PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10796479

Clonidine for smoking cessation.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Clonidine was originally used to lower blood pressure. It acts on the central nervous system and may reduce withdrawal symptoms in various addictive behaviours, including tobacco use. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review is to determine clonidine's effectiveness in helping smokers to quit. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register. Date of the most recent search: October 1998. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomised trials of clonidine versus placebo with a smoking cessation endpoint assessed at least 12 weeks following the end of treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data in duplicate on the type of subjects, the dose and duration of clonidine therapy, the outcome measures, method of randomisation, and completeness of follow-up. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least twelve weeks follow-up in patients smoking at baseline. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed effects model. MAIN RESULTS: Six trials met the inclusion criteria. There were three trials of oral, and three of transdermal clonidine. Some form of behavioural counselling was offered to all participants in five of the six trials. There was a statistically significant effect of clonidine in one of these trials. The pooled odds ratio for success with clonidine vs placebo was 1.89 (95% confidence interval 1.30 to 2.74). There was a high incidence of dose-dependent side-effects, particularly dry mouth and sedation. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Based on a small number of trials, in which there are potential sources of bias, clonidine is effective in promoting smoking cessation. Prominent side-effects limit the usefulness of clonidine for smoking cessation.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S G Gourlay, L F Stead, N L Benowitz. 2000. Clonidine for smoking cessation.. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd000058

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Is the addition of metformin efficacious in the treatment of clomiphene citrate-resistant patients with polycystic ovary syndrome? A structured literature review.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this literature search is to establish if metformin is efficacious when given to clomiphene citrate (CC)-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) patients. DESIGN: Medline database was searched from 1 January 1980 to 1 January 2005. Inclusion criteria were prospective randomized control trials where metformin was randomized either with placebo or CC to induce ovulation in the CC-resistant patient. RESULT(S): Group 1: Four trials were prospective double-blind placebo controlled. When the data of the four trials were pooled, the overall effect of the addition of metformin in the CC patient was P=.0006 with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of odds ratio (OR) 1.81-8.84. Group 2: In two trials the randomization was only prospective. When the data of these two trials were pooled, the overall effect of the addition of metformin in the CC-resistant patient was P<.0001 with a 95% CI of OR 6.24-70.27. Groups 1 and 2: The combined data show an overall effect of P<.0001 with a 95% CI of OR 3.59-12.96. CONCLUSION(S): The addition of metformin in the CC-resistant patient is highly effective in achieving ovulation induction.

Clomiphene↗

The clomiphene citrate challenge test versus the exogenous follicle-stimulating hormone ovarian reserve test as a single test for identification of low responders and hyperresponders to in vitro fertilization.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to compare the exogenous FSH ovarian reserve test (EFORT) versus the clomiphene citrate challenge test (CCCT), basal FSH, and basal inhibin B, with respect to their ability to predict poor and/or hyperresponders in an IVF population. DESIGN: Prospective randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Fertility center of a university hospital. PATIENT(S): One hundred ten patients undergoing their first IVF cycle, randomized into two groups. INTERVENTION(S): Fifty-six patients underwent a CCCT, and 54 patients underwent an EFORT. In all patients, the test was followed by an IVF treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Ovarian response, expressed by the total number of retrieved oocytes. RESULT(S): Univariate logistic regression showed that the best predictor for poor response is the CCCT (area under receiver operator characteristic curve [ROC-AUC] = 0.87), with maximal accuracy of 0.89. Multiple logistic regression analysis did not produce a better model in terms of improving the prediction of poor response. For hyper response, univariate logistic regression showed that the best predictor is the inhibin B increment in the EFORT (ROC-AUC = 0.92) but with a low maximal accuracy of 0.78. Again, multiple logistic regression analysis did not produce a better model in terms of predicting hyper response. CONCLUSION(S): Our study, the first which compares the CCCT with the EFORT for the prediction of poor and hyperresponders, shows that the CCCT is superior for identification of low responders. The EFORT (inhibin B increment) is superior for prediction of hyper response at the cost of a high rate of false positives. Neither of the two tests seems adequate to act alone for identification of both poor and hyperresponders.

Clomiphene↗