A Randomized Trial of E-Cigarettes versus Nicotine-Replacement Therapy
Рандомизированное исследование электронных сигарет в сравнении с никотинзаместительной терапией
2019-01-30
SCID: 54.1/37nntdur
Discuss with AI
E-cigarettesNicotine-replacement therapyRandomized trialSmoking cessationSustained abstinence
Figures from the paper
Abstract (AI)
BACKGROUND: E-cigarettes are commonly used in attempts to stop smoking, but evidence is limited regarding their effectiveness as compared with that of nicotine products approved as smoking-cessation treatments. METHODS: We randomly assigned adults attending U.K. National Health Service stop-smoking services to either nicotine-replacement products of their choice, including product combinations, provided for up to 3 months, or an e-cigarette starter pack (a second-generation refillable e-cigarette with one bottle of nicotine e-liquid [18 mg per milliliter]), with a recommendation to purchase further e-liquids of the flavor and strength of their choice. Treatment included weekly behavioral support for at least 4 weeks. The primary outcome was sustained abstinence for 1 year, which was validated biochemically at the final visit. Participants who were lost to follow-up or did not provide biochemical validation were considered to not be abstinent. Secondary outcomes included participant-reported treatment usage and respiratory symptoms. RESULTS: A total of 886 participants underwent randomization. The 1-year abstinence rate was 18.0% in the e-cigarette group, as compared with 9.9% in the nicotine-replacement group (relative risk, 1.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30 to 2.58; P<0.001). Among participants with 1-year abstinence, those in the e-cigarette group were more likely than those in the nicotine-replacement group to use their assigned product at 52 weeks (80% [63 of 79 participants] vs. 9% [4 of 44 participants]). Overall, throat or mouth irritation was reported more frequently in the e-cigarette group (65.3%, vs. 51.2% in the nicotine-replacement group) and nausea more frequently in the nicotine-replacement group (37.9%, vs. 31.3% in the e-cigarette group). The e-cigarette group reported greater declines in the incidence of cough and phlegm production from baseline to 52 weeks than did the nicotine-replacement group (relative risk for cough, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9; relative risk for phlegm, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9). There were no significant between-group differences in the incidence of wheezing or shortness of breath. CONCLUSIONS: E-cigarettes were more effective for smoking cessation than nicotine-replacement therapy, when both products were accompanied by behavioral support. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research and Cancer Research UK; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN60477608 .).
Key Findings
1
Among participants abstinent at one year, continued use of the assigned product was substantially higher with e-cigarettes than nicotine-replacement therapy (80% versus 9%).
2
E-cigarette users reported greater reductions in cough and phlegm production over 52 weeks than nicotine-replacement users.
3
In a randomized trial of 886 adults receiving behavioral support, e-cigarettes nearly doubled 1-year sustained abstinence versus nicotine-replacement therapy: 18.0% versus 9.9%.
4
The abstinence advantage for e-cigarettes was statistically significant (relative risk, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.30 to 2.58; P<0.001).
5
Throat or mouth irritation was more common with e-cigarettes, whereas nausea was more common with nicotine-replacement therapy.
Research Object
Smoking-cessation treatments in adults attending U.K. National Health Service stop-smoking services: refillable nicotine e-cigarettes versus nicotine-replacement products
Research Subject
Comparative effectiveness for sustained 1-year smoking abstinence, treatment usage, and respiratory symptoms
Publication Details
Publication Date
2019-01-30
Journal
Publisher
ISSN
Open access PDF
Access Type
Author Information
Download PDF
Subscribe to digest