This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In their trial of 4 nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) products, Hajek and colleagues¹ concluded that there were no notable differences in general efficacy among the tested nicotine patch, gum, nasal spray, and inhaler. Indeed, the withdrawal scores, urges to smoke indices, and abstinence rates for patients randomized to each of the 4 groups were not statistically different from one another at the 12-week follow-up. What is notable, however, is that among the participants who were not smoking at 12 weeks, a majority continued to use NRT products. Specifically, 53.8% (14/68), 74.2% (23/54), 76.0% (19/64), and 90.0% (27/68) of patch, inhaler, gum, and nasal spray users, respectively, continued to use their prescribed NRT products. Furthermore, post hoc comparisons indicated that the patch group showed significantly less continued NRT use than those participants using the other 3 NRT products.

Although the lower continued NRT use among patch group participants appeared only as . . . [Full Text of this Article]