Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2024
Switching to E-cigarettes as Harm Reduction Among Individuals With Chronic Disease Who Currently Smoke: Results of a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Vojjala Mahathi, Stevens Elizabeth R, Nicholson Andrew, Morgan Tucker, Kaneria Aayush, Xiang Grace, Wilker Olivia, Wisniewski Rachel, Melnic Irina, El Shahawy Omar, Berger Kenneth I, Sherman Scott E
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: E-cigarettes (ECs) may be an effective harm reduction strategy for individuals with conditions like chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma, coronary artery disease (CAD), and peripheral arterial disease who smoke combustible cigarettes (CCs). Our aim was to examine how individuals with chronic conditions transition from CCs to ECs and its impact on health outcomes.
AIMS AND METHODS: In a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT), patients with COPD, asthma, and CAD/PAD who currently smoke CCs and have not used nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) or ECs in the past 14 days were randomized to receive ECs or combination NRT with behavioral counseling. Disease symptoms, acceptability/satisfaction (TSQM-9) and feasibility, and cigarettes per day (CPD), and/or EC use were collected at baseline, 3-, and 6 months. Descriptive statistics and a linear regression were conducted to explore changes in CPD and chronic condition-specific assessments (CAT, SAQ-7, and ACT) that assess COPD, asthma, and CAD/PAD symptom change.
RESULTS: At 3 months, the EC group (n = 63, mean CPD = 9 ± 11) reduced their CPD by 54% versus 60% in the NRT group (n = 58, mean CPD = 7 ± 6), p = .56. At 6 months, 17.5% had switched completely to ECs while 23% quit smoking in the NRT arm. CAT scores showed a significant 6-point reduction in the EC arm (p = .03). Participants scored an average of 69 ± 27 for EC effectiveness, 87 ± 23 for convenience, and 75 ± 27 for overall satisfaction.
CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study suggests that ECs may be a safer alternative for chronic condition patients using CCs and warrants further research on expected smoking cessation/reduction among individuals who use ECs.
IMPLICATIONS: The findings from this pilot RCT hold significant implications for chronic conditions such as COPD, asthma, CAD, and peripheral arterial disease who smoke CCs. The observed reduction in CPD and improvement in respiratory symptoms suggest that switching to ECs appears feasible and acceptable among those with chronic diseases. These results suggest that ECs may offer an alternative for individuals struggling to quit CC smoking through existing pharmacotherapies. This study supports further exploration of switching to ECs as a harm reduction strategy among CC users who have been unsuccessful at quitting by other means.
AIMS AND METHODS: In a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT), patients with COPD, asthma, and CAD/PAD who currently smoke CCs and have not used nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) or ECs in the past 14 days were randomized to receive ECs or combination NRT with behavioral counseling. Disease symptoms, acceptability/satisfaction (TSQM-9) and feasibility, and cigarettes per day (CPD), and/or EC use were collected at baseline, 3-, and 6 months. Descriptive statistics and a linear regression were conducted to explore changes in CPD and chronic condition-specific assessments (CAT, SAQ-7, and ACT) that assess COPD, asthma, and CAD/PAD symptom change.
RESULTS: At 3 months, the EC group (n = 63, mean CPD = 9 ± 11) reduced their CPD by 54% versus 60% in the NRT group (n = 58, mean CPD = 7 ± 6), p = .56. At 6 months, 17.5% had switched completely to ECs while 23% quit smoking in the NRT arm. CAT scores showed a significant 6-point reduction in the EC arm (p = .03). Participants scored an average of 69 ± 27 for EC effectiveness, 87 ± 23 for convenience, and 75 ± 27 for overall satisfaction.
CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study suggests that ECs may be a safer alternative for chronic condition patients using CCs and warrants further research on expected smoking cessation/reduction among individuals who use ECs.
IMPLICATIONS: The findings from this pilot RCT hold significant implications for chronic conditions such as COPD, asthma, CAD, and peripheral arterial disease who smoke CCs. The observed reduction in CPD and improvement in respiratory symptoms suggest that switching to ECs appears feasible and acceptable among those with chronic diseases. These results suggest that ECs may offer an alternative for individuals struggling to quit CC smoking through existing pharmacotherapies. This study supports further exploration of switching to ECs as a harm reduction strategy among CC users who have been unsuccessful at quitting by other means.