Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT)

From Safer nicotine wiki

Studies, Surveys, Papers, and Case Studies

  • Sometimes it's necessary to view the PDF version to access the full study.
  • This page is for referencing the possible benefits of Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) vs. smoking cigarettes.
  • If you'd prefer someone else to add a study to a topic, there is a subject section called "Suggested studies to add to this page". You may put the link in that section for one of the regular page editors to address.
  • PAGE EDITORS - Please only add Studies, Surveys, Papers in this format to keep page consistent for all viewers.
    • Topic
    • Year (list new to old) Name of Study (In link format to the study)
    • Note here if animal study (leave blank if not)
    • Brief Summary
    • Link to PDF Version
    • Citation
    • Acknowledgements (funded by, helped by)
    • Keywords
    • Other

Suggested studies to add to this page

Articles

Conversation with Ove Ferno - The Father of Nicotine Gum

Studies, etc.

2011: Providing accurate safety information may increase a smoker's willingness to use nicotine replacement therapy as part of a quit attempt

93% of smokers did not know that smoking while wearing the nicotine patch does not cause heart attacks; 76% that nicotine gum/lozenge are not as addictive as cigarettes; and 69% that NRT products are not as dangerous as cigarettes. Over half of the smokers with misperceptions reported that they would be more likely to use NRT (nicotine replacement therapy) to help them quit smoking if they were exposed to information correcting their concerns

2006: Nicotine replacement therapy for long‐term smoking cessation: a meta‐analysis

  • Results after only 6–12 months of follow‐up, as used in existing reviews and treatment guidelines, will overestimate the lifetime benefit and cost‐efficacy of NRT by about 30%. The majority of relapse after 12 months occurs within the first or second year.
  • This review focused on the long‐term impact of the current “one‐shot” therapeutic approach to treatment with NRT and found significant but modest effects. Although such treatment is still likely to be highly cost‐effective in terms of life‐years gained, the substantial amount of relapse observed even after a year of abstinence, and the fact that more than 90% of those treated do not succeed, questions whether this therapeutic approach is the most appropriate. Our results support the notion that nicotine addiction, like others, should be viewed as a chronic recurring disease of the brain, and that its treatment should probably be closer to the long‐term treatment of other chronic diseases, such as hypertension, than that used for acute diseases like infections. For many smokers at least, a chronic, prolonged treatment is probably necessary and should include the encouragement to make repeated quit attempts accompanied with multiple treatment episodes over many years. To date, only one study has thoroughly investigated the effect of prolonged treatment on health outcomes. The results in terms of reducing smoking and morbidity have been encouraging.
  • PDF Version
  • Citation: Etter JF, Stapleton JA. Nicotine replacement therapy for long-term smoking cessation: a meta-analysis. Tob Control. 2006;15(4):280-285. doi:10.1136/tc.2005.015487
  • Acknowledgements: Financial Support: None. Authors have done work / research on smoking cessation and on nicotine replacement therapies, some of which were paid in the past by NRT manufacturers.

2001: The nicotine inhaler: clinical pharmacokinetics and comparison with other nicotine treatments

Despite the ‘cigarette-like’ appearance of the inhaler and the associated sensory/ritual elements, little treatment dependence or abuse has been reported.


1997: Environmental Assessment for Nicotine Inhaler / FONSI

More Information

  • Click on the category link below for more studies by topic on Smokeless Tobacco and Nicotine.
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.