Long-term effectiveness of mailed nicotine replacement therapy: study protocol of a randomized controlled trial 5-year follow-up

Vladyslav Kushnir, Peter Selby, Laurie Zawertailo, Rachel F Tyndale, Scott T Leatherdale, John A Cunningham, Vladyslav Kushnir, Peter Selby, Laurie Zawertailo, Rachel F Tyndale, Scott T Leatherdale, John A Cunningham

Abstract

Background: Our group recently completed a randomized controlled trial, evaluating the efficacy of providing 5 weeks of free nicotine replacement therapy (NRT; in the form of the nicotine patch) by expedited postal mail without behavioral assistance to regular adult smokers interested in receiving it. The findings revealed that mailed provision of nicotine patches resulted in more than a doubling of quit rates at a six-month follow-up compared to a no intervention control group. While this trial provided evidence for the effectiveness of mailed nicotine patches in promoting cessation, the findings speak only to the short term effectiveness of this approach. As relapse to smoking is known to occur beyond the 6 month period, it is important to evaluate whether the net benefit of NRT in naturalistic settings can be maintained long-term. The present study aims to perform a 5-year follow-up survey of participants in the original trial to evaluate the long-term effectiveness of mailed NRT.

Methods/design: Trained interviewers will contact participants in the randomized controlled trial 5 years post-enrollment. A total of 924 participants will be eligible to be contacted. Interviewers will first assess participants' smoking status and their level of nicotine dependence. Participants reporting not currently smoking will be asked whether they have smoked tobacco, even a puff, in the last 30 days (primary outcome measure: 30-day point prevalence abstinence), past 6 months (secondary outcome measure: prolonged 6-month abstinence), and since the 8-week follow-up survey (secondary outcome measure: > 4 year continuous abstinence). Interviewers will be blind to experimental condition at the time the primary outcome measure will be assessed. It is hypothesized that participants who received nicotine patches at baseline will display significantly higher quit rates at the 5-year follow-up as compared to participants who did not receive nicotine patches at baseline.

Discussion: If the study finds that the mailed distribution of free NRT is effective at promoting long-term cessation, it would provide further evidence to move forward with policies designed to make NRT treatment readily and freely available to smokers who request it.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT01429129 , Registered 2 September 2011; NCT03097445 , Registered 25 March 2017.

Keywords: Free distribution; Nicotine dependence; Nicotine patches; Nicotine replacement therapy; Smoking; Smoking cessation; Tobacco.

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This research was approved by the Ethics Review Board at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (No. 216–2005). All participants provided verbal, over-the-phone consent to participate prior to the start of the baseline interview in the original trial. Completers of the 6-month follow-up provided additional consent to be recontacted for a long-term follow-up.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

VK, LZ, SL, and JAC have no conflicts of interest to declare. RFT declares that, in the past three years, she has consulted with Apotex on topics unrelated to smoking cessation and has received unrestricted research funds via GRAND from Pfizer Inc. PS has received grant/research support from Pfizer Inc., Shoppers Drug Mart, Bhasin Consulting Fund Inc., and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. PS has received a speaking honorarium from Bristol-Myers Squibb. PS has also received consulting fees from Pfizer Canada Inc., Evidera Inc., Johnson & Johnson Group of Companies, Medcan Clinic, Miller Medical Communications, and NVision Insight Group. MedPlan Communications was involved in organizing Pfizer Canada Inc’s meetings that PS was asked to consult on and attend. Furthermore, PS has received pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation, free/discounted, from Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, and Pfizer Inc. through an open tender process for study purposes.

References

    1. Canadian Cancer Society/National Cancer Institute of Canada: Canadian Cancer Statistics 2005. Toronto, Canada, 2005. []. Accessed 29 June 2009.
    1. Baliunas D, Patra J, Rehm J, Popova S, Taylor B. Smoking-attributable morbidity: acute care hospital diagnoses and days of treatment in Canada, 2002. BMC Public Health. 2007;7:247. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-7-247.
    1. Canadian Tobacco Alcohol and Drugs Survey (CTADS): 2015 summary. []. Accessed June 21, 2017.
    1. West R, McNeill A, Raw M. Smoking cessation guidelines for health professionals: an update. Health Education Authority Thorax. 2000;55:987–999.
    1. The 2008 PHS Guideline Update Panel. Treating tobacco use and dependence: 2008 update U.S. Public Health Service Clinical Practice Guideline executive summary. Respir Care. 2008;53:1217–22.
    1. Le Foll B, Melihan-Cheinin P, Rostoker G, Lagrue G. Smoking cessation guidelines: evidence-based recommendations of the French health products safety agency. European Psychiatry. 2005;20:431–441. doi: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2004.12.008.
    1. Stead LF, Perera R, Bullen C, Mant D, Hartmann-Boyce J, Cahill K, Lancaster T. Nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2012;11
    1. Alpert HR, Connolly GN, Biener L. A prospective cohort study challenging the effectiveness of population-based medical intervention for smoking cessation. Tob Control. 2013;22:32–37. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050129.
    1. Kotz D, Brown J, West R. 'Real-world' effectiveness of smoking cessation treatments: a population study. Addiction. 2013;89:1360–1367.
    1. Kotz D, Brown J, West R. Prospective cohort study of the effectiveness of smoking cessation treatments used in the "real world". Mayo Clin Proc. 2014;89:1360–1367. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2014.07.004.
    1. Land T, Warner D, Paskowsky M, Cammaerts A, Wetherell L, Kaufmann R, Zhang L, Malarcher A, Pechacek T, Keithly L. Medicaid coverage for tobacco dependence treatments in Massachusetts and associated decreases in smoking prevalence. PLoS One. 2010;5 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009770.
    1. Leatherdale ST, Shields M. Smoking cessation: intentions, attempts and techniques. Health Rep. 2009;20:31–39.
    1. Cummings KM, Fix B, Celestino P, Carlin-Menter S, O'Connor R, Hyland A. Reach, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness of free nicotine medication giveaway programs. Journal of Public Health Management Practice. 2006;12:37–43. doi: 10.1097/00124784-200601000-00009.
    1. Miller N, Frieden TR, Liu SY, Matte TD, Mostashari F, Deitcher DR, Cummings KM, Chang C, Bauer U, Bassett MT. Effectiveness of a large-scale distribution programme of free nicotine patches: a prospective evaluation. Lancet. 2005;365:1849–1854. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66615-9.
    1. Davis KA, Coady MH, Mbamalu IG, Sacks R, Kilgore EA. Lessons learned from the implementation of a time-limited, large-scale nicotine replacement therapy giveaway program in new york city. Health Promot Pract. 2013;14:767–776. doi: 10.1177/1524839912471816.
    1. Selby P, Zawertailo L, Dragonetti R, Bondy SJ, Ho J: Stop Smoking Therapy for Ontario Patients (Stop Study): Methods for Free NRT Distribution. In: World Conference on Tobacco or Health: 2006; Washington, D.C.; 2006.
    1. Zawertailo L, Dragonetti R, Bondy SJ, Victor JC, Selby P. Reach and effectiveness of mailed nicotine replacement therapy for smokers: 6-month outcomes in a naturalistic exploratory study. Tob Control. 2013;22 doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050303.
    1. Selby P, Zawertailo L, Dragonetti R. The STOP study. Ninth Interim Progress Report to the Ministry of Health Promotion; 2009.
    1. Bush TM, McAfee T, Deprey M, Mahoney L, Fellows JL, McClure J, Cushing C. The impact of a free nicotine patch starter kit on quit rates in a state quit line. Nicotine Tob Res. 2008;10:1511–1516. doi: 10.1080/14622200802323167.
    1. Swartz SH, Cowan TM, Klayman JE, Welton MT, Leonard BA. Use and effectiveness of tobacco telephone counseling and nicotine therapy in Maine. Am J Prev Med. 2005;29:288–294. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2005.06.015.
    1. Tinkelman D, Wilson SM, Willett J, Sweeney CT. Offering free NRT through a tobacco quitline: impact on utilisation and quit rates. Tob Control. 2007;16(Suppl 1):i42–i46. doi: 10.1136/tc.2007.019919.
    1. Cunningham J, Leatherdale S, Selby P, Tyndale R, Zawertailo L, Kushnir V. Randomized controlled trial of mailed nicotine replacement therapy to Canadian smokers: study protocol. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:741. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-741.
    1. Cunningham JA, Kushnir V, Selby P, Tyndale RF, Zawertailo L, Leatherdale ST. Effect of mailing nicotine patches on tobacco cessation among adult smokers : a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176:184–190. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.7792.
    1. Cahill K, Stevens S, Perera R, Lancaster T. Pharmacological interventions for smoking cessation: an overview and network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;5
