Journal of addiction medicine · 2023
An Open-label Pilot Study of NicoBloc as a Novel Smoking Cessation Intervention.
Рандомизированное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Chichester Keith R, Sisson Michelle L, Chana Sofia Mildrum, Wolford-Clevenger Caitlin, Hugley Mickeah J, Hawes Elizabeth S, Palenski Paige, Nguyen Angela, Dahne Jennifer, Hendricks Peter S, Cropsey Karen L
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: NicoBloc is a viscous fluid applied to the cigarette filter designed to block tar and nicotine. This novel and understudied smoking cessation device presents a nonpharmacological means for smokers to gradually reduce nicotine and tar content while continuing to smoke their preferred brand of cigarette. This pilot study aimed to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and initial efficacy of NicoBloc as compared with nicotine replacement therapy (nicotine lozenge).
METHODS: A community sample of predominately Black smokers (N = 45; 66.7% Black) were randomized to receive NicoBloc or nicotine lozenge. Both groups engaged in 4 weeks of smoking cessation therapy followed by 2 months of independent usage with monthly check-ins to assess medication adherence. The intervention lasted 12 weeks, and the study concluded with a 1-month postintervention follow-up visit (week 16).
RESULTS: NicoBloc was comparable with nicotine lozenge in smoking reduction, feasibility, symptom adverse effects, and reported acceptability at week 16. Participants in the lozenge group endorsed higher treatment satisfaction ratings during the intervention and lower cigarette dependence. Adherence to NicoBloc was superior throughout the study.
CONCLUSION: NicoBloc was feasible and acceptable to community smokers. NicoBloc presents a unique, nonpharmacological intervention. Future research is needed to examine whether this intervention may be most effective in subpopulations where pharmacological approaches are restricted or in combination with established pharmacological methods such as nicotine replacement therapy.
METHODS: A community sample of predominately Black smokers (N = 45; 66.7% Black) were randomized to receive NicoBloc or nicotine lozenge. Both groups engaged in 4 weeks of smoking cessation therapy followed by 2 months of independent usage with monthly check-ins to assess medication adherence. The intervention lasted 12 weeks, and the study concluded with a 1-month postintervention follow-up visit (week 16).
RESULTS: NicoBloc was comparable with nicotine lozenge in smoking reduction, feasibility, symptom adverse effects, and reported acceptability at week 16. Participants in the lozenge group endorsed higher treatment satisfaction ratings during the intervention and lower cigarette dependence. Adherence to NicoBloc was superior throughout the study.
CONCLUSION: NicoBloc was feasible and acceptable to community smokers. NicoBloc presents a unique, nonpharmacological intervention. Future research is needed to examine whether this intervention may be most effective in subpopulations where pharmacological approaches are restricted or in combination with established pharmacological methods such as nicotine replacement therapy.