Individuals with behavioral health conditions account for 50% of annual smoking-related deaths, yet rarely receive tobacco dependence treatment within local mental health authorities (LMHAs). As lack of training and knowledge are key barriers to providing tobacco dependence treatment, Taking Texas Tobacco-Free (TTTF) developed an iterative, 4–6-months train-the-trainer program to embed expertise and delivery of sustained education on tobacco-free workplace policies and practices in participating centers. We explore the employee “champions’” train-the-trainer program experiences using a community of practice (CoP) model to identify key contributors to successful program implementation. Across 3 different LMHAs, we conducted semi-structured individual and group interviews online at 2 time points. We interviewed each champion twice (except for 1 champion who dropped out between measurements); pre-implementation (3 group interviews; N = 4 + 4 + 3 = 11 champions); post-implementation (7 individual interviews and 1 group interview; 7 + 3 = 10 champions). Therefore, 11 champions participated in pre- and post-implementation interviews from July 2020–May 2021. Guided by an iterative, thematic analysis and constant comparison process, we inductively coded and summarized data into themes. Five factors contributed to successful program implementation: value of peer support/feedback; building knowledge, champion confidence, and program ownership; informative curriculum, adaptable to targeted populations; staying abreast of current tobacco/nicotine research and products; and TTTF team responsiveness and practical coaching/assistance. Champions reported the TTTF train-the-trainer program was successful and identified attitudes and CoP processes that effectively built organizational capacity and expertise to sustainably address tobacco dependence. Study findings can guide other agencies in implementing sustainable tobacco-free training programs.

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is defined as a multidimensional subjective assessment of one’s physical and mental health. Homelessness is associated with numerous stressors that can reduce HRQoL. Social support is defined as the availability of individuals, or resources provided by individuals, to cope with stress. Interpersonal social support may be important in buffering HRQoL from the negative implications of stress. Here, we examine this association in a marginalized group known for high rates of physical and mental health comorbidities: adults experiencing homelessness. Participants (N = 581; 63.7% men; Mage = 43.6 ± 12.2) were recruited from homeless-serving agencies in Oklahoma City. Social support was measured with the 12-item Interpersonal Support Evaluation List (ISEL). HRQoL was measured by the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey using self-rated health, the number of poor mental and poor physical health days over the preceding 30 days, as well as the number of limited activity days as the result of poor mental and/or physical health. Perceived stress was assessed using the 4-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). The potential moderation effect of social support was examined by assessing the interaction term of social support and stress in a series of linear regression analyses, controlling for sex, age, months homeless, race, education, health insurance status, serious mental illness diagnosis, and recruitment agency/site. There was a significant interaction effect of social support and stress on the prediction of days of poor physical health, days of poor mental health, and days of limited activity (p in all cases ≤ 0.05). Results add to a growing literature on the potentially protective benefits of social support for HRQoL, extend them to a large sample of adults experiencing homelessness in the South, and demonstrate the significance of this moderating effect of social support over and above the influence of several prominent sociodemographic and diagnostic variables. Future work should determine if interventions designed to enhance social support can buffer HRQoL from the deleterious effects of stress among this vulnerable population.

Roughly 70–80% of adults experiencing homelessness smoke cigarettes. Smoke-free living/workplace policies are an empirically-supported tobacco control intervention. However, homeless shelters may be reluctant to implement smoke-free policies due to fears of it discouraging current/potential shelter guests from taking refuge there. The current study was meant to characterize guest support for on-property smoke-free policies within a homeless shelter with an extant indoor tobacco use ban amongst never smokers, former smokers, and current smokers to provide data on this point. Participants comprised a convenience sample of adult guests of a homeless shelter in Texas (N = 394, 28.2% women; 10.2% former; and 75.9% current smokers). Participant sociodemographics, smoking status, behavioral health diagnoses, and support for two versions of an on-property outdoor courtyard smoke-free policy (one partial, one complete) were assessed. Data were collected in two waves in a repeated cross-sectional design. Overall, 64.0% of participants supported a partial, and 32.0% a full smoking ban. Logistic regressions, controlling for wave of data collection, age, sex, and any additional significant predictors from a semi-adjusted model, examined associations between participant characteristics and policy support. Older participants (OR = 1.024, CI0.95 = 1.005–1.044), non-veterans (OR = 2.523, CI0.95 = 1.156–5.506), former smokers (OR = 2.730, CI0.95 = 1.191–6.258), and those without severe mental illness (OR = 1.731, CI0.95 = 1.061–2.824) had significantly greater odds of supporting a partial smoking ban. Relative to current smokers, never smokers (OR = 3.902, CI0.95 = 2.133–7.137) and former smokers (OR = 8.257, CI0.95 = 3.951–17.258) had significantly greater odds of supporting a complete smoking ban. The implementation of smoke-free living/workplace policies in homeless shelters may enjoy more support from guests—specifically, non-smokers—than anticipated by shelter administrators. Aside from reducing ambient smoke exposure for never and former smokers, these policies can help to reduce ubiquitous smoking cues for those who may want to quit, are undergoing a quit attempt, or are trying to maintain abstinence. Interventionists might partner with shelter guests, particularly smokers, to inform the roll-out of such policies for maximal acceptance and adoption.

No abstract