Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation

Examining associations of e-cigarette flavour restrictions with e-cigarette use and success quitting smoking among US adults

INTRODUCTION

Restricting available e-cigarette flavours to only tobacco and menthol may reduce appeal among youth; it is unknown how flavour restrictions impact adults using e-cigarettes to quit smoking cigarettes.

METHODS

Online US survey data were collected in summer 2021 from 857 adults who reported using e-cigarettes in a recent attempt to quit smoking. Survey items assessed e-cigarette flavours used during their quit attempt, whether e-cigarette flavour bans restricted access to flavours they like, and what impact the restrictions had on e-cigarette behaviour. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine the associations of flavour bans with success quitting smoking for 1 month or longer.

RESULTS

30.2% (N=259) reported restricted access to e-cigarette flavours they like. During their quit attempt, 64.9% (N=168) used tobacco or menthol-flavoured e-cigarettes, and 90.7% (N=235) used another flavour that could be affected by restrictions, most commonly fruit, mint, and candy/dessert. Responses to flavour restrictions included switching devices to continue using preferred flavours (39.4%), using the same device only with available flavours (35.9%), buying preferred flavours elsewhere (eg, online) (19.3%), making flavours (3.5%) and 'other' (eg, no longer using e-cigarettes) (1.9%). The odds of quitting smoking for 1 month or longer were not significantly different between those experiencing flavour restrictions (vs not), preferring tobacco/menthol (vs restricted) flavour, or switching flavours in response to the bans (vs finding another way to obtain restricted flavours) (p>0.11).

CONCLUSION

Experiencing e-cigarette flavour restrictions was not associated with success quitting smoking among adults using e-cigarettes to try to quit.

The Health Effects of Real-World Dual Use of Electronic and Conventional Cigarettes versus the Health Effects of Exclusive Smoking of Conventional Cigarettes: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

A high prevalence of dual use of e-cigarettes and conventional cigarettes has been reported across the world.

METHODS

A systematic search was carried out. We included original articles on any topic relevant to health, excluding mental health, in all languages. The PRISMA guidelines were followed. Both reviewers independently screened and read all publications. We compared dual use with exclusive smoking of conventional cigarettes (ESCC).

RESULTS

Fifty-two publications (49 studies) were included. Thirteen papers/10 studies were prospective. There was great heterogeneity across studies. Many methodological weaknesses, such as inaccurate exposure measurement, lack of adjustment for former tobacco consumption, and lack of significance testing were identified. Most prospective studies found dual use to be at least as harmful as ESCC. The longest follow-up was six years. Most of the best available cross-sectional studies found dual use associated with the same and, in several studies, significantly higher risk of self-reported symptoms/disease than in ESCC. The intensity of cigarette smoking seems associated with worse health.

CONCLUSION

Existing studies indicate that dual use is at least as, or probably even more, harmful than ESCC. Due to the predominance of cross-sectional studies and the methodological weaknesses we judged the overall certainty of the evidence as "low certainty".

Analysis of state portrayals of the risks of e-cigarette use and the cause of the EVALI outbreak

INTRODUCTION

In August 2019, an outbreak of "e-cigarette or vaping product use-associated lung injury" (EVALI) prompted many states and health organizations to warn against the use of electronic cigarettes, or e-cigarettes, due to the presumed link between e-cigarette use and the illness. However, it was later shown that vitamin E acetate, a component of some illicit vaporizable THC products, was the causative agent in this outbreak.

METHODS

We conducted a series of cross-sectional surveys of the websites of all state departments of health to determine how they communicated the risk of e-cigarette use during and after the EVALI outbreak. We then paired this analysis with data from the 2016 through 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System to measure changes in cigarette and e-cigarette use.

RESULTS

Website data from 24 states was available for analysis at all three time points of interest, and BRFSS data was only available for 8 of these states. We found that by January 2020, a majority of the states surveyed did not list vaporizable THC use as a cause of EVALI; however, differences in state messaging did not appear to be associated with changes in e-cigarette and cigarette use.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the number of states that did not appear to update their messaging regarding the cause of EVALI, we believe that states should re-evaluate this messaging to accurately communicate the risks of e-cigarette use.

Prevalence, knowledge and attitude toward electronic cigarette use among male health colleges students in Saudi Arabia-A cross-sectional study

Background

Health care professionals have an important role in increasing awareness about smoking harms and serving as role models. This study aims to assess knowledge, attitude and perception toward electronic cigarettes (ECs) as well as prevalence of ECs use among male health colleges students.

Method

This is a cross-sectional survey-based study conducted among students in the male campus of five different health colleges over a 4-month period from February 2020 to May 2020. Descriptive analysis was used to assess the knowledge, perception and attitude, and inferential testing was used to evaluate the association of different participant's variables and knowledge toward ECs usage using SPSS.

Results

A total of 333 students were included in the analysis. Most of students (n = 205; 61.6%) had never used ECs, while 22.8 and 15.6% used them for recreational and smoking cessation purposes, respectively. Focusing on ECs users from each college individually, medical students had the highest prevalence followed by dental, pharmacy and nursing students (47.4, 40.7, 34.5, and 32%, respectively). Many students had misconceptions and a low level of knowledge about ECs, such as recognizing them as smoking-cessation tools and not knowing whether toxic and carcinogenic components levels in ECs are similar to conventional cigarettes, respectively. Medical students had significantly higher knowledge compared to dental students [3 (2) vs. 2 (1); p = 0.033]. Moreover, smokers were less knowledgeable than non-smokers [2.5 (1) vs. 2.1 (1), p = 0.027]. At least 62.8% of students perceived using ECs as a fashionable alternative smoking method and 59.2% believed that they may become a gateway for smoking addiction. Only 120 (36.0%) health colleges students were confidently able to advise smokers regarding ECs.

Conclusion

Our study highlights an increased trend of ECs use accompanied with insufficient knowledge and several misconceptions about ECs among health colleges students. This was associated with a negative influence on their attitude toward ECs use, which would potentially lead to negative consequences on public health.

E-cigarette addiction and harm perception: Does initiation flavor choice matter?

Introduction

The 21^st century was marked by a dramatic increase in adolescent e-cigarette use in the United States (US). The popularity of non-traditional flavor types, including fruit and pastry, is thought to contribute toward growing product use nationally, leading to a variety of federal and state regulations limiting the use of non-traditional flavors in the US. The relationship between flavor type and increased adolescent use suggests a possible link between flavor use and addiction and harm perception. This study assessed if the flavor type used when initiating e-cigarette use predicted addiction and harm perceptions.

Methods

The study utilized data from the multi-wave youth Population Assessment of Tobacco Health Study. It explored the impact initiating e-cigarette use with traditional versus non-traditional flavor types among cigarette users on the outcome variables: e-cigarette addiction and harm perception. Both e-cigarette addiction and harm perception were measured using self-report, Likert scale questionnaires. Descriptive statistics characterized the study variables and linear regression analyses performed to test whether flavor initiation type is associated with addiction and harm perception.

Results

The study sample consisted of 1,043 youth (weighted N = 1,873,617) aged 12 to 17 years who reported at least one instance of e-cigarette use. After adjusting for age, age of onset, sex, race and annual household income there was no statistically significant difference in addiction levels between those initiating with traditional versus non-traditional flavors (p = 0.294). Similarly, traditional versus non-traditional flavor initiation did not show a statistically significant difference in adolescent e-cigarette harm perceptions (p = 0.601).

Conclusions

Traditionally flavored e-cigarette initiation produces similar risk for addiction and harm perceptions as non-traditionally flavored initiation. These findings suggest that banning non-traditional flavors alone may be ineffective in curbing e-cigarette addiction and harm perception. Additional research is needed to better understand which e-cigarette product characteristics and behaviors may be associated with greater addiction and reduced harm perceptions.

The Frequency of Tobacco Smoking and E-Cigarettes Use among Primary Health Care Patients-The Association between Anti-Tobacco Interventions and Smoking in Poland

The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of smoking and e-cigarette use among primary care patients during the COVID-19 pandemic and to assess the frequency of minimal anti-tobacco interventions by family doctors. A cross-sectional study was conducted from January 2020 to December 2021 encompassing 896 patients over 18 years of age who used primary health care in the city of Lodz, Poland. In total, 21.2% of the respondents were smokers, 11.6% were e-cigarette users, and 7.3% dual users. In addition, 68.4% of smokers had been asked about smoking, while 62.9% of non-smokers and 33.7% of smokers were advised to quit smoking; furthermore, 71.1% of e-cigarette users and 72.3% of dual users were asked about tobacco use, and 17.3% and 21.5%, respectively, had been advised to quit smoking. Multivariate logistic regression analysis found men and alcohol users to receive more minimal anti-tobacco advice than women and non-alcohol users (OR = 1.46; p < 0.05 and OR = 1.45; p < 0.05), socio-demographic and health correlates did not increase the chances of obtaining minimal anti-tobacco interventions among smokers. People with a medium level of education had a higher chance of receiving minimal anti-tobacco intervention from their family doctor when using e-cigarettes and when they were dual users (OR = 2.06; p < 0.05 and OR = 2.51; p < 0.05). Smokers were less likely to receive minimal anti-tobacco interventions than reported in previous studies. Measures should be implemented to increase the minimum interventions provided by GPs in their daily work among all patients, not only those who use tobacco. Non-smokers should be encouraged to abstain.

Medium- and longer-term cardiovascular effects of e-cigarettes in adults making a stop-smoking attempt: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Smoking is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease and smoking cessation reduces excess risk. E-cigarettes are popular for smoking cessation but there is little evidence on their cardiovascular health effect. Our objective was to compare the medium- and longer-term cardiovascular effects in smokers attempting to quit smoking using e-cigarettes with or without nicotine or prescription nicotine replacement therapy (NRT).

METHODS

This was a single-center, pragmatic three-arm randomized (1:1:1) controlled trial, which recruited adult smokers (≥ 10 cigarettes/day), who were willing to attempt to stop smoking with support (n = 248). Participants were randomized to receive behavioral support with either (a) e-cigarettes with 18 mg/ml nicotine, (b) e-cigarettes without nicotine, and (c) NRT. Flow-mediated dilation (%FMD) and peak cutaneous vascular conductance (CVCmax) responses to acetylcholine (ACh) and sodium nitroprusside (SNP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and other outcomes were recorded at baseline, 3, and 6 months after stopping smoking. Data were analyzed using generalized estimating equations (GEE).

RESULTS

At 3- and 6-month follow-up, %FMD showed an improvement over baseline in all three groups (e.g., p < 0.0001 at 6 months). Similarly, ACh, SNP, and MAP improved significantly over baseline in all groups both at 3 and 6 months (e.g., ACh: p = 0.004, at 6 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Smokers attempting to quit experienced positive cardiovascular impact after both a 3- and 6-month period. None of the groups (i.e., nicotine-containing and nicotine-free e-cigarettes or NRT) offered superior cardiovascular benefits to the others.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03061253 . Registered on 17 February 2017.

Changes in the Use of Tobacco, Alternative Tobacco Products, and Tobacco Alternatives in Germany

BACKGROUND

Due to the increasing use of alternative tobacco products (waterpipes, heat-not-burn) and tobacco alternatives (e-cigarettes), we studied recent changes in the prevalence of conventional tobacco use and alternative products.

METHODS

Data come from ten waves of the Epidemiological Survey of Substance Abuse (ESA) from 1995 to 2021, with representative samples collected via paperpencil questionnaires, telephone interviews, or online. We compared the prevalence of conventional tobacco use and alternative products by gender and age (18-24, 25-39, 40-59 years).

RESULTS

In all age groups, the use of conventional tobacco products decreased. The prevalence of the exclusive use of one of the three alternative products differed statistically significantly between age groups and in 2021 was higher for ages 18-24 (females: 11.1%, males: 12.4%) compared to ages 25-39 (females: 2.9%; males: 4.9%) and ages 40-59 (females: 1.4%; males: 2.0%). The use of alternative products was mainly due to the exclusive use of waterpipes among individuals aged 18 to 24 and 25 to 39 and the exclusive use of e-cigarettes among individuals aged 40 to 59.

CONCLUSION

The higher prevalence of alternative product use among young adults implies a turning point that needs to be considered in prevention. Because of the addictive potential of these products, young adults can be expected to maintain their use into middle and older adulthood. There is a need to monitor the use of alternative products, identify the risks associated with them, and develop effective prevention and cessation interventions for adults.

Assessment of formal tobacco treatment and smoking cessation in dual users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes

BACKGROUND

The utility of electronic cigarettes ('e-cigarettes') as a smoking cessation adjunct remains unclear. Similarly, it is unclear if formal tobacco treatment (pharmacotherapy and/or behavioural support) augments smoking cessation in individuals who use both cigarettes and e-cigarettes.

