4.5 Article

Nicotine Replacement Therapy Distribution to Light Daily Smokers Calling a Quitline

Journal

NICOTINE & TOBACCO RESEARCH
Volume 15, Issue 9, Pages 1572-1577

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ntr/ntt021

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. New York State Smokers' Quitline (NYS Department of Health)
  2. Roswell Park Cancer Institute Cancer Center Support Grant (NCI) [P30 CA016056]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: With an increasing prevalence of lighter smokers presenting for cessation assistance, outcome-based recommendations are needed to inform nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) distribution protocols by quitlines. Methods: A quasi-experimental design was utilized to compare quit rates based on samples selected from the time period before and after NRT (gum or lozenge) was offered to light daily smokers (1-9 cigarettes) contacting the New York State Smokers' Quitline. Outcome measures included self-reported 7- and 30-day abstinence rates, numbers of daily cigarettes among continuing smokers, and cost per quit analyses. Results: Among responders to the follow-up survey, quit rates were higher for those given NRT compared with those not offered NRT at both 7 (33.0% vs. 27.2%; Relative Risk [RR] = 2.25 [95% CI: 1.15, 4.40;p < .05]) and 30 days (28.0% vs. 21.9%; RR = 2.63 [95% CI: 1.25, 5.54; p < .05]). Similar results were obtained based on intent-to-treat analyses for both 7 (13.4% vs. 11.3%; RR = 1.92 [95% CI: 1.08, 3.39;p < .05]) and 30 days (11.4% vs. 9.1%; RR = 2.29 [95% CI: 1.20, 4.40; p < .05]). Among continuing smokers, the mean number of cigarettes smoked per day increased from enrollment to follow-up in both groups, but less so in those receiving NRT. The additional cost associated with providing a 2-week free supply of nicotine replacement to smokers was $52 for gum and $74 for lozenge. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that light daily smokers (1-9 cigarettes) who contact a telephone quitline are interested in using NRT if offered and are able to achieve higher quit rates compared with those not offered NRT.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available