Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T04:31:11.339Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feasibility of Delivering Varenicline Through a Telephone Quitline to Promote Smoking Cessation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2018

Alana M. Rojewski ,
Andrew Hyland ,
Martin C. Mahoney ,
Louise M. Cooper ,
Kelly L. Zuromski ,
Paula Celestino ,
James Koutsky  and
Benjamin A. Toll
Alana M. Rojewski
Affiliation:
Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC
Andrew Hyland
Affiliation:
Department of Health Behavior, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY
Martin C. Mahoney
Affiliation:
Department of Health Behavior, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY
Louise M. Cooper
Affiliation:
School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY
Kelly L. Zuromski
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC
Paula Celestino
Affiliation:
Department of Health Behavior, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY
James Koutsky
Affiliation:
Department of Health Behavior, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY
Benjamin A. Toll*
Affiliation:
Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC Department of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT
*
Address for correspondence: Benjamin A. Toll, PhD, Department of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, 135 Cannon Street, MSC 835, Charleston, SC, 29425-8350. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction: Telephone quitlines are an easily accessible and effective means for delivering cessation services including nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Varenicline (VAR) may show superior quit rates to NRT, but has not been routinely evaluated in the context of quitlines.

Aims: To assess the feasibility of distributing VAR through a quitline, and preliminarily compare cessation rates between participants receiving VAR and NRT.

Methods: Participants were recruited through the New York State Smokers’ Quitline. Those randomised to VAR (n = 200) were instructed to obtain a prescription from their primary care physician (PCP) to be filled by mail through the research pharmacy. Those randomised to NRT (n = 100) were mailed NRT using an existing protocol. Outcome measures were number of submitted prescriptions and dispensed medication kits, and self-reported 7-day point prevalence abstinence at follow-up.

Results: The research pharmacy filled 100% of prescriptions through the quitline. However, only 27% of the VAR Arm submitted a prescription. An intent-to-treat analysis revealed that those receiving NRT were more likely to be abstinent at follow-up than the VAR Arm (OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.27–4.60; p < 0.01). The per-protocol analysis, which only included those in the VAR Arm who submitted a prescription, showed no difference in quit rates.

Conclusions: The present protocol resulted in successful delivery of VAR through the quitline, but a sizable proportion of the VAR Arm did not submit a prescription. Self-reported barriers included being unable to obtain a prescription from a PCP. Future studies should explore alternative methods for delivering VAR through quitlines.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Smoking Cessation , Volume 13 , Issue 4 , December 2018 , pp. 201 - 206
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

An, L. C., Schillo, B. A., Kavanaugh, A. M., Lachter, R. B., Luxenberg, M. G., Wendling, A. H. et al. (2006). Increased reach and effectiveness of a statewide tobacco quitline after the addition of access to free nicotine replacement therapy. Tobacco Control, 15 (4). doi:10.1136/Tc.2005.014555.Google Scholar
Aubin, H.-J., Bobak, A., Britton, J. R., Oncken, C., Billing, C. B., Gong, J. et al. (2008). Varenicline versus transdermal nicotine patch for smoking cessation: Results from a randomised open-label trial. Thorax, 63 (8), 717–724.Google Scholar
Biazzo, L. L., Froshaug, D. B., Harwell, T. S., Beck, H. N., Haugland, C., Campbell, S. L. et al. (2010). Characteristics and abstinence outcomes among tobacco quitline enrollees using varenicline or nicotine replacement therapy. Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 12 (6), 567–573. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntq045.Google Scholar
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2004). Telephone quitlines: A resource for development, implementation, and evaluation. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health Ed. Atlanta.Google Scholar
Cummings, K. M., Hyland, A., Fix, B., Bauer, U., Celestino, P., Carlin-Menter, S. et al. (2006). Free nicotine patch giveaway program – 12-month follow-up of participants. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 31 (2), 181–184. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2006.03.027.Google Scholar
Eisenberg, M. J., Filion, K. B., Yavin, D., Bélisle, P., Mottillo, S., Joseph, L. et al. (2008). Pharmacotherapies for smoking cessation: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 179 (2), 135–144. doi:10.1503/cmaj.070256.Google Scholar
Fiore, M. C., Jaen, C. R., Baker, T. B., Bailey, W. C., Benowitz, N. L., Curry, S. J. et al. (2008). Treating tobacco use and dependence: 2008 update US public health service clinical practice guideline executive summary. Respiratory Care, 53 (9), 1217–1222.Google Scholar
Gonzales, D., Rennard, S. I., Nides, M., Oncken, C., Azoulay, S., Billing, C. B. et al. (2006). Varenicline, an alpha 4 beta 2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor partial agonist, vs sustained-release bupropion and placebo for smoking cessation – A randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 296 (1), 47–55. doi:10.1001/jama.296.1.47.Google Scholar
Hollis, J. F., McAfee, T. A., Fellows, J. L., Zbikowski, S. M., Stark, M., & Riedlinger, K. (2007). The effectiveness and cost effectiveness of telephone counselling and the nicotine patch in a state tobacco quitline. Tobacco Control, 16, I53–I59. doi:10.1136/tc.2006.019794.Google Scholar
Jorenby, D. E., Hays, J., Rigotti, N. A., Azoulay, S., Watsky, E. J., Williams, K. E. et al. (2006). Efficacy of varenicline, an α4β2 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor partial agonist, vs. placebo or sustained-release bupropion for smoking cessation: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 296 (1), 56–63. doi:10.1001/jama.296.1.56.Google Scholar
Kralikova, E., Kmetova, A., Stepankova, L., Zvolska, K., Davis, R., & West, R. (2013). Fifty-two-week continuous abstinence rates of smokers being treated with varenicline versus nicotine replacement therapy. Addiction, 108 (8), 1497–1502. doi:10.1111/add.12219.Google Scholar
Miller, N., Frieden, T. R., Liu, S. Y., Matte, T. D., Mostashari, F., Deitcher, D. R. et al. (2005). Effectiveness of a large-scale distribution programme of free nicotine patches: A prospective evaluation. Lancet, 365 (9474), 1849–1854. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66615-9.Google Scholar
Stead, L. F., Hartmann-Boyce, J., Perera, R., & Lancaster, T. (2013). Telephone counselling for smoking cessation. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (8), Cd002850. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD002850.pub3.Google Scholar
Toll, B. A., Martino, S., O'Malley, S. S., Fucito, L. M., McKee, S. A., Kahler, C. W. et al. (2015). A randomized trial for hazardous drinking and smoking cessation for callers to a quitline. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 83 (3), 445–454. doi:10.1037/a0038183.Google Scholar
Walker, N., Gainforth, H., Kiparoglou, V., Robinson, H., van Woerden, H., & West, R. (2017). Factors moderating the relative effectiveness of varenicline and nicotine replacement therapy in clients using smoking cessation services. Addiction, 113, 313–324. doi:10.1111/add.14004.Google Scholar