METHODS

We performed a longitudinal cohort study of adult outpatients evaluated in our tertiary care medical centre (6/2018-6/2020). E-cigarette use, smoking status and formal tobacco treatment (deterrent pharmacotherapy and/or behavioural support) were assessed in 6-month blocks (eg, cohort 1 (C1)=6/2018-12/2018, C2=1/2019-6/2019 and so on) using our electronic health record. We assessed the relationship between e-cigarette use (either with or without formal tobacco treatment) and point prevalence of smoking cessation at 6 and 12 months.

RESULTS

111 823 unique patients were included in the study. The prevalence of dual use of cigarettes and e-cigarettes increased significantly over the study period (C1=0.8%; C2=1.1%; C3=1.8%; C4=2.3%; p<0.001). The prevalence of smoking cessation at 12 months was higher among e-cigarette users (20.8%) compared with non-users (16.8%) (risk difference, 4.0% (95% CI 2.5% to 5.5%); adjusted relative risk (aRR) 1.354, 95% CI 1.252 to 1.464, p<0.0001). Further, among dual users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes, the prevalence of smoking cessation at 12 months was higher among individuals who received tobacco treatment (29.1%) compared with individuals who did not receive tobacco treatment (19.6%) (risk difference, 9.5% (95% CI, 4.6% to 14.4%); aRR 1.238, 95% CI 1.071 to 1.432, p=0.004).

INTERPRETATION

These results suggest that dual users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes benefit from formal tobacco treatment. Clinicians should consider offering formal tobacco treatment to such patients, though future trials are needed.

Chemosensory Contributions of E-Cigarette Additives on Nicotine Use

While rates of smoking combustible cigarettes in the United States have trended down in recent years, use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) has dramatically increased, especially among adolescents. The vast majority of e-cigarette users consume "flavored" products that contain a variety of chemosensory-rich additives, and recent literature suggests that these additives have led to the current "teen vaping epidemic." This review, covering research from both human and rodent models, provides a comprehensive overview of the sensory implications of e-cigarette additives and what is currently known about their impact on nicotine use. In doing so, we specifically address the oronasal sensory contributions of e-cigarette additives. Finally, we summarize the existing gaps in the field and highlight future directions needed to better understand the powerful influence of these additives on nicotine use.

Impact of vaping on respiratory health

Widespread uptake of vaping has signaled a sea change in the future of nicotine consumption. Vaping has grown in popularity over the past decade, in part propelled by innovations in vape pen design and nicotine flavoring. Teens and young adults have seen the biggest uptake in use of vape pens, which have superseded conventional cigarettes as the preferred modality of nicotine consumption. Relatively little is known, however, about the potential effects of chronic vaping on the respiratory system. Further, the role of vaping as a tool of smoking cessation and tobacco harm reduction remains controversial. The 2019 E-cigarette or Vaping Use-Associated Lung Injury (EVALI) outbreak highlighted the potential harms of vaping, and the consequences of long term use remain unknown. Here, we review the growing body of literature investigating the impacts of vaping on respiratory health. We review the clinical manifestations of vaping related lung injury, including the EVALI outbreak, as well as the effects of chronic vaping on respiratory health and covid-19 outcomes. We conclude that vaping is not without risk, and that further investigation is required to establish clear public policy guidance and regulation.

Commentary: Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems: Seeing Through the Clouds

Electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) represent a variety of different devices that are designed as alternatives to combustible cigarettes. A continuum of nicotine risk is becoming increasingly recognized, and many ENDS products are associated with significant harm reduction when compared to conventional tobacco products; however, ENDS products still present significant public safety concerns and regulatory challenges. While a rather large body of scientific evidence demonstrates ENDS are useful for smoking cessation efforts, a culture of ENDS use has simultaneously developed among youth users. Youth preference for ENDS is likely a function of both a variety of flavorants found in these products and social media and influencer campaigns that appealed directly to younger audiences. More recent marketing strategies have emphasized the safety of these products and promote ENDS products through “education” campaigns designed to inform youth about the dangers of tobacco use. Consequently, ENDS products are now a primary factor promoting nicotine addiction among new users, who tend to be young. As modified risk claims are now common among ENDS products, public health strategies designed to reduce nicotine use must balance the safety of ENDS and their clear appeal to youth.

Transition to smoking cessation among dual cigarette and e-cigarette users in the population assessment of tobacco and health study, Waves 3 and 4 (2015-2017)

INTRODUCTION

This study evaluated the patterns of smoking cessation at Wave 4 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study among established cigarette smokers who were also current e-cigarettes users at Wave 3.

