Key result
Adding traditional and complementary medicine to NRT and counseling fails to improve 4-week smoking cessation.
Why the study?
Smoking causes more than 6 million preventable deaths globally per year, and the pragmatic effectiveness and incremental cost-effectiveness of traditional and complementary medicine interventions for smoking cessation needed evaluation.
Does the addition of traditional and complementary medicine to nicotine replacement therapy and counseling improve smoking cessation success rates in individuals seeking to quit smoking?
RCT (n=41)
Open-label
1:1
Does the addition of traditional and complementary medicine to nicotine replacement therapy and counseling improve smoking cessation success rates in individuals seeking to quit smoking?
Odds Ratio: 1.96 (95% CI 0.51–8.51)
The addition of traditional and complementary medicine to nicotine replacement therapy and counseling did not significantly improve smoking cessation success rates in this pilot trial.
Does not support adding traditional medicine to NRT and counseling for smoking cessation; leaves open benefit in larger trials.
Background: Smoking is associated with many preventable diseases and deaths. Globally, more than 6 million deaths per year are related to smoking. This study aimed to evaluate the pragmatic effectiveness of traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) interventions for the smoking cessation treatment and to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of these interventions. Methods: The study design was a pragmatic, open-label randomized trial. The hypothesis of this trial was that the smoking cessation success rate increases with the addition of T&CM methods. The intervention group was provided T&CM interventions in addition to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and counseling, whereas the control group was treated with only NRT and counseling. Individuals received treatment for 4 weeks, then follow-up care for 20 weeks. Results: Forty-one participants were enrolled and assigned to either an intervention group or a control group at a ratio of 1:1. The odds ratio values at 4 weeks were 1.96 (0.51–8.51) in intention-to-treat analysis and 3.27 (0.75–17.75) in per-protocol analysis. The amount of smoking (cigarettes) decreased in both groups: from 17.2 ± 10.31 (baseline) to 1.7 ± 3.02 (4 weeks) in the intervention group and from 12.9 ± 5.47 (baseline) to 3.3 ± 5.96 (4 weeks) in the control group. The total medical costs per patient were $212.20 USD in the intervention group and $170.80 in the control group. The adjusted ICER of T&CM interventions was $13,355. Conclusions: This pilot study evaluated the clinical feasibility of T&CM used in conjunction with NRT and counseling for the smoking cessation treatment. However, there was no statistically significant effectiveness of T&CM interventions to raise cessation success rate. This study demonstrates the necessity for further studies based on large-scale randomized controlled trials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jang et al. (2019) conducted an RCT in Smoking cessation (n=41). Traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) plus NRT and counseling vs. NRT and counseling was evaluated on Smoking cessation success rate at 4 weeks (OR 1.96, 95% CI 0.51-8.51). Traditional and complementary medicine added to NRT and counseling did not significantly increase smoking cessation success at 4 weeks compared to NRT alone (OR 1.96; 95% CI 0.51-8.51).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: