Health care costs among former smokers increase relative to continuing smokers in the year after cessation but fall to a level that is statistically indistinguishable in the second year postquit. Any net increase in costs among former smokers relative to continuing smokers appears compensated for within two years post-quit and is maintained for at least six years after cessation.

Pragmatic clinical trials are comparative effectiveness studies conducted in real-world settings to answer questions relevant to patients, clinicians, and healthcare decision makers. In contrast, explanatory clinical trials study how treatments or interventions work in carefully controlled settings and study populations, often to investigate a biological hypothesis or test a drug or device to meet regulatory requirements. The pragmatic approach requires unique methods to achieve the goal of identifying sustainable, generalizable, evidence based ways to improve healthcare. 1-5 While previous authors addressed statistical considerations, 6 little guidance is available on the methods for establishing partnerships between researchers and the people and processes in usual care settings that are necessary to conduct a pragmatic clinical trial. Based on insights from an initiative to accelerate pragmatic research, 7 this article summarizes best practices for researchers and partners in healthcare systems as they establish collaborative relationships, develop research questions, and implement sustainable pragmatic clinical trials.

Previous research on health care costs among former smokers suggests that quitters incur greater health care costs for up to 4 years after cessation compared with continuing smokers. However, little is known about the relationship between health care costs and utilization in the periods before as well as after cessation. The present study used a retrospective cohort design with automated health plan and primary data to examine the health care costs and clinical experiences before and after smoking cessation among former smokers compared with a sample of continuing smokers. Subjects were a random sample of adults (aged 25 and older) whose smoking status was identified by a physician during a primary care visit to the Group Health Cooperative (GHC), a nonprofit, integrated health care delivery system in western Washington state. Total direct health care costs among former smokers began to rise in the quarter prior to cessation and were significantly greater (p < .001) than those of continuing smokers in the quarter immediately following cessation. This difference dissipated within one quarter following cessation. We replicated the postquit cost spike among former smokers found by other research and showed that this spike dissipated within the first year postquit. Smoking cessation did not result in sustained cost increases among former smokers.

Purpose:As multi-institutional research networks assume a central role in clinical research, they must address the challenge of sustainability. Despite its importance, the concept of network sustainability has received little attention in the literature, and the sustainability strategies of durable scientific networks have not been described.Innovation:The Health Maintenance Organization Research Network (HMORN) is a consortium of 18 research departments in integrated health care delivery systems with over 15 million members in the United States and Israel. The HMORN has coordinated federally funded scientific networks and studies since 1994. This case study describes the HMORN approach to sustainability, proposes an operational definition of network sustainability, and identifies 10 essential elements that can enhance sustainability.Credibility:The sustainability framework proposed here is drawn from prior publications on organizational issues by HMORN investigators and from the experience of recent HMORN leaders and senior staff.Conclusion and Discussion:Network sustainability can be defined as (1) the development and enhancement of shared research assets to facilitate a sequence of research studies in a specific content area or multiple areas, and (2) a community of researchers and other stakeholders who reuse and develop those assets. Essential elements needed to develop the shared assets of a network include: network governance; trustworthy data and processes for sharing data; shared knowledge about research tools; administrative efficiency; physical infrastructure; and infrastructure funding. The community of researchers within a network is enhanced by: a clearly defined mission, vision and values; protection of human subjects; a culture of collaboration; and strong relationships with host organizations. While the importance of these elements varies based on the membership and goals of a network, this framework for sustainability can enhance strategic planning within the network and can guide relationships with external stakeholders.

Background: Research shows the profound impact of social factors on health, lead many healths systems to incorporate social risk screening. To help healthcare systems select among various screening tools we compared two tools, the Your Current Life Situation (YCLS) and the Accountable Health Communities (AHC) Screening tools, on key psychometric properties. Method: Kaiser Permanente Southern California subsidized exchange members ( n = 1008) were randomly invited to complete a survey containing either the YCLS or the AHC tool, as well as other measures related to care experience and health. Healthcare use was measured through the electronic health record. Agreement between the AHC and YCLS was assessed using adjusted kappas for six domains (food – worry, food – pay, insecure housing, housing quality, transportation, utilities). To assess predictive validity, items on the AHC and YCLS were compared to self-rated health and receipt of a flu shot. Results: Responders ( n = 450) and non-responders ( n = 558) significantly differed on sex, language, and depression ( P < 0.05) but not anxiety, race/ethnicity, or healthcare use. Agreement between the AHC and YCLS tools was substantial on all items (kappas > 0.60) except for housing quality (kappa 0.52). Four out of six screening questions on the AHC tool and four out of seven on the YCLS tool were associated with self-rated health ( P < 0.03). No social needs were associated with flu shot receipt except utilities on the AHC tool ( P = 0.028). Conclusion: In this sample, the AHC and YCLS tools are similar in their ability to screen for social risks. Differences observed likely stem from the timeframe and wording of the questions, which can be used to guide selection in healthcare systems.