METHODS

We assessed changes in smoking frequency at Wave 4 among established cigarette and e-cigarette users at Wave 3. The demographics of participants were analyzed as well as e-cigarettes device types, number of cigarettes smoked and time from waking up until the first cigarette. Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios as well as percentage of discontinuing cigarettes use at Wave 4 were calculated for the different categories of dual users.

RESULTS

Among dual users at Wave 3, 13.1% quit cigarette smoking at Wave 4, whereas half discontinued e-cigarette use and maintained exclusive cigarette smoking. Significant differences in the percentage of smoking cessation were observed across demographic groups - dual users with a bachelor's degree were more likely to quit smoking than dual users who did not finish high school (aOR = 3.06, 95% CI: 1.17-8.00) and smokers aged 25-64 years were less likely to quit smoking than those aged 18-24 years (aOR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.28-0.86 for smokers aged 25-44 years, and aOR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.20-0.87 for those aged 45-64). Dual users who smoked more than 15 cigarettes per day were significantly less likely to stop smoking (aOR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.17-0.88).

CONCLUSION

E-cigarettes have the potential to aid in smoking cessation. Questions remain as to whether dual use of e-cigarettes and cigarettes should be encouraged as a transitional phase on the path to smoking cessation.

E-cigarette Transitions Among US Youth and Adults: Results from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study (2013-2018)

Currently, the debate surrounding the regulation of e-cigarettes focuses mainly on the size of e-cigarettes' potentially beneficial effects (i.e., adult cessation) versus their unwarranted effects (i.e., initiation among tobacco-naïve adolescents). Therefore, we investigated the relative scale of e-cigarette use transitions in the United States. We reported cross-sectional weighted prevalence estimates of past-month e-cigarette use by ever cigarette use from Waves 1-4 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health study (2013-2018) among youth (12-17 years) and adults (≥ 18 years). We also examined past-month e-cigarette mono and dual transitions related to cigarette smoking and reported the longitudinal weighted prevalence across waves. Among youth new e-cigarette users, the proportion of never-cigarette smokers increased from 24.1 in Wave 1 (n = 418) to 51.4% in Wave 4 (n = 310) (p < 0.0001 for trend). Of youth past-month e-cigarette mono-users in Wave 1 (n = 151), 15.2% transitioned to cigarette mono-use and 8.2% dual-use at Wave 2 or 3 or 4, compared to 60.2% no tobacco use and 16.4% e-cigarette mono-use. Among young adult past-month dual-users (18-24 years; n = 684), 22.6% transitioned to no tobacco use, 60.1% continued cigarette use, 11.4% dual use, and 5.9% e-cigarette mono-use. Among adult dual-users ≥ 25 years old (n = 1560), 13.6% transitioned to no tobacco use, 71.3% cigarette mono-use, 9.0% dual-use, and 6.1% e-cigarette mono-use. Transition to cigarette mono-use and continued dual-use were common among adult past-month e-cigarette users, while e-cigarette initiation was common among youth never-cigarette smokers. These findings contrast with data from other countries showing limited evidence of e-cigarette initiation among youth never cigarette smokers. Both e-cigarette and cigarette use should be addressed in youth and adults, given the potential for dual use in both populations.

Electronic cigarettes versus nicotine patches for smoking cessation in pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial

Nicotine replacement therapy, in the form of nicotine patches, is commonly offered to pregnant women who smoke to help them to stop smoking, but this approach has limited efficacy in this population. Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are also used by pregnant women who smoke but their safety and efficacy in pregnancy are unknown. Here, we report the results of a randomized controlled trial in 1,140 participants comparing refillable e-cigarettes with nicotine patches. Pregnant women who smoked were randomized to e-cigarettes (n = 569) or nicotine patches (n = 571). In the unadjusted analysis of the primary outcome, validated prolonged quit rates at the end of pregnancy in the two study arms were not significantly different (6.8% versus 4.4% in the e-cigarette and patch arms, respectively; relative risk (RR) = 1.55, 95%CI: 0.95-2.53, P = 0.08). However, some participants in the nicotine patch group also used e-cigarettes during the study. In a pre-specified sensitivity analysis excluding abstinent participants who used non-allocated products, e-cigarettes were more effective than patches (6.8% versus 3.6%; RR = 1.93, 95%CI: 1.14-3.26, P = 0.02). Safety outcomes included adverse events and maternal and birth outcomes. The safety profile was found to be similar for both study products, however, low birthweight (<2,500 g) was less frequent in the e-cigarette arm (14.8% versus 9.6%; RR = 0.65, 95%CI: 0.47-0.90, P = 0.01). Other adverse events and birth outcomes were similar in the two study arms. E-cigarettes might help women who are pregnant to stop smoking, and their safety for use in pregnancy is similar to that of nicotine patches. ISRCTN62025374.

