MINIMAL DATA SET FOR QUITLINES North American Quitline Consortium Annual Meeting May 2005 NORTH AMERICAN QUITLINE CONSORTIUM
Jan 02, 2016
MINIMAL DATA SET
FOR QUITLINES
North American Quitline Consortium Annual MeetingMay 2005
NORTH AMERICAN QUITLINE CONSORTIUM
MDS Working Group
Eric Auguston Sharon Campbell Sharon Cummins Donna Czukar Corrine Husten Anne Joseph Ann Malarcher Paul McDonald
Deborah Ossip-Klein Joanne Pike Abby Rosenthal Jessie Saul Barbara Schillo Donna Vallone Susan Zbikowski
Plus many other volunteers
WHY A MINIMAL DATA SET?
Quitlines are new …
Few answers to operational questions
Hard to determine what contributes to success Different definitions of caller, smoker, quitter Different measures of quit rates Different follow-up periods Different numerators and denominators
Comparing and learning from other quitlines very difficult
What can a Minimal Dataset do?
1. Facilitates performance monitoring and operational management
2. Makes comparisons possible
3. Allows for better understanding of quitlines
What Else?
Provide stakeholders with a standard approach to reporting quitline performance,
Provide researchers with common indicators to conduct descriptive and comparative research.
STEPS IN DEVELOPMENT 2001
2003
2003 - 2004
Feb 12, 2005
May 2005
Sept 2005
Need for Common Evaluation Framework – Phoenix Quitline Conf.
NAQC establishes MDS Working Group (became the Evaluation and Research Group)
Consultation with Quitline Stakeholders Identify Existing Indicators & Measures
Finalize and Sign Off Use of MDS in European Quitline Network
Study
Roll-out and testing by quitlines
Implementation across NA
Principles
1. Not impose undue burden on quitlines
2. Feasible to collect and report
3. Meaningful, valid and reliable
4. Tied to decision making and performance indicators
Four Questions All Quitlines Ask
1. Who uses (and doesn’t use) quitlines?
2. How do we best promote quitlines?
3. What proportion of smokers in the target population does the quitline reach?
4. Are quitlines effective and for whom?
Domains included in MDS
Awareness of quitline
Reach and Utilization
Caller characteristics
Tobacco Behaviours
Satisfaction with service
Service Delivery (intervention provided)
Components of Minimal Data Set
1. Quitline Survey
2. 15 Intake Questions
3. 11 Follow-up Questions
4. Optional Questions
5. Guidelines for Tracking
6. Technical Documents and Assistance
Quitline Survey
Standardized description of quitline service model, operational aspects of quitline, staffing, eligibility criteria, interventions, promotion.
Allows understanding of differences in service models that may influence quitline performance
See: 2004 Survey Results www.naquitline.org
Intake Questions
Reason for Call (quit, stay quit, information)
How Caller Heard about Quitline
Who Calls (tobacco user, proxy, referral, first time or repeat; caller demographic characteristics)
Tobacco behaviors (type, amount of tobacco, level of addiction, intent to quit next 30 days)
7 month Follow-Up Questions
Caller satisfaction Tobacco behaviors (type, amount of tobacco, level of
addiction). Will be able to calculate if callers switch type of tobacco used between first call and follow-
up
Quit attempt (for 24 hours)
Quit Rates (7 day, 30 day point prevalence, prolonged abstinence)
Use of other cessation aides
Follow-up Period
First callIntake +/-Counsel
Intervention- Counseling Reactive Proactive-Referral-Self-help- NRT
Follow-Up-Reduce-Switch-Quit Attempt-Quit Rate-Satisfaction
X XDay One
One Month Six Months
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Seven Months
Quitline collects Evaluator collects
Repeat Callers
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jne Jly Aug Spt Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr
x1 FU
x3
x2 x2
x1
Each Caller should be in denominator only once per 12 month period
FU
Definitions (examples)
Counseling: Caller centered, tailored to person, in depth, motivational interaction
Information: objective, neutral information about consequences of smoking, cessation methods, referrals.
First Call: caller speaks to quitline staff, includes screening or intake interview. Does not include voice message.
Challenges Balance service delivery with data collection Comparison of current and historical results
with MDS results
Benefits Better understanding of quitlines Ability to learn from others
Next Steps
Presentation to North American Quitlines Implementation team
Technical Assistance Timeline for implementation – September 2005
Go !! Report, Review, Adjust (in Dec 2005)
Acknowledgements
Members of MDS Working Group
Health Canada
American Legacy Foundation
National Cancer Institute
Contact Information
Members of MDS Working Group
c/o Linda Bailey, Executive Director, NAQC
Email: [email protected]
Website. : www.naquitline.org