A Randomised Controlled Trial of Nicotine Replacement Therapy for Low-Income Smokers Valerie Sedivy, Caroline Miller and Jacqueline Hickling
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Overview Background and aims Study design NRT redemption Quitting outcomes Cost analysis Conclusions and implications
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Background Smoking restrictions in workplaces and hospitality venues Desire to support smokers to quit (especially disadvantaged groups) Request for trial from Minister for Health
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Aims The study was designed to assess: –Demand for subsidised NRT in SA –Quit rates achieved by adding subsidised NRT to the Quitline –Cost per quitter
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Study design Intervention invitations n=150,000 Approach Control invitations n=150,000 n=1000n=377 Recruited Follow-up n=863/832/672n=329/305/257 Intervention Subsidised NRT + Quitline counselling Quitline counselling only
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Smoking behaviour at baseline Intervention (n=1000) Control (n=377) Years smoked No. of cigarettes smoked/day* Smoke within 30 minutes*87%83% Quit attempt in past year*50%56% * statistically significant at p≤0.05
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Use of NRT at 3 months InterventionControl Among all participants*58%22% Among those who quit or attempted to quit* 89%43% * statistically significant at p≤0.05
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Voucher redemption at 3 months (intervention) 98.5% received vouchers 80.9% redeemed one or more vouchers Used an average of 5 vouchers 37% of all vouchers redeemed
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Reasons for not using vouchers (intervention) No vouchers (n=162): –31% never attempted to quit –25% decided to quit without NRT –19% trouble with redemption Fewer than 10 vouchers (n=571): –30% relapsed –23% still using –18% quit before using them all
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Participation in callback program at 3 months InterventionControl Received 1+ callbacks96%95% Mean number of calls* * statistically significant at p≤0.05
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Perceptions of the Quitline at 3 months Intervention (n=863) Control (n=329) Very helpful*63%56% Very friendly 95% 96% Not at all intrusive 73% 71% * statistically significant at p≤0.05
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Quit attempts and cessation at 3, 6 and 12 months # Analyzed by intention to treat * statistically significant difference Figure 3 : Quit attempts and quit rates #
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Cost analysis at 12 months Costs included Cost per quitter / per client Relative contribution of NRT / counselling to costs
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Costs included in analysis Staff time Telephone NRT and voucher booklets Resources sent Excluded trial-related infrastructure and recruitment
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Cost per quitter / per client at 12 months Intervention (n=1000) Control (n=377) Additional cost (Intervention over control) Cost per quitter $622$185 $436 Cost per client $139$35 $104
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Cost of service versus NRT at 12 months
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Overall conclusions Offer of NRT increased demand for the Quitline Encouraged 2-3 times as many smokers to call 63% first time callers Reached higher-risk group: NRT callers more dependent on smoking
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Overall conclusions Statistically significant effects of subsidising NRT for low-income smokers are limited to short term But overall quit rates higher among NRT group than among general Quitline callers
RCT of subsidised NRT for low-income smokers Implications Long-term quitting outcomes not improved statistically significantly by NRT subsidy Offer increased demand among disadvantaged group Cost should be weighed against benefits of reaching this group – currently being reviewed