The Effectiveness of E-Cigarettes for Smoking Cessation

BACKGROUND

Our primary aim was to assess-in the German population-the effectiveness of e-cigarettes (ECs; with or without nicotine), nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), and no use of evidence-based aids in smoking cessation.

METHODS

Analysis of cross-sectional data from a representative survey of the population (age 14-96 years) conducted in 2016-2021. All current smokers and recent ex-smokers (< 12 months since quitting) who had made ≥ 1 attempt to quit in the past 12 months (n = 2740) were included. They were asked about use of cessation aids in their most recent quit attempt and their current smoking status.

RESULTS

Two hundred thirty-nine respondents had used ECs, 168 NRT, and 2333 no aid. After adjustment for potential confounders, the odds of abstinence were 1.78 times higher for smokers who had used ECs in their quit attempt than in the group that had used no aids (95% confidence interval [1.09; 2.92]; p = 0.02) and 1.46 times higher than in the NRT group ([0.68; 3.13]; p = 0.34, Bayes factor = 1.26). Compared with the unaided group, the odds of abstinence were 2.34 times higher ([1.21; 4.53]; p = 0.01) in the subgroup using ECs with nicotine and 1.48 times higher ([0.68; 3.26]; p = 0.33) in the subgroup using ECs without nicotine. The unadjusted abstinence rates in people who had started their quit attempt > 6 months earlier were 15.6% [9.4; 23.8] in the ECs group and 13.8% [7.3; 22.9] in the NRT group.

CONCLUSION

In Germany, use of ECs in an attempt to quit smoking is associated with a higher rate of abstinence than attempting to quit unaided.

How do Europeans quit using tobacco, e-cigarettes and heated tobacco products? A cross-sectional analysis in 28 European countries

OBJECTIVES

While smoking tobacco remains a substantial cause of harm in Europe, novel products such as electronic cigarettes or e-cigarettes (ECs) and heated tobacco products (HTPs) have entered the market recently. While debate still persists over the role of these novel products, they are now in widespread use. This study aimed to explore the prevalence and methods of attempts to quit EC and HTP.

SETTING

We analysed the 2020 Eurobarometer survey, which collected data in 28 European countries.

PARTICIPANTS

A representative sample of individuals residing in these countries aged ≥15 years.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Multilevel regression analyses were performed to assess differences in quit attempts and cessation methods among tobacco smokers and exclusive EC/HTP users separately.

RESULTS

51.1% of current tobacco smokers and 27.1% of exclusive EC or HTP users reported having ever made a quit attempt. The majority of former and current smokers (75.8%) who made a quit attempt did so unassisted, with 28.8% reporting at least one attempt using a cessation aid. The most popular cessation aids were nicotine replacement therapy or other medication (13.4%) and ECs (11.3%). 58.8% of exclusive EC or HTP users who had made a quit attempt did so unassisted, with 39.5% reporting the use of a cessation aid.

CONCLUSION

Most EC and HTP users in Europe try to quit unassisted, although more of them report the use of a cessation aid compared with tobacco smokers. Cessation support services should take into consideration the increasing numbers of users of EC and HTP who may be trying to quit.

E-Cigarettes-a review of the evidence-harm versus harm reduction

The World Health Organization estimates there are 1.1 billion cigarette smokers across the globe and that tobacco related deaths number 7 million per year. Electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) are available to contribute options for smoking cessation and include e-cigarettes, e-hookahs, vape pens, mods, and vaping. The growing use of ENDS, or e-cigarettes, in the US and globally across populations is dramatic. Although users may think that e-cigarettes are less harmful than combustible tobacco products, the evidence shows that there are known risks and harms for users. E-cigarettes have varying amounts of toxicants, nicotine, and carcinogens and put the user at risk for lung diseases and COVID-19 similar to smokers. Currently, most governing bodies have not approved e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation tool but do state if a person has failed conventional smoking cessation treatments that e-cigarettes used alone for the short term may help those to quit combustible tobacco and nicotine. A shared decision-making approach should be used when discussing e-cigarettes as a harm reduction tool. More studies and long-term data are needed to assess potential benefits and harms. What is known is that prevention efforts and policy are needed to avoid adolescents and other vulnerable populations from initiating tobacco or e-cigarette use.

