AIDS (London, England) · 2024
A randomized trial for combination nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation among people with HIV in a low-resourced setting.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Elf Jessica L, Lebina Limakatso, Motlhaoleng Katlego, Chon Sandy, Niaura Raymond, Abrams David, Variava Ebrahim, Gupte Nikhil, Martinson Neil, Golub Jonathan E
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of combination nicotine replacement therapy (c-NRT) for smoking cessation among people with HIV (PWH) in South Africa.
DESIGN: We conducted an open-label, individually randomized clinical trial.
METHODS: Using a two-armed approach, PWH who smoke were randomized to receive either intensive antismoking behavioral counselling or intensive antismoking behavioral counseling plus c-NRT (nicotine patches augmented by nicotine gum). Self-reported smoking abstinence was biochemically validated with exhaled breath carbon monoxide (CO) and urine cotinine at 6 months. Recruitment, provision of trial interventions, and follow-up of participants took place in March 2014 through June 2016.
RESULTS: We randomly assigned 280 participants to the behavioral counseling arm and 281 participants to the behavioral counseling + c-NRT arm. Four hundred and thirty-eight (78%) participants were men and 123 (22%) were women. For our primary outcome of biochemically verified abstinence at 6 months, 41 (15%) were quit in the behavioral counseling + c-NRT arm vs. 28 (10%) in the behavioral counseling arm, resulting in a 5% [95% confidence interval (CI) -1 to 10%] absolute difference in relative risk and an adjusted odd ratio of 1.47 (95% CI 0.86-2.52) comparing the behavioral counseling + c-NRT to the behavioral counseling arm.
CONCLUSION: Although our results did not reach statistical significance, we found augmentation of behavioral counseling with c-NRT to increase smoking abstinence at 6 months, which is consistent with performance in the general population. PWH in low-resource settings may benefit from the addition of c-NRT to existing tobacco cessation interventions.
DESIGN: We conducted an open-label, individually randomized clinical trial.
METHODS: Using a two-armed approach, PWH who smoke were randomized to receive either intensive antismoking behavioral counselling or intensive antismoking behavioral counseling plus c-NRT (nicotine patches augmented by nicotine gum). Self-reported smoking abstinence was biochemically validated with exhaled breath carbon monoxide (CO) and urine cotinine at 6 months. Recruitment, provision of trial interventions, and follow-up of participants took place in March 2014 through June 2016.
RESULTS: We randomly assigned 280 participants to the behavioral counseling arm and 281 participants to the behavioral counseling + c-NRT arm. Four hundred and thirty-eight (78%) participants were men and 123 (22%) were women. For our primary outcome of biochemically verified abstinence at 6 months, 41 (15%) were quit in the behavioral counseling + c-NRT arm vs. 28 (10%) in the behavioral counseling arm, resulting in a 5% [95% confidence interval (CI) -1 to 10%] absolute difference in relative risk and an adjusted odd ratio of 1.47 (95% CI 0.86-2.52) comparing the behavioral counseling + c-NRT to the behavioral counseling arm.
CONCLUSION: Although our results did not reach statistical significance, we found augmentation of behavioral counseling with c-NRT to increase smoking abstinence at 6 months, which is consistent with performance in the general population. PWH in low-resource settings may benefit from the addition of c-NRT to existing tobacco cessation interventions.