scholarly journals Nicotine Replacement Therapy Use Predicts Smoking and Drinking Outcomes among Heavy-Drinking Smokers Calling a Tobacco Quitline

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alana M. Rojewski ◽  
Lisa M. Fucito ◽  
Stephen Baldassarri ◽  
Andrew Hyland ◽  
K. Michael Cummings ◽  
...  

Introduction: Suboptimal use of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) may pose a significant barrier to smokers attempting to quit. We examined NRT use as a predictor of smoking abstinence and heavy drinking in a randomised trial of hazardous drinkers who contacted the NY State Smokers’ quitline for smoking cessation assistance.Methods: Participants (N = 1,948) received either Tobacco Only Counselling or Alcohol + Tobacco Counselling (ATC), both in addition to a 2-week supply of NRT. NRT use, smoking status, and heavy drinking days were assessed by self-report at the 7-month follow-up.Results: Of those smokers who completed the 7-month follow-up (N = 843), 53.1% used all of the NRT and 40.6% used some. Those who used all of the NRT were more likely to be abstinent from smoking than those who used some, and more likely to report no heavy drinking days than those who used some or none.Conclusions: Approximately half of the heavy drinking smokers calling the quitline are willing to use the 2-week supply of free NRT, and most will at least try it. Those who reported using all of the NRT were more likely to report smoking abstinence and no heavy drinking days at the 7-month follow-up.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Herbec ◽  
Jamie Brown ◽  
Lion Shahab ◽  
Robert West ◽  
Tobias Raupach

Abstract Background: Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) bought over the counter (OTC) appears to be largely ineffective for smoking cessation, which may be partially explained by poor adherence. We developed and evaluated the NRT2Quit smartphone app (for iOS) designed to improve quit attempts with OTC NRT by improving adherence to the medications. Methods: A pragmatic double-blind randomized controlled trial with remote recruitment through leaflets distributed to over 300 UK-based community pharmacies. The study recruited adult daily smokers (≥10 cig/day) who bought NRT, wanted to quit smoking, downloaded NTR2Quit and completed the registration process within the app. Participants were automatically randomized within the app to the intervention (full) version of NRT2Quit or to its control (minimal) versions. The primary outcome was biochemically-verified 4-week abstinence assessed at 8-week follow-up using Russell Standard criteria and intention-to-treat. Bayes factors were calculated for the cessation outcome. Secondary outcomes were self-reported abstinence, NRT use, app use and satisfaction with the app. Results: The study under-recruited with only 41 participants (3.5% of the target sample) randomly assigned to NRT2Quit (n=16) or the control (n=25) app versions between March 2015-September 2016. The follow-up rate was 51.2%. The intervention participants had numerically higher biochemically-verified quit rates (25.0% vs 8.0%, p=0.19, OR=3.83,0.61-24.02). The Bayes factor calculated was 1.92 showed the data were insensitive to test for the hypothesis that the intervention app version aided cessation. The intervention participants had higher median logins (2.5 vs. 0, p=0.01), were more likely to use NRT at follow-up (100.0% vs. 28.6%, p=0.03) and recommend NRT2Quit to others (100.0% vs. 28.6%, p=0.01). Conclusions: Despite very low recruitment there was preliminary but inconclusive evidence that NRT2Quit may improve short-term abstinence and adherence among smokers using nicotine replacement therapy. Well-powered studies on NRT2Quit are needed, but different recruitment methods will be required to engage smokers through community pharmacies or other channels.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Herbec ◽  
Jamie Brown ◽  
Lion Shahab ◽  
Robert West ◽  
Tobias Raupach

Abstract Background Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) bought over the counter (OTC) appears to be largely ineffective for smoking cessation, which may be partially explained by poor adherence. We developed and evaluated the NRT2Quit smartphone app (for iOS) designed to improve quit attempts with OTC NRT by improving adherence to the medications. Methods A pragmatic double-blind randomized controlled trial with remote recruitment through leaflets distributed to over 300 UK-based community pharmacies. The study recruited adult daily smokers (≥10 cig/day) who bought NRT, wanted to quit smoking, downloaded NTR2Quit and completed the registration process within the app. Participants were automatically randomized within the app to the intervention (full) version of NRT2Quit or to its control (minimal) versions. The primary outcome was biochemically-verified 4-week abstinence assessed at 8-week follow-up using Russell Standard criteria and intention-to-treat. Bayes factors were calculated for the cessation outcome. Secondary outcomes were self-reported abstinence, NRT use, app use and satisfaction with the app. Results The study under-recruited with only 41 participants (3.5% of the target sample) randomly assigned to NRT2Quit (n=16) or the control (n=25) app versions between March 2015-September 2016. The follow-up rate was 51.2%. The intervention participants had numerically higher biochemically-verified quit rates (25.0% vs 8.0%, p=0.19, OR=3.83,0.61-24.02). The Bayes factor calculated was 1.92, suggesting anecdotal level of support for the hypothesis that the intervention app version aided cessation, but showed the data were insensitive. The intervention participants had higher median logins (2.5 vs. 0, p=0.01), were more likely to use NRT at follow-up (100.0% vs. 28.6%, p=0.03) and recommend NRT2Quit to others (100.0% vs. 28.6%, p=0.01). Conclusions Despite very low recruitment there was preliminary but inconclusive evidence that NRT2Quit may improve short-term abstinence and adherence among smokers using nicotine replacement therapy. Well-powered studies on NRT2Quit are needed, but different recruitment methods will be required to engage smokers through community pharmacies or other channels.


BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S92-S93
Author(s):  
Flensham Mohamed ◽  
Mohamed Bader

AimsAudit carried out to assess whether or not patients had been asked about their smoking status during admission onto an acute adult mental health ward, as well as if they had received any smoking cessation advice or offered nicotine replacement therapy.Background•Physical health outcomes in patients with serious mental illness (SMI) are consisitently worse than the general public This is due to multiple factors; adverse effects of medication (including metabolic syndromes with psychotropics) as well as poor lifestyle factors such as smoking status•Patients with an SMI are 3–6 times more likely to die due to coronary artery disease. 70% of patients in inpatient psychiatric units are smokers, a strong independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease.•Smoking cessation is a potent modifiable risk factor that can prevent mortality and reduce morbidity.MethodA cross-sectional review of all 34 inpatients across four general adult acute psychiatric wards.Patient records were explored using the Aneuran Bevan Health Board admission proformas to identify evidence of smoking status and whether advice was offered.ResultSmoker but not given cessation advice n = 13 (38%)Not asked about smoking n = 11 (32%)Smoker and given cessation advice n = 4 (12%)Non-smoker n = 6 (18%)ConclusionPatients were asked about their smoking status the majority of the time (68%) but provision of advice or nicotine replacement therapy was only done in 14% of potential smokers (identified smokers and patients not asked about smoking status).A consideration to be taken into account is that on admission, a patient's physical health status may be unknown, with the additional difficulty of a patient's acute distress complicating the physical examination, smoking status and modification of patient's smoking status may not be the highest priory in that context.Data regarding asking about smoking were different amongst wards, potentially signifying differences between assessors willingness to ask about smoking status.There is a lack of smoking cessation literature available on the wards and patients are often unaware of what options are available to quit smoking.The audit simply determined whether or not assessors were documenting smoking status, it does not measure the quantity or quality of smoking cessation advice provided.Further quality improvement projects should be launched, with focus groups as the intial step at further investigating inpatient smoking rates, as well as attempting to reduce them in a more systemic way.


2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (54) ◽  
pp. 1-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sue Cooper ◽  
Sarah Lewis ◽  
James G Thornton ◽  
Neil Marlow ◽  
Kim Watts ◽  
...  

