Psychopharmacology

, Volume 182, Issue 4, pp 545–550 | Cite as

Comparison of three nicotine treatments: initial reactions and preferences with guided use

  • Nina G. Schneider
  • Scott Terrace
  • Margaret A. Koury
  • Shilpan Patel
  • Behram Vaghaiwalla
  • Regina Pendergrass
  • Richard E. Olmstead
  • Chris Cortner
Original Investigation

Abstract

Rationale

Misuse or dislike of nicotine replacement treatments (NRTs) undermines their effectiveness. Brief testing among NRTs could allow tailoring by preference to improve outcome.

Objective

To test initial reactions/preferences to NRTs in a single session crossover design with guided use.

Methods

Smokers were offered two doses of three NRTs: gum (2 and 4 mg), inhaler, and nasal spray (NNS) in a 5-h test with proper use enforced. Subjects rated each NRT and ranked among NRTs on use variables and preferences.

Results

Gum was ranked over inhaler and NNS for “ease of use,” “safety” and “prefer in public.” Four-milligram gum was rated higher than 2 mg on several variables. With experience, “ease of use” and “liking” improved for gum. Both inhaler and NNS ranked low on considering “use >3 months” vs gum. Dislike of NRT was reflected in refusal of second doses. For those testing all doses (n=9), inhaler ranked last on “relief of withdrawal,” “choose under stress,” and “choice to help quit.” Craving and withdrawal were relieved over time with any NRT use.

Conclusions

Sampling of treatments can identify reactions key to initial compliance with these NRTs.

Keywords

Nicotine replacement treatments Preferences Tailoring Nicotine gum Nicotine nasal spray Nicotine inhaler Pharmacotherapy Dependence 

References

  1. Benowitz NL, Jacob P II, Savanapridi C (1987) Determinants of nicotine intake while chewing nicotine polacrilex gum. Clin Pharmacol Ther 41:467–473PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bohadana A, Nilsson F, Rasmussen T et al (2000) Nicotine inhaler and nicotine patch as a combination therapy for smoking cessation: a randomized, double-blind controlled trial. Arch Intern Med 160(20):3128–3134CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Fagerstrom KO, Tejding R, Westin A, Lunell E (1997) Aiding reduction of smoking with nicotine replacement medications: hope for the recalcitrant smoker? Tob Control 6(4):311–316PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fiore MC, Bailey WC, Cohen SJ et al (2000) Treating tobacco use and dependence (clinical practice guideline). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Rockville, MDGoogle Scholar
  5. Foulds J, Burke M, Steinberg M et al (2004) Advances in pharmacotherapy for tobacco dependence. Expert Opin Emerg Drugs 9(1):39–53CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Heatherton TF, Koslowski LT, Frecker RC, Fagerstrom KO (1991) The Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence: a revision of the Fagerstrom Tolerance Questionnaire. Br J Addict 86:1119–1127PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hughes JR, Shiffman S, Callas P, Zhang J (2003) A meta-analysis of the efficacy of over-the-counter nicotine replacement. Tob Control 12:21–27CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Hurt RD, Offord KP, Croghan IT et al (1998) Temporal effects of nicotine nasal spray and gum on nicotine withdrawal symptoms. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 140(1):98–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Leischow SJ, Valente SN, Hill AL et al (1997) Effects of nicotine dose and administration method on withdrawal symptoms and side effects during short-term smoking abstinence. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 5(1):54–64CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Niaura R, Sayette M, Shiffman S et al (in press) Comparative efficacy of rapid-release nicotine gum versus nicotine polacrilex gum in relieving smoking cue-provoked craving. AddictionGoogle Scholar
  11. Sachs DPL (2005) California Thoracic Society. Position paper. Medical management for Tobacco Dependence. http://www.thoracic.org/chapters/california/publications.asp
  12. Schneider NG (1986) Use of 2 mg and 4 mg nicotine gum in an individual treatment trial. In: Ockene JK (ed) Pharmacologic treatment of tobacco dependence: proceedings of the World Congress, 4–5 November 1985. Institute for the Study of Smoking Behavior and Policy, Cambridge, MA, pp 233–248Google Scholar
  13. Schneider NG, Lunell E, Olmstead RE, Fagerstrom KO (1996) Clinical pharmacokinetics of nasal nicotine delivery: a review and comparison to other nicotine systems. Clin Pharmacokinet 31(1):65–80PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Schneider NG, Olmstead RE, Franzon MA et al (2001) The nicotine inhaler: clinical pharmacokinetics and comparison with other nicotine treatments. Clin Pharmacokinet 40(9):661–684PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Schneider NG, Olmstead RE, Nides M et al (2004) Comparative testing of 5 nicotine systems: initial use and preferences. Am J Health Behav 28(1):72–86PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Shiffman S, Dresler CM, Hajek P et al (2002) Efficacy of a nicotine lozenge for smoking cessation. Arch Intern Med 162:1267–1276CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Shiffman S, Fant RV, Gitchell JG et al (2003) Nicotine delivery systems: how far has technology come? Am J Drug Deliv 1(2):113–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Silagy C, Lancaster T, Stead L et al (2004) Nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation. The cochrane database of systematic reviews 2004, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD000146.pub2. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000146.pub2. Cited 19 July 2004Google Scholar
  19. West R, Hajek P, Nilsson F et al (2001) Individual differences in preference for and responses to four nicotine replacement products. Psychopharmacology 153:225–230CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nina G. Schneider
    • 1
    • 2
  • Scott Terrace
    • 1
    • 2
  • Margaret A. Koury
    • 1
    • 2
  • Shilpan Patel
    • 1
    • 2
  • Behram Vaghaiwalla
    • 1
    • 2
  • Regina Pendergrass
    • 1
    • 2
  • Richard E. Olmstead
    • 1
    • 2
  • Chris Cortner
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Veteran Affairs Greater Los Angeles (VAGLA) Healthcare SystemLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral SciencesUniversity of California (UCLA)Los AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations