首页> 外文期刊>Health technology assessment: HTA >'Cut down to quit' with nicotine replacement therapies in smoking cessation: a systematic review of effectiveness and economic analysis.
【24h】

'Cut down to quit' with nicotine replacement therapies in smoking cessation: a systematic review of effectiveness and economic analysis.

机译:减少戒烟的尼古丁替代在戒烟疗法:一个系统的审查的有效性和经济分析。

获取原文
           

摘要

OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for 'cut down to quit' (CDTQ) smoking. DATA SOURCES: Major electronic databases were searched up to July 2006. REVIEW METHODS: Data from studies meeting the criteria were reviewed and analysed. A decision analytical model was constructed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of CDTQ from the NHS perspective. RESULTS: No systematic reviews of the effectiveness of CDTQ and no randomised controlled trials (RCTs) specifically addressing CDTQ were identified. Seven randomised placebo-controlled trials satisfied the inclusion criteria; six of these were industry sponsored. However, sustained smoking cessation was only reported as a secondary outcome in these trials and required commencement of cessation within the first 6 weeks of treatment. Meta-analyses of the study level results demonstrated statistically significant superiority of NRT compared with placebo. Individual patient data from unpublished reports of five RCTs were used to calculate sustained abstinence of at least 6 months starting at any time during the treatment period (generally 12 months). From this the meta-analysis indicated statistically significant superiority of NRT versus placebo [relative risk 2.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.34 to 3.15]. The proportions achieving this outcome across all five RCTs were 6.75% of participants in receipt of NRT and 3.29% of those receiving placebo. The number-needed-to-treat was 29. This measure of sustained abstinence was used for economic modelling. No existing economic analyses of CDTQ were identified. A de novo decision analytic model was constructed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of making CDTQ with NRT available for smokers unwilling or unable to attempt an abrupt quit. The outcome measure was expected quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The model results suggest that CDTQ with NRT delivers incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) ranging from around 1500 pounds/QALY to 7700 pounds/QALY depending on the age at which smoking cessation was achieved and the modes of CDTQ delivery. Assuming applicability to a single population, CDTQ was not cost-effective compared with abrupt quitting. If CDTQ with NRT were to be offered on the NHS as a matter of policy, the base-case results suggest that it would only be effective and cost-effective if a substantial majority of the people attempting CDTQ with NRT were those who would otherwise make no attempt to quit. This result is robust to considerable variation in the forms of CDTQ with NRT offered, and to the assumptions about QALY gained per quit success. CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis of RCT evidence of quit rates in NRT-supported smoking reduction studies indicates that NRT is an effective intervention in achieving sustained smoking abstinence for smokers who declare unwillingness or inability to attempt an abrupt quit. The 12-month sustained abstinence success rate in this population (approximately 5.3% with NRT versus approximately 2.6% with placebo) is considerably less than that documented for an abrupt quit NRT regime in smokers willing to attempt an abrupt quit with NRT (which according to other systematic reviews is around 16% with NRT versus 10% with placebo). Most of the evidence of effectiveness of CDTQ came from trials that required considerable patient-investigator contact. Therefore, for CDTQ with NRT to generate similar abstinence rates for this recalcitrant population in a real-world setting would probably require a similar mode of delivery. The modelling undertaken, which was based on reasonable assumptions about costs, benefits and success rates, suggests that CDTQ is highly cost-effective compared with no quit attempt. CDTQ remains cost-effective if dilution from abrupt quitting forms a small proportion of CDTQ attempts. In an alternative analysis in which smokers who switch from an abrupt quit to CDTQ retain the success rate of abrupt quitters, all forms of C
机译:目的:检查和有效性成本效益的尼古丁替代治疗(NRT)为“减少戒烟”(CDTQ)吸烟。2006年7月被搜索到。数据从研究会议的标准回顾和分析。模型估计成本效益的CDTQ NHS视角。CDTQ和随机的有效性专门解决相关的对照试验CDTQ被确定。包含安慰剂对照试验满意标准;然而,持续的戒烟只是在这些试验报告为次要的结果并要求开始戒烟的前6周的治疗。研究结果表明统计水平NRT相比的重要优势安慰剂。5相关的被用来计算的报告禁欲至少持续6个月在治疗期间的任何时候开始(一般12个月)。荟萃分析显示统计学意义NRT的优越性与安慰剂(相对风险为2.06,95%可信区间(CI) 1.34到3.15)。比例达到这一结果在所有五个相关的6.75%的参与者在收据的NRT和3.29%的那些接受安慰剂。number-needed-to-treat是29。持续的禁欲是用于经济造型。被确定。模型估计成本效益的CDTQ NRT吸烟者不愿或无力尝试突然辞职。预期质量调整寿命(提升)。模型结果表明,CDTQ NRT交付增量成本效益比率(警察)从1500磅/ QALY 7700左右磅/ QALY根据吸烟的年龄停止CDTQ的实现和模式交付。人口,CDTQ相比是不划算的突然辞职。提供在英国国民健康保险制度作为一项政策,基本情况结果表明它只会如果大量有效和具有成本效益的大多数人尝试CDTQ NRT那些原本不打算吗辞职。变化形式的CDTQ NRT提供,和假设QALY获得/退出成功。证据的戒烟率NRT-supported吸烟研究表明NRT减少在实现持续有效的干预吸烟对吸烟者禁欲申报的东西突然不愿或无力尝试辞职。在这个人口(大约5.3%NRT与大约2.6%与安慰剂)大大小于记录的突然退出NRT吸烟者愿意政权尝试与NRT(据突然辞职其他系统评价是16%左右与安慰剂NRT和10%)。CDTQ来自的有效性的证据试验需要相当大的patient-investigator接触。与NRT生成类似的禁欲率这在一个真实的顽固的人设置可能会需要一个类似的模式交付。基于合理的假设,关于费用,福利和成功率,表明CDTQ高成本效益而不放弃尝试。从突然辞职形式的一小部分CDTQ尝试。吸烟者从突然辞职CDTQ保留突然戒烟的成功率,所有形式的C

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号