BackgroundSmoking during pregnancy causes many adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes. Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is effective for cessation outside pregnancy but efficacy and safety in pregnancy are unknown. We hypothesised that NRT would increase smoking cessation in pregnancy without adversely affecting infants.ObjectivesTo compare (1) at delivery, the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness for achieving biochemically validated smoking cessation of NRT patches with placebo patches in pregnancy and (2) in infants at 2 years of age, the effects of maternal NRT patch use with placebo patch use in pregnancy on behaviour, development and disability.DesignRandomised, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial and economic evaluation with follow-up at 4 weeks after randomisation, delivery and until infants were 2 years old. Randomisation was stratified by centre and a computer-generated sequence was used to allocate participants using a 1 : 1 ratio. Participants, site pharmacies and all study staff were blind to treatment allocation.SettingSeven antenatal hospitals in the Midlands and north-west England.ParticipantsWomen between 12 and 24 weeks’ gestation who smoked ≥ 10 cigarettes a day before and ≥ 5 during pregnancy, with an exhaled carbon monoxide (CO) reading of ≥ 8 parts per million (p.p.m.).InterventionsNRT patches (15 mg per 16 hours) or matched placebo as an 8-week course issued in two equal batches. A second batch was dispensed at 4 weeks to those abstinent from smoking.Main outcome measuresParticipants: self-reported, prolonged abstinence from smoking between a quit date and childbirth, validated at delivery by CO measurement and/or salivary cotinine (COT) (primary outcome). Infants, at 2 years: absence of impairment, defined as no disability or problems with behaviour and development. Economic: cost per ‘quitter’.ResultsOne thousand and fifty women enrolled (521 NRT, 529 placebo). There were 1010 live singleton births and 12 participants had live twins, while there were 14 fetal deaths and no birth data for 14 participants. Numbers of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes were similar in trial groups, except for a greater number of caesarean deliveries in the NRT group. Smoking: all participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses; those lost to follow-up (7% for primary outcome) were assumed to be smoking. At 1 month after randomisation, the validated cessation rate was higher in the NRT group {21.3% vs. 11.7%, odds ratio [OR], [95% confidence interval (CI)] for cessation with NRT, 2.05 [1.46 to 2.88]}. At delivery, there was no difference between groups’ smoking cessation rates: 9.4% in the NRT and 7.6% in the placebo group [OR (95% CI), 1.26 (0.82 to 1.96)]. Infants: at 2 years, analyses were based on data from 888 out of 1010 (87.9%) singleton infants (including four postnatal infant deaths) [445/503 (88.5%) NRT, 443/507 (87.4%) placebo] and used multiple imputation. In the NRT group, 72.6% (323/445) had no impairment compared with 65.5% (290/443) in placebo (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.86). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for NRT use was £4156 per quitter (£4926 including twins), but there was substantial uncertainty around these estimates.ConclusionsNicotine replacement therapy patches had no enduring, significant effect on smoking in pregnancy; however, 2-year-olds born to women who used NRT were more likely to have survived without any developmental impairment. Further studies should investigate the clinical effectiveness and safety of higher doses of NRT.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN07249128.FundingThis project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 54. See the NIHR Journals Library programme website for further project information.


2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonie S. Brose ◽  
Julia Bowen ◽  
Ann McNeill ◽  
Timea R. Partos

Abstract Background Most smokers attempting to quit relapse. There is little evidence whether the use of e-cigarettes (‘vaping’) increases or decreases relapse. This study aimed to assess 1) whether vaping predicted relapse among ex-smokers, and 2) among ex-smokers who vaped, whether vaping characteristics predicted relapse. Methods Longitudinal web-based survey of smokers, recent ex-smokers and vapers in the UK, baseline in May/June 2016 (n = 3334), follow-up in September 2017 (n = 1720). Those abstinent from smoking ≥ 2 months at baseline and followed up were included. Aim 1: Relapse during follow-up was regressed onto baseline vaping status, age, gender, income, nicotine replacement therapy use and time quit smoking (n = 374). Aim 2: Relapse was regressed onto baseline vaping frequency, device type, nicotine strength and time quit smoking (n = 159). Results Overall, 39.6% relapsed. Compared with never use (35.9%), past/ever (45.9%; adjOR = 1.13; 95% CI, 0.61–2.07) and daily vaping (34.5%; adjOR = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.61–1.89) had similar odds of relapse, for non-daily vaping evidence of increased relapse was inconclusive (65.0%; adjOR = 2.45; 95% CI, 0.85–7.08). Among vapers, non-daily vaping was associated with higher relapse than daily vaping (adjOR = 3.88; 95% CI, 1.10–13.62). Compared with modular devices (18.9% relapse), tank models (45.6%; adjOR = 3.63; 95% CI, 1.33–9.95) were associated with increased relapse; evidence was unclear for disposable/cartridge refillable devices (41.9%; adjOR = 2.83; 95% CI, 0.90–8.95). Nicotine strength had no clear association with relapse. Conclusion Relapse to smoking is likely to be more common among ex-smokers vaping infrequently or using less advanced devices. Research into the effects of vaping on relapse needs to consider vaping characteristics.


2012 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
SJ Bondy ◽  
LM Diemert ◽  
JC Victor ◽  
PW McDonald ◽  
JE Cohen

Introduction Access to Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) is a key public health intervention to reduce smoking. We assessed prevalence and correlates of use of NRT in Ontario, where NRT is available without prescription. Methods Participants were a representative sample of 2262 adult smokers in the Ontario Tobacco Survey cohort. Prospectively measured use of NRT over a 6-month period was reported in relation to smoking behaviour and history, attempts to quit, receipt of other supports for cessation supports and attitudes toward NRT. Results Overall, 11% of smokers used NRT over the six-month follow-up period. Conclusion With increasing accessibility of NRT, further surveillance and research are warranted to determine the impact of the reach and benefits of NRT, considering both the general and targeted smoking populations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document