ENDS Pregnancy: Difference between revisions

Line 6:

* 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.

* If you'd like to help add content to this page, please see the directions at the bottom of the page.

=== 2023: [https://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hta/AGTH6901/#/full-report Helping pregnant smokers quit: a multicentre randomised controlled trial of electronic cigarettes versus nicotine replacement therapy] ===

* Przulj D, Pesola F, Myers Smith K, McRobbie H, Coleman T, Lewis S, ''et al.'' Helping pregnant smokers quit: a multicentre randomised controlled trial of electronic cigarettes versus nicotine replacement therapy. ''Health Technol Assess'' 2023;27(13)

* Rates of adverse events and adverse birth outcomes were similar in the two study arms, apart from participants in the e-cigarette arm having fewer infants with low birthweight (<2500 g) (9.6% vs. 14.8%, risk ratio = 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.47 to 0.90; Bayes factor = 10.3)

* At end of pregnancy, 33.8% versus 5.6% of participants were using their allocated product in the e-cigarettes versus nicotine patches arm (risk ratio = 6.01, 95% confidence interval 4.21 to 8.58). Regular use of e-cigarettes in the nicotine patches arm was more common than use of nicotine replacement products in the e-cigarette arm (17.8% vs. 2.8%).

* Only 55% of self-reported abstainers mailed back useable saliva samples. Due to this, validated sustained abstinence rates were low (6.8% vs. 4.4% in the e-cigarettes and nicotine patches arms, respectively, risk ratio = 1.55, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 2.53; Bayes factor = 2.7). In a pre-specified sensitivity analysis that excluded abstainers using non-allocated products, the difference became significant (6.8% vs. 3.6%, risk ratio = 1.93, 95% confidence interval 1.14 to 3.26; Bayes factor = 10). Almost a third of the sample did not set a target quit date and the uptake of support calls was low, as was the initial product use.

=== 2022: [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01808-0 Electronic cigarettes versus nicotine patches for smoking cessation in pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial] ===

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 * 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.
 * If you'd like to help add content to this page, please see the directions at the bottom of the page.
+=== 2023: [https://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hta/AGTH6901/#/full-report Helping pregnant smokers quit: a multicentre randomised controlled trial of electronic cigarettes versus nicotine replacement therapy] ===
+* Przulj D, Pesola F, Myers Smith K, McRobbie H, Coleman T, Lewis S, ''et al.'' Helping pregnant smokers quit: a multicentre randomised controlled trial of electronic cigarettes versus nicotine replacement therapy. ''Health Technol Assess'' 2023;27(13)
+* Rates of adverse events and adverse birth outcomes were similar in the two study arms, apart from participants in the e-cigarette arm having fewer infants with low birthweight (<2500 g) (9.6% vs. 14.8%, risk ratio = 0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.47 to 0.90; Bayes factor = 10.3)
+* At end of pregnancy, 33.8% versus 5.6% of participants were using their allocated product in the e-cigarettes versus nicotine patches arm (risk ratio = 6.01, 95% confidence interval 4.21 to 8.58). Regular use of e-cigarettes in the nicotine patches arm was more common than use of nicotine replacement products in the e-cigarette arm (17.8% vs. 2.8%).
+* Only 55% of self-reported abstainers mailed back useable saliva samples. Due to this, validated sustained abstinence rates were low (6.8% vs. 4.4% in the e-cigarettes and nicotine patches arms, respectively, risk ratio = 1.55, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 2.53; Bayes factor = 2.7). In a pre-specified sensitivity analysis that excluded abstainers using non-allocated products, the difference became significant (6.8% vs. 3.6%, risk ratio = 1.93, 95% confidence interval 1.14 to 3.26; Bayes factor = 10). Almost a third of the sample did not set a target quit date and the uptake of support calls was low, as was the initial product use.
 === 2022: [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01808-0 Electronic cigarettes versus nicotine patches for smoking cessation in pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial] ===