among non-smoking residents in such housing is unclear. Methods: We analyzed data from 285 non-smoking public MUH residents living in non-smoking households in the Boston area. Participants were interviewed about personal TSE in various locations in the past 7 days and completed a diary of home TSE for 7 days. Self-reported TSE was validated against measurable saliva cotinine (lower limit of detection (LOD) 0.02 ng/ml) and airborne apartment nicotine (LOD 5 ng). Correlations, estimates of inter-measure agreement, and logistic regression assessed associations between self-reported TSE items and measurable cotinine and nicotine. Results: Cotinine and nicotine levels were low in this sample (median = 0.026 ng/ml and 0.022 μg/m3, respectively). Prevalence of detectable personal TSE was 66.3% via self-report and 57.0% via measurable cotinine (median concentration among those with cotinine>LOD: 0.057 ng/ml), with poor agreement (kappa = 0.06; sensitivity = 68.9%; specificity = 37.1%). TSE in the home, car, and other peoples’ homes was weakly associated with cotinine levels (Spearman correlations rs = 0.15–0.25), while TSE in public places was not associated with cotinine. Among those with airborne nicotine and daily diary data (n = 161), a smaller proportion had household TSE via self-report (41.6%) compared with measurable airborne nicotine (53.4%) (median concentration among those with nicotine>LOD: 0.04 μg/m3) (kappa = 0.09, sensitivity = 46.5%, specificity = 62.7%). Conclusions: Self-report alone was not adequate to identify individuals with TSE, as 31% with measurable cotinine and 53% with measurable nicotine did not report TSE. Self-report of TSE in private indoor spaces outside the home was most associated with measurable cotinine in this low-income non-smoking population.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Assessment of Residents’ Attitudes and Satisfaction Before and After Implementation of a Smoke-Free Policy in Boston Multiunit Housing
    (Oxford University Press (OUP), 2015) Rokicki, Slawa; Adamkiewicz, Gary; Fang, Shona C; Rigotti, Nancy; Winickoff, Jonathan; Levy, Douglas
    Introduction: In 2012, the Boston Housing Authority (BHA) in Massachusetts implemented a smoke-free policy prohibiting smoking within its residences. We sought to characterize BHA resident experiences before and after the smoke-free policy implementation, and compare them to that of nearby residents of the Cambridge Housing Authority, which had no such policy. Methods: We recruited a convenience sample of nonsmoking residents from the BHA and Cambridge Housing Authority. We measured residents’ awareness and support of their local smoking policies before and 9–12 months after the BHA’s policy implementation, as well as BHA respondents’ attitudes towards the smoke-free policy. We assessed tobacco smoke exposure via saliva cotinine, airborne apartment nicotine, and self-reported number of days smelling smoke in the home. We evaluated predictors of general satisfaction at follow-up using linear regression. Results: At follow-up, 91% of BHA respondents knew that smoking was not allowed in apartments and 82% were supportive of such a policy in their building. BHA residents believed enforcement of the smoke-free policy was low. Fifty-one percent of BHA respondents indicated that other residents “never” or “rarely” followed the new smoke-free rule and 41% of respondents were dissatisfied with policy enforcement. Dissatisfaction with enforcement was the strongest predictor of general housing satisfaction, while objective and self-reported measures of tobacco smoke exposure were not predictive of satisfaction. At follow-up, 24% of BHA participants had complained to someone in charge about policy violations. Conclusions: Resident support for smoke-free policies is high. However, lack of enforcement of smoke-free policies may cause frustration and resentment among residents, potentially leading to a decrease in housing satisfaction. Implications: Smoke-free housing laws are becoming increasingly prevalent, yet little is known about satisfaction and compliance with such policies post-implementation. We evaluated nonsmoking residents’ attitudes about smoke-free rules and their satisfaction with enforcement 1 year after the BHA implemented its comprehensive smoke-free policy. We found that while residents were supportive of the policy, they believed enforcement was low, a perception that was associated with a drop in housing satisfaction. Our findings point to a desire for smoke-free housing among public housing residents, and the importance of establishing systems and guidelines to help landlords monitor and enforce these policies effectively.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Comparative effectiveness of post-discharge interventions for hospitalized smokers: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
    (BioMed Central, 2012) Japuntich, Sandra J; Regan, Susan; Viana, Joseph; Tymoszczuk, Justyna; Reyen, Michele; Levy, Douglas; Singer, Daniel; Park, Elyse; Chang, Yuchiao; Rigotti, Nancy
    Background: A hospital admission offers smokers an opportunity to quit. Smoking cessation counseling provided in the hospital is effective, but only if it continues for more than one month after discharge. Providing smoking cessation medication at discharge may add benefit to counseling. A major barrier to translating this research into clinical practice is sustaining treatment during the transition to outpatient care. An evidence-based, practical, cost-effective model that facilitates the continuation of tobacco treatment after discharge is needed. This paper describes the design of a comparative effectiveness trial testing a hospital-initiated intervention against standard care. Methods/design: A two-arm randomized controlled trial compares the effectiveness of standard post-discharge care with a multi-component smoking cessation intervention provided for three months after discharge. Current smokers admitted to Massachusetts General Hospital who receive bedside smoking cessation counseling, intend to quit after discharge and are willing to consider smoking cessation medication are eligible. Study participants are recruited following the hospital counseling visit and randomly assigned to receive Standard Care or Extended Care after hospital discharge. Standard Care includes a recommendation for a smoking cessation medication and information about community resources. Extended Care includes up to three months of free FDA-approved smoking cessation medication and five proactive computerized telephone calls that use interactive voice response technology to provide tailored motivational messages, offer additional live telephone counseling calls from a smoking cessation counselor, and facilitate medication refills. Outcomes are assessed at one, three, and six months after hospital discharge. The primary outcomes are self-reported and validated seven-day point prevalence tobacco abstinence at six months. Other outcomes include short-term and sustained smoking cessation, post-discharge utilization of smoking cessation treatment, hospital readmissions and emergency room visits, and program cost per quit. Discussion: This study tests a disseminable smoking intervention model for hospitalized smokers. If effective and widely adopted, it could help to reduce population smoking rates and thereby reduce tobacco-related mortality, morbidity, and health care costs.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    The Effect of Systematic Clinical Interventions with Cigarette Smokers on Quit Status and the Rates of Smoking-Related Primary Care Office Visits
    (Public Library of Science, 2012) Land, Thomas G.; Rigotti, Nancy; Levy, Douglas; Schilling, Thad Ferguson; Warner, Donna; Li, Wenjun
    Background: The United States Public Health Service (USPHS) Guideline for Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence includes ten key recommendations regarding the identification and the treatment of tobacco users seen in all health care settings. To our knowledge, the impact of system-wide brief interventions with cigarette smokers on smoking prevalence and health care utilization has not been examined using patient population-based data. Methods and Findings Data on clinical interventions with cigarette smokers were examined for primary care office visits of 104,639 patients at 17 Harvard Vanguard Medical Associates (HVMA) sites. An operational definition of “systems change” was developed. It included thresholds for intervention frequency and sustainability. Twelve sites met the criteria. Five did not. Decreases in self-reported smoking prevalence were 40% greater at sites that achieved systems change (13.6% vs. 9.7%, p<.01). On average, the likelihood of quitting increased by 2.6% (p<0.05, 95% CI: 0.1%–4.6%) per occurrence of brief intervention. For patients with a recent history of current smoking whose home site experienced systems change, the likelihood of an office visit for smoking-related diagnoses decreased by 4.3% on an annualized basis after systems change occurred (p<0.05, 95% CI: 0.5%–8.1%). There was no change in the likelihood of an office visit for smoking-related diagnoses following systems change among non-smokers. Conclusions: The clinical practice data from HVMA suggest that a systems approach can lead to significant reductions in smoking prevalence and the rate of office visits for smoking-related diseases. Most comprehensive tobacco intervention strategies focus on the provider or the tobacco user, but these results argue that health systems should be included as an integral component of a comprehensive tobacco intervention strategy. The HVMA results also give us an indication of the potential health impacts when meaningful use core tobacco measures are widely adopted.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    A Longitudinal Study of Medicaid Coverage for Tobacco Dependence Treatments in Massachusetts and Associated Decreases in Hospitalizations for Cardiovascular Disease
    (Public Library of Science, 2010) Land, Thomas; Rigotti, Nancy; Levy, Douglas; Paskowsky, Mark; Warner, Donna; Kwass, Jo-Ann; Wetherell, LeAnn; Keithly, Lois
    Background: Insurance coverage of tobacco cessation medications increases their use and reduces smoking prevalence in a population. However, uncertainty about the impact of this coverage on health care utilization and costs is a barrier to the broader adoption of this policy, especially by publicly funded state Medicaid insurance programs. Whether a publicly funded tobacco cessation benefit leads to decreased medical claims for tobacco-related diseases has not been studied. We examined the experience of Massachusetts, whose Medicaid program adopted comprehensive coverage of tobacco cessation medications in July 2006. Over 75,000 Medicaid subscribers used the benefit in the first 2.5 years. On the basis of earlier secondary survey work, it was estimated that smoking prevalence declined among subscribers by 10% during this period. Methods and Findings: Using claims data, we compared the probability of hospitalization prior to use of the tobacco cessation pharmacotherapy benefit with the probability of hospitalization after benefit use among Massachusetts Medicaid beneficiaries, adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, seasonality, influenza cases, and the implementation of the statewide smoke-free air law using generalized estimating equations. Statistically significant annualized declines of 46% (95% confidence interval 2%–70%) and 49% (95% confidence interval 6%–72%) were observed in hospital admissions for acute myocardial infarction and other acute coronary heart disease diagnoses, respectively. There were no significant decreases in hospitalizations rates for respiratory diagnoses or seven other diagnostic groups evaluated. Conclusions: Among Massachusetts Medicaid subscribers, use of a comprehensive tobacco cessation pharmacotherapy benefit was associated with a significant decrease in claims for hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction and acute coronary heart disease, but no significant change in hospital claims for other diagnoses. For low-income smokers, removing the barriers to the use of smoking cessation pharmacotherapy has the potential to decrease short-term utilization of hospital services.