Journal of substance use and addiction treatment · 2023
Type-switching of short-acting nicotine replacement therapy products and its implications for treatment.
СтатьяНаблюдательное 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.
Veldhuizen Scott, Zawertailo Laurie, Selby Peter
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The frequency with which people change from one medical treatment to another partly reflects satisfaction with the initial intervention. In this secondary analysis of observational data, we explore switch rates for short-acting nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) products, which differ in mode of use, rapidity of action, and adverse effect profiles.
METHODS: We analyzed data from 46,882 participants in the Smoking Treatment for Ontario Patients program who received short-acting NRT (gum, lozenge, oral spray, or inhaler) at their initial visit. We used discrete-time survival analysis to model the time elapsing before a change was made to another product and included time-by-product interactions to explore differences over time and product-by-previous-quit-attempts interactions to examine the importance of potential previous exposure to NRT. We adjusted both models for a range of sociodemographic and tobacco use variables.
RESULTS: Overall, 37.9% (95% CI = 37.5%, 38.4%) of participants switched to a different product at their first follow-up visit. Time-averaged and adjusted switch probabilities were 21.1% for gum, 23.8% for lozenge, 26.0% for inhaler, and 28.8% for oral spray. Switch rates were highest for people without past quit attempts, for women, and for people also using the nicotine patch.
CONCLUSIONS: People frequently switch from one type of short-acting NRT to another. We did not assess reasons for switching, but they may include adverse effects, impracticality, and perceived ineffectiveness. Given the superior effectiveness of combination treatment, making multiple products available may improve outcomes by allowing some people to continue with short-acting products for longer.
METHODS: We analyzed data from 46,882 participants in the Smoking Treatment for Ontario Patients program who received short-acting NRT (gum, lozenge, oral spray, or inhaler) at their initial visit. We used discrete-time survival analysis to model the time elapsing before a change was made to another product and included time-by-product interactions to explore differences over time and product-by-previous-quit-attempts interactions to examine the importance of potential previous exposure to NRT. We adjusted both models for a range of sociodemographic and tobacco use variables.
RESULTS: Overall, 37.9% (95% CI = 37.5%, 38.4%) of participants switched to a different product at their first follow-up visit. Time-averaged and adjusted switch probabilities were 21.1% for gum, 23.8% for lozenge, 26.0% for inhaler, and 28.8% for oral spray. Switch rates were highest for people without past quit attempts, for women, and for people also using the nicotine patch.
CONCLUSIONS: People frequently switch from one type of short-acting NRT to another. We did not assess reasons for switching, but they may include adverse effects, impracticality, and perceived ineffectiveness. Given the superior effectiveness of combination treatment, making multiple products available may improve outcomes by allowing some people to continue with short-acting products for longer.