Evaluating the effectiveness of nicotine replacement therapy in critically ill smokers: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Tobacco Induced Diseases Pub Date : 2024-08-06 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.18332/tid/190798
Ohoud Aljuhani, Khalid Al Sulaiman, Hadeel Alkofide, Mashael AlFaifi, Asma A Alshehri, Sarah Aljohani, Haifa Algethamy
{"title":"Evaluating the effectiveness of nicotine replacement therapy in critically ill smokers: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Ohoud Aljuhani, Khalid Al Sulaiman, Hadeel Alkofide, Mashael AlFaifi, Asma A Alshehri, Sarah Aljohani, Haifa Algethamy","doi":"10.18332/tid/190798","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The effectiveness of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in critically ill patients remains uncertain, as conflicting research results have been reported. Despite potential side effects and inconsistent data on safety and efficacy, NRT is still prescribed in intensive care units (ICUs) to prevent withdrawal symptoms and manage agitation in patients who are smokers. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the effectiveness of nicotine replacement therapy in critically ill smoking patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials investigated the outcomes of smokers admitted to ICUs and were randomized either to receive or not receive nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) during their ICU stay. The MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched from inception through 13 February 2023 using OVID. The primary outcome was ICU length of stay (LOS) for this systematic review and meta-analysis. Meta-analysis was conducted using both random-effects and fixed-effect models; the latter is recommended when meta-analysis is restricted to just a few studies. The study was registered in the Prospective International Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under reference number CRD42023407804.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 28 studies initially identified, three, with 67 patients on NRT and 72 controls, were deemed eligible for pooled analysis. Patients who received NRT experienced a shorter LOS (mean difference, MD= -3.06; 95% CI: -5.88 - -0.25, p=0.0, I<sup>2</sup>=0%). The mechanical ventilation (MV) duration was also shorter in the NRT group, but this difference was not statistically significant (MD= -1.24; 95% CI: -3.21-0.72, p=0.22, I<sup>2</sup>=12.69%). Delirium duration was reported by two studies, from which pooled analysis revealed an MD of -0.50 (95% CI: -1.63-0.62, I<sup>2</sup>=0%). The vasopressor duration was assessed in two studies, and the overall MD for vasopressor duration was not statistically different between NRT patients and controls in the fixed-effects model (MD=0.11; 95% CI: -0.75-0.96, I<sup>2</sup>=0%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Critically ill smoker patients who received NRT experienced a significantly shorter ICU LOS but no significant differences in the durations of MV, vasopressor use, or delirium.</p>","PeriodicalId":23202,"journal":{"name":"Tobacco Induced Diseases","volume":"22 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11302334/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tobacco Induced Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18332/tid/190798","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The effectiveness of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in critically ill patients remains uncertain, as conflicting research results have been reported. Despite potential side effects and inconsistent data on safety and efficacy, NRT is still prescribed in intensive care units (ICUs) to prevent withdrawal symptoms and manage agitation in patients who are smokers. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the effectiveness of nicotine replacement therapy in critically ill smoking patients.

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials investigated the outcomes of smokers admitted to ICUs and were randomized either to receive or not receive nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) during their ICU stay. The MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched from inception through 13 February 2023 using OVID. The primary outcome was ICU length of stay (LOS) for this systematic review and meta-analysis. Meta-analysis was conducted using both random-effects and fixed-effect models; the latter is recommended when meta-analysis is restricted to just a few studies. The study was registered in the Prospective International Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under reference number CRD42023407804.

Results: Of 28 studies initially identified, three, with 67 patients on NRT and 72 controls, were deemed eligible for pooled analysis. Patients who received NRT experienced a shorter LOS (mean difference, MD= -3.06; 95% CI: -5.88 - -0.25, p=0.0, I2=0%). The mechanical ventilation (MV) duration was also shorter in the NRT group, but this difference was not statistically significant (MD= -1.24; 95% CI: -3.21-0.72, p=0.22, I2=12.69%). Delirium duration was reported by two studies, from which pooled analysis revealed an MD of -0.50 (95% CI: -1.63-0.62, I2=0%). The vasopressor duration was assessed in two studies, and the overall MD for vasopressor duration was not statistically different between NRT patients and controls in the fixed-effects model (MD=0.11; 95% CI: -0.75-0.96, I2=0%).

Conclusions: Critically ill smoker patients who received NRT experienced a significantly shorter ICU LOS but no significant differences in the durations of MV, vasopressor use, or delirium.

评估尼古丁替代疗法对重症吸烟者的疗效:随机对照试验荟萃分析。
导言:尼古丁替代疗法(NRT)对重症患者的疗效仍不确定,因为相关研究结果相互矛盾。尽管尼古丁替代疗法存在潜在的副作用,且有关安全性和有效性的数据不一致,但重症监护病房(ICU)仍在处方尼古丁替代疗法,以防止吸烟患者出现戒断症状并控制躁动。这项荟萃分析旨在评估尼古丁替代疗法对重症吸烟患者的疗效:对随机对照试验进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析,调查了入住重症监护病房的吸烟者的治疗效果,这些患者在入住重症监护病房期间被随机分配接受或不接受尼古丁替代疗法(NRT)。研究人员使用 OVID 对 MEDLINE 和 Embase 数据库进行了检索,检索时间从开始到 2023 年 2 月 13 日。本系统综述和荟萃分析的主要结果是重症监护室的住院时间(LOS)。荟萃分析同时使用随机效应和固定效应模型;当荟萃分析仅限于少数几项研究时,建议使用固定效应模型。该研究已在系统综述前瞻性国际注册中心(PROSPERO)注册,参考编号为 CRD42023407804:在初步确定的 28 项研究中,有 3 项研究(67 名接受 NRT 治疗的患者和 72 名对照组患者)被认为符合汇总分析的条件。接受 NRT 治疗的患者 LOS 更短(平均差,MD= -3.06;95% CI:-5.88 -0.25,P=0.0,I2=0%)。NRT 组的机械通气(MV)持续时间也较短,但差异无统计学意义(MD=-1.24;95% CI:-3.21-0.72,P=0.22,I2=12.69%)。两项研究报告了谵妄持续时间,汇总分析显示MD为-0.50(95% CI:-1.63-0.62,I2=0%)。两项研究对血管加压持续时间进行了评估,在固定效应模型中,NRT患者与对照组之间血管加压持续时间的总体MD无统计学差异(MD=0.11;95% CI:-0.75-0.96,I2=0%):结论:接受 NRT 治疗的吸烟重症患者的 ICU LOS 明显缩短,但 MV、血管加压器使用或谵妄的持续时间没有显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Tobacco Induced Diseases
Tobacco Induced Diseases SUBSTANCE ABUSE-PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
5.40%
发文量
95
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Tobacco Induced Diseases encompasses all aspects of research related to the prevention and control of tobacco use at a global level. Preventing diseases attributable to tobacco is only one aspect of the journal, whose overall scope is to provide a forum for the publication of research articles that can contribute to reducing the burden of tobacco induced diseases globally. To address this epidemic we believe that there must be an avenue for the publication of research/policy activities on tobacco control initiatives that may be very important at a regional and national level. This approach provides a very important "hands on" service to the tobacco control community at a global scale - as common problems have common solutions. Hence, we see ourselves as "connectors" within this global community. The journal hence encourages the submission of articles from all medical, biological and psychosocial disciplines, ranging from medical and dental clinicians, through health professionals to basic biomedical and clinical scientists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信