Treating heavy smokers in primary care with the nicotine nasal spray: randomized placebo-controlled trial

被引:21
作者
Stapleton, John A. [1 ]
Sutherland, Gay [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] UCL, Canc Res UK Hlth Behav Res Ctr, Dept Epidemiol & Publ Hlth, London WC1E 6BT, England
[2] UCL, Dept Psychiat, Inst Psychiat, London WC1E 6BT, England
[3] S London & Maudsley NHS Fdn Trust, London, England
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
Nicotine dependence; nicotine nasal spray; NRT; primary care; varenicline; SMOKING-CESSATION; GENERAL-PRACTICE; EFFICACY; DELIVERY; PATCHES;
D O I
10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.03274.x
中图分类号
R194 [卫生标准、卫生检查、医药管理];
学科分类号
摘要
Aims Of six established nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) formulations, only the gum and patch have been tested without specialist clinic support in placebo-controlled trials. We aimed to broaden the evidence base by examining if the nicotine nasal spray (NNS) could be effective with only brief support in general practice. Design Randomized placebo-controlled trial. Setting Twenty-seven English general practices. Participants A total of 761 heavy smokers received brief support and 12 weeks of treatment with NNS (506) or placebo (255). Measurements The primary outcome was biochemically verified complete abstinence from smoking throughout weeks 3-12. Findings NNS compared with placebo more than doubled the number who successfully stopped smoking [15.4% versus 6.7%, odds ratio (OR) = 2.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.5-4.4]. Many participants reported minor irritant adverse symptoms. NNS was particularly effective among those who were more highly dependent on nicotine (OR = 6.17, 95% CI = 2.13-17.9). Of those who failed to stop during the first week (417, 54.8%), only one (0.2%) achieved later success. Conclusions NNS is effective when given in primary care. The benefit was lower than in a specialist clinic but similar to that with the nicotine patch in primary care. Unlike most other NRT formulations, bupropion or varenicline, NNS was especially helpful for more dependent smokers. Continuing treatment of those initially failing was not beneficial. An initial 1-week prescription to those more dependent on nicotine is likely to be the most cost-effective NNS treatment protocol. These results should offer support to the effectiveness of the other NRT formulations untested in this setting.
引用
收藏
页码:824 / 832
页数:9
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2017, COST EFFECTIVENESS I
[2]   Weekly versus basic smoking cessation support in primary care:: a randomised controlled trial [J].
Aveyard, Paul ;
Brown, Karen ;
Saunders, Cas ;
Alexander, Avril ;
Johnstone, Elaine ;
Munafo, Marcus R. ;
Murphy, Mike .
THORAX, 2007, 62 (10) :898-903
[3]   A double-blind randomized trial of nicotine nasal spray as an aid in smoking cessation [J].
Blondal, T ;
Franzon, M ;
Westin, A .
EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL, 1997, 10 (07) :1585-1590
[4]   Nicotine replacement therapy for long-term smoking cessation: a meta-analysis [J].
Etter, Jean-Francois ;
Stapleton, John A. .
TOBACCO CONTROL, 2006, 15 (04) :280-285
[5]  
Fagerstrom Karl, 2008, Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat, V4, P353
[6]  
Foulds J, 1993, Arch Fam Med, V2, P417, DOI 10.1001/archfami.2.4.417
[7]  
Glover Elbert D, 2002, Nicotine Tob Res, V4, P441, DOI 10.1080/1462220021000018443
[8]  
HEATHERTON TF, 1991, BRIT J ADDICT, V86, P1119
[9]   EFFECT OF NICOTINE NASAL SPRAY ON SMOKING CESSATION - A RANDOMIZED, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED, DOUBLE-BLIND-STUDY [J].
HJALMARSON, A ;
FRANZON, M ;
WESTIN, A ;
WIKLUND, O .
ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1994, 154 (22) :2567-2572
[10]   RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL OF NICOTINE CHEWING-GUM [J].
JARVIS, MJ ;
RAW, M ;
RUSSELL, MAH ;
FEYERABEND, C .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1982, 285 (6341) :537-540