    1. Stead LF, Koilpillai P, Fanshawe TR, Lancaster T. Combined pharmacotherapy and behavioural interventions for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;3:CD008286.
    1. Hughes JR, Peters EN, Naud S. Relapse to smoking after 1 year of abstinence: a meta-analysis. Addict Behav. 2008;33:1516–1520. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2008.05.012.
    1. Nohlert E, Ohrvik J, Tegelberg A, Tillgren P, Helgason AR. Long-term follow-up of a high- and a low-intensity smoking cessation intervention in a dental setting--a randomized trial. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:592. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-592.
    1. Blondal T, Gudmundsson LJ, Olafsdottir I, Gustavsson G, Westin A. Nicotine nasal spray with nicotine patch for smoking cessation: randomised trial with six year follow up. BMJ. 1999;318:285–288. doi: 10.1136/bmj.318.7179.285.
    1. Glavas D, Rumboldt M, Rumboldt Z. Smoking cessation with nicotine replacement therapy among health care workers: randomized double-blind study. Croat Med J. 2003;44:219–224.
    1. Clavel-Chapelon F, Paoletti C, Benhamou S. Smoking cessation rates 4 years after treatment by nicotine gum and acupuncture. Prev Med. 1997;26:25–28. doi: 10.1006/pmed.1996.9997.
    1. Sales MP, Oliveira MI, Mattos IM, Viana CM, Pereira ED. The impact of smoking cessation on patient quality of life. Brazilian Journal of Pulmonology. 2009;35:436–441.
    1. Skevington SM, Lotfy M, O'Connell KA, Group W The World Health Organization's WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment: psychometric properties and results of the international field trial. A report from the WHOQOL group. Qual Life Res. 2004;13:299–310. doi: 10.1023/B:QURE.0000018486.91360.00.
    1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Smoking - 50 years of Progress: A Report of the Surgeon General. In. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health; 2014.
    1. Velicer WF, Prochaska JO, Rossi JS, Snow MG. Assessing outcome in smoking cessation studies. Psychol Bull. 1992;111:23–41. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.111.1.23.
    1. Velicer WF, Prochaska JO. A comparison of four self-report smoking cessation outcome measures. Addict Behav. 2004;29:51–60. doi: 10.1016/S0306-4603(03)00084-4.
    1. Prochaska JO, Velicer WF. The transtheoretical model of health behavior change. Am J Health Promot. 1997;12:38–48. doi: 10.4278/0890-1171-12.1.38.
    1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Benefits of Smoking Cessation: A Report of the Surgeon General. In. Atlanta: U.S. : Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health; 1990.
    1. Heatherton TF, Kozlowski LT, Frecker RC, Fagerstrom KO. The Fagerstrom test for nicotine dependence: a revision of the Fagerstrom tolerance questionnaire. Br J Addict. 1991;86:1119–1127. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1991.tb01879.x.
    1. Pomerleau CS, Carton SM, Lutzke ML, Flessland KA, Pomerleau OF Reliability of the Fagerstrom tolerance questionnaire and the Fagerstrom test for nicotine dependence. Addict Behav. 1994;19:33–39. doi: 10.1016/0306-4603(94)90049-3.
    1. Van Overmeire IP, De Smedt T, Dendale P, Nackaerts K, Vanacker H, Vanoeteren JF, Van Laethem DM, Van Loco J, De Cremer KA. Nicotine Dependence and Urinary Nicotine, Cotinine and Hydroxycotinine Levels in Daily Smokers. Nicotine Tob Res. 2016;18:1813–9.
    1. Prochaska JO, DiClemenete CC, Norcross JC. In search of how people change: applications to addictive behaviours. Am Psychol. 1992;47:1102–1114. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.47.9.1102.
    1. Wong SL, Shields M, Leatherdale S, Malaison E, Hammond D. Assessment of validity of self-reported smoking status. Health Rep. 2012;23:47–53.
    1. Patrick DL. Toward an epidemiology of disablement. Am J Public Health. 1994;84:1723–1725. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.84.11.1723.
    1. West R, Zatonski W, Przewozniak K, Jarvis MJ. Can we trust national smoking prevalence figures? Discrepancies between biochemically assessed and self-reported smoking rates in three countries. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2007;16:820–822. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0679.
    1. Hughes JR, Solomon LJ, Naud S, Fingar JR, Helzer JE, Callas PW. Natural history of attempts to stop smoking. Nicotine Tob Res. 2014;16:1190–1198. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntu052.
    1. US Centers for Disease Control/National Center for Health Statistics: Cognitive Research on Response Error in Survey Questions on Smoking: DAINE Publishing; 1992.
    1. Etter JF, Stapleton JA. Nicotine replacement therapy for long-term smoking cessation: a meta-analysis. Tob Control. 2006;15:280–285. doi: 10.1136/tc.2005.015487.
    1. Stan Development Team. rstanarm: Bayesian applied regression modeling via Stan. version:2.13.1; 2016.
    1. Stan Development Team. RStan: the R interface to Stan. version:2.14.1; 2016.
    1. R Core Team: R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria; 2016.
    1. Tobacco Control Liaison Committee of the Pan-Canadian Public Health Network. The National Strategy: Moving Forward - The 2006 Progress report on tobacco control. In. Ottawa: Health Canada; 2006.

Source: PubMed

3
Subskrybuj