Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27882838›Full record

Trial reportJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2016

A Pragmatic Randomized Trial Comparing Telephone-Based Enhanced Pharmacy Care and Usual Care to Support Smoking Cessation.

Jason Gong, Christine L Baker, Kelly H Zou, Marianna Bruno, Zhanna Jumadilova, David Lawrence, Beth Wilson, Cynthia Ewel

Abstract readComparative StudyPragmatic Clinical TrialRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Interventions to increase adherence to medications for tobacco dependence.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Telephone counselling for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Research and Scholarly Methods: Pragmatic Clinical Trials.Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Jason Gong1 Clinical Sciences, Pfizer, New York, New York.
Christine L Baker3 Global Health and Value.
Kelly H Zou2 Global Innovative Pharma Business-Statistics, Pfizer, New York, New York.
Marianna Bruno4 Medical Affairs North America, Pfizer, New York, New York.
Zhanna Jumadilova1 Clinical Sciences, Pfizer, New York, New York.
David Lawrence2 Global Innovative Pharma Business-Statistics, Pfizer, New York, New York.
Beth Wilson5 United BioSource Corporation, Blue Bell, Pennsylvania.
Cynthia Ewel5 United BioSource Corporation, Blue Bell, Pennsylvania.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSmoking is the leading preventable cause of death, and tobacco control professionals continue to make progress in cessation efforts. Pharmacists can assist smokers seeking to quit by offering counseling on smoking cessation pharmacotherapies. Pragmatic randomized trials are useful for investigating practical questions about an intervention's risks, benefits, and costs in routine clinical practice.

objectiveTo evaluate an enhanced pharmacy care (EPC) program involving personalized pharmacist-provided telephone counseling for supporting prescription smoking cessation medications compared with usual care (UC).

methodsCigarette smokers filling a newly prescribed smoking cessation pharmacotherapy and with pharmacy benefits managed by Express Scripts were recruited. Qualified subjects were randomized 1:1 to EPC and UC. Subjects in EPC received 3 telephone-counseling sessions from specialist pharmacists during the early course of the study, while subjects in UC did not receive any counseling sessions. Study outcomes were collected through telephone contact and using the Express Scripts prescription database. The primary outcome assessed the 1-week point prevalence (PP) of smoking abstinence at the end of the trial (week 12). Secondary outcomes included 4-week PP at week 12 and adherence, evaluated by proportion of days covered (PDC), to prescribed smoking cessation pharmacotherapies.

resultsThere were 1,017 randomized subjects. Among them, 1,002 subjects were included in the analysis, and 513 were randomized into EPC and 489 into UC. Baseline demographics, smoking history, and prescribed smoking cessation pharmacotherapies were comparable. Varenicline and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) were most frequently prescribed for smoking cessation. In EPC, 46.0% received all 3 counseling sessions; 29.4% received 2 sessions; and 14.6% received 1 session. Overall, 353 subjects in EPC and 383 subjects in UC completed the week 12 assessment. In the analysis for 1-week PP of smoking abstinence at week 12, the percentage of abstainers in EPC was numerically higher than in UC (42.3% vs. 38.2%) with OR = 1.24, 95% CI = 0.96-1.61. It was not statistically significant. Adherence to prescription smoking cessation medication was significantly higher in EPC versus UC (49.7% vs. 45.6%; P = 0.033).

conclusionsThis study evaluated whether a telephone-based pharmacy care program, provided by pharmacists and designed to support attempted quitters, improved quitting and increased adherence over usual care. The findings suggest that an enhanced program may benefit smokers by increasing prescription smoking cessation medication adherence. Future research should explore this program's effect on smokers who are compliant, based on insights on quitting provided by the post hoc analyses and limitations of the current study design. DISCLOSURES: This study was sponsored by Pfizer. Gong, Baker, Zou, Bruno, Jumadilova, and Lawrence are employees and stockholders of Pfizer. Wilson and Ewel are employees of United BioSource Corporation, which received funding from Pfizer for conducting this study and for the development of this manuscript. Study concept and design were contributed by Gong, Bruno, and Ewel, with assistance from Jumadilova, Lawrence, and Zou. Gong, Jumadilova, Lawrence, and Ewel collected the data. Data interpretation was performed by Baker, Zou, and Wilson, assisted by Gong, Lawrence, and Ewel. The manuscript was written by Baker, Ewel, and Gong, with assistance from the other authors, and revised by Baker, Wilson, Zou, and Gong, with assistance from Bruno and Jumadilova.

Indexed as

Pharmaceutical ServicesPharmacistsTelephoneAdultCounselingFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedNauseaNicotinic AgonistsPatient CareProfessional RoleProspective StudiesSmokingNicotinic AgonistsVarenicline

Identifiers

PMID27882838
PMCPMC10397624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.