Journals / Tüberküloz ve Toraks / 2005 / Cilt: 53 - Sayı: 4

The comparison of nicotine replacement therapy and behavioral education in smoking cessation: A study of naturalistic follow-up

Sigarayı bırakmada nikotin replasman tedavisi ve davranış eğitimi yöntemlerinin karşılaştırılması: Doğal izlem çalışması

Pages
354–361
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

According to our results, NRT and behavioral education are both efficient in smoking cessation.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, we aimed to compare quitting smoking rates after behavioral education (BE) and/or nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). 610 patients applied between October 1999-April 2002 have been acknowledged and evaluated by a questionnaire including demographic variables, smoking history, smoking habits and attitudes, motivation; biochemical assayand spirometric measures were examined.
📊
Key Findings & Data:One-year follow-up results and demographic variables of patients who recruitedto treatment (n= 435) were analyzed by chi-square, Student-t test, one-way ANOVA and post-hoc tests. 375 (%66.8) case were given NRT and BE; only BE (Fagerstrom 0.05).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to our results, NRT and behavioral education are both efficient in smoking cessation.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2002 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this study, we aimed to compare quitting smoking rates after behavioral education (BE) and/or nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). 610 patients applied between October 1999-April 2002 have been acknowledged and evaluated by a questionnaire including demographic variables, smoking history, smoking habits and attitudes, motivation; biochemical assayand spirometric measures were examined. One-year follow-up results and demographic variables of patients who recruitedto treatment (n= 435) were analyzed by chi-square, Student-t test, one-way ANOVA and post-hoc tests. 375 (%66.8) case were given NRT and BE; only BE (Fagerstrom 0.05). Quitting rates were similar between age, sex, education, occupation,and complaint groups. Two groups were not statistically different with regards of smoking history and nicotine dependence. The most frequent side effect was skin reactions (%7). The economical and medical burden of smoking increase astime goes on. According to our results, NRT and behavioral education are both efficient in smoking cessation.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, sigara bırakma polikliniğimize başvuran hastaların özellikleri ve uygulanan tedavilerin [nikotin replasman tedavisi (NRT)/davranış eğitimi-motivasyonel destek (DE)] birinci yıl izlem sonuçlarının karşılaştırılması amaçlanmıştır. Ekim 1999-Nisan 2002 tarihleri arasında başvuranlara (n= 610), rutin ve spirometrik değerlendirmeleri yapılarak Fagerstrom Testi uygulanmış, sigarayı bırakma yöntemleri konusunda bilgilendirilmiş ve anket uygulanmıştır. İkinci görüşme sonunda tedaviye alınan olguların (n= 561) bir yıllık izlem sonuçları ve demografik verileri gruplar arası ki-kare,Student’s t-testi ve tek yönlü ANOVA, tukey post-hoc testleriyle değerlendirilmiştir. Üçyüzyetmişbeş (%66.8) kişiye NRT veDE, 186 (%33.2) kişiye ise yalnızca DE verilmiştir (Fagerstrom skoru 0.05). Bırakma oranları açısından demografik özellikler, sigara içme öyküsü ve nikotin bağımlılığı açısından anlamlı fark olmadığı görüldü. Yan etkilerden cilt reaksiyonları (%7) birinci sıradaydı. Önümüzdeki yıllarda sigara içmenin medikal ve ekonomik boyutları giderek artacaktır. Sigarayı bırakma başarısında NRT kadar davranış eğitimi ve yoğun motivasyonel destek de etkilidir.

🔖

Cite This Article

KURT, B., ÖRSEL, O., ALPAR, S., UÇAR, N., ÖRSEL, S., ŞİPİT, T. (2022). The comparison of nicotine replacement therapy and behavioral education in smoking cessation: A study of naturalistic follow-up. Tüberküloz ve Toraks, Cilt: 53 - Sayı: 4, 354–361. https://ajindex.com/articles/619216

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. Hand S, Edwards S, Campell IA, Cannings A. Controlled trial of three weeks nicotine replacement treatment in hospital patients also given advice and support. Thorax 2002; 57: 715-8
  2. Simon AJ, Carmody TP, Hudes HS, et al. Intensive smoking cessation counselling versus minimal counselling among hospitalized smokers treated with transdermal nicotine replacement: A randomized trial. Am J Med 2003; 114: 555-62
  3. Uzaslan EK, Özyardımcı N, Karadağ M, et al. The Physician’s intervention in smoking cessation: Results of the five years of smoking cessation clinic. Ann Med Sci 2000; 9: 63-9
  4. Çan G. Sigara epidemiyolojisi. Özyardımcı N (editör). Sigara ve Sağlık. Bursa, 2002: 49-59
  5. Smiths SS, Jorenby DE, FC Fiore, et al. Strike while iron is hot: Can stepped-care treatments resurrect relapsing smokers. J Consult Clin Psychol 2001; 69: 429-39
  6. The Tobacco Use and Dependence Clinical Practice Guideline Panel, Staff, and Consortium Representatives. US Public Health Service Support. A Clinical Practice Guideline for Treating Tobocca Use and Dependence. JAMA 2000; 283: 3244-54
  7. Jorenby DE, Leischow SJ, Nides MA, et al. A controlled trial of sustained-release bupropion, a nicotine patch, or both for smoking cessation. N Engl J Med 1999; 340: 685-91
  8. Fiore MC, Smith SS, Jorenby DE. The effectiveness of the nicotine patch for smoking cessation: A meta-analysis. JAMA 1994; 271: 1940-7
  9. Uzaslan E. Sigarayı bırakma yöntemleri. Özyardımcı N (editör). Sigara ve Sağlık. Bursa, 2002: 429-60
  10. Silagy C, Mant D, Fowler G, Lodge M. Meta-analysis on efficacy of nicotine replacement therapies in smoking cessation. Lancet 1994; 343: 139-42
  11. Campell IA, Prescott RJ, Tjeder-Burton SM. Smoking cessation in hospital patients given repeated advice plus nicotine or placebo chewing gum. Respir Med 1991; 85:155-7
  12. Bolliger CT, Zellweger JP, Danielsson T, et al. Smoking reduction with oral nicotine inhalers: Double blind, randomised clinical trial of efficacy and safety. BMJ 2000; 321: 329-33
  13. Shiffman S, Rolf CN, Hellesbusch SJ, et al. Real-world efficacy of prescription and over the counter nicotine replacement therapy. Addiction 2002; 97: 505-16
  14. Etter FJ, Laszlo ERN, Zellweger JP, et al. Nicotine replacement to reduce cigarette consumption in smokers who are unwilling to quit: A randomized trial. J Clin Psychopharmacol 2002; 22: 487-95
  15. DeGraff AC. Pharmacologic therapy for nicotine addiction. Chest 2002; 122: 392-4
  16. Hays TJ, Croghan IT, Sc