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.
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: Saul Shiffman; Carolyn M Dresler; Peter Hajek; Simon J A Gilburt; Darren A Targett; Kenneth R Strahs Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2002-06-10
Authors: Jennifer Scott Koontz; Kari Jo Harris; Kolawole S Okuyemi; Michael C Mosier; James Grobe; Niaman Nazir; Jasjit S Ahluwalia Journal: J Am Coll Health Date: 2004 Nov-Dec
Authors: Nancy Miller; Thomas R Frieden; Sze Yan Liu; Thomas D Matte; Farzad Mostashari; Deborah R Deitcher; K Michael Cummings; Christina Chang; Ursula Bauer; Mary T Bassett Journal: Lancet Date: 2005 May 28-Jun 3 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: K Michael Cummings; Brian Fix; Paula Celestino; Shannon Carlin-Menter; Richard O'Connor; Andrew Hyland Journal: J Public Health Manag Pract Date: 2006 Jan-Feb
Authors: Saul Shiffman; Sarah M Scholl; Jason Mao; Stuart G Ferguson; Donald Hedeker; Brian Primack; Hilary A Tindle Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2020-03-16 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Francisco I Salgado García; Karen J Derefinko; Zoran Bursac; Sarah Hand; Robert C Klesges Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2018-03-13 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Jeremy E Drehmer; Man Luo; Emara Nabi-Burza; Bethany Hipple Walters; Jonathan P Winickoff Journal: Acad Pediatr Date: 2020-10-07 Impact factor: 3.107
Authors: Kelly C Young-Wolff; Sara R Adams; Andy S L Tan; Alyce S Adams; Daniella Klebaner; Cynthia I Campbell; Derek D Satre; Ramzi G Salloum; Lisa Carter-Harris; Judith J Prochaska Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2019-03-15