Smoking cessation behaviors and reasons for use of electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products among Romanian adults

We report cessation behaviors, reasons for use of electronic cigarettes (EC) and heated tobacco products (HTP) and association of their use with quit attempts and smoking intensity using Romania Global Adult Tobacco Survey 2018. Weighted estimates of EC and HTP by cigarette smoking (CS) status were assessed. Quit attempts, intention to quit, reasons for lack of intention to quit among current CS, and reasons for current use of EC and HTP were estimated. The association of 'ever use' of EC and HTP with cigarette smoking intensity and quit attempts was explored using binary logistic regression. Of the total 4571 surveyed, 1243 (27.3%) were current CS, 300 (24.4%) made quit attempts in the past 12 months. Only 38 (12.5%) and 26 (8.6%) had used EC and HTP as an aid to quit. Among current CS, 512 (41.2%) had no intention to quit. Reasons for this were, 'enjoy smoking' (86.1%), 'reduce stress' (65.9%), and 'staying alert' (46.3%). Awareness and use of EC and HTP were significantly higher among current CS. 'Dual use' of EC and HTP with CS was manifolds higher than stand-alone use. Reasons for current use of EC and HTP were 'enjoyment', and 'use in places where smoking was prohibited'.

News events and their relationship with US vape sales: an interrupted time series analysis

OBJECTIVE

News coverage around vaping-related events may have furthered misconceptions regarding the relative harms of vapes. Such information may influence the decisions of individuals who smoke, around switching to vaping, potentially affecting the overall tobacco mortality burden. Thus, it is prudent to study how news events (e.g., 2019 vaping illness epidemic) are associated with vape sales in the United States, to possibly reduce the tobacco mortality burden.

METHODS

We used weekly retail sales data for e-cigarettes (30 December 2018 - 28 December 2019) from the US retail scanner data compiled by the Nielsen Company. We used an interrupted time series design with segmented regression analysis to determine immediate and longer-term impacts of individual news events (e.g. Trump administration's planned ban on some flavored vaping products) on vape sales, controlling for pre-existing trends.

RESULTS

Unexpectedly, we noted a statistically significant positive relationship between vape sales and the CDC announcing an investigation into vaping-related illnesses (Change: 6.59%, Estimate: 0.066; 95% CI: 0.036, 0.092; P < 0.001). We also observed a similar positive association between vape sales and the CDC's announcement on the link between Vitamin E acetate and EVALI (Change: 2.93%, Estimate: 0.029; 95% CI: 0.003, 0.055; P < 0.05). There was a steep decline in sales after these events.

CONCLUSIONS

News events may be associated with US vape sales. Findings have implications for the management of risk perceptions around vaping to improve health outcomes of tobacco users. Information-based policy instruments can be applied to balance the effects of news events that may influence vape sales.

Feasibility of a primary care patient decision aid for smoking cessation with information about e-cigarettes

•

Patients had higher confidence and readiness to quit after the decision aids.

•

The decision aid helped prepare patients to make a decision about quitting smoking.

•

Patients expressed satisfaction with the decision aid and clinician consultation.

•

Smoking cessation decision aids are acceptable and may promote behavior change.

Decision aids can promote shared decision making and behavior change and may be effective in helping patients quit smoking. Patients are increasingly using e-cigarettes for smoking cessation; however, little is known about the impact of including e-cigarette information in smoking cessation decision aids. Our objective was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a smoking cessation decision aid including e-cigarette information. This study was conducted at one family medicine clinic in the United States. We used a pre-post design. In Phase I, the decision aid presented information about approved cessation methods. In Phase II, current e-cigarette users and patients with no intention of quitting received additional information on switching to e-cigarettes. We assessed the impact of the decision aids on quit attempts and abstinence, confidence and readiness to quit, confidence and readiness to switch to e-cigarettes, and patient satisfaction. We enrolled 60 patients in each phase (N = 120). Patients reported higher confidence and readiness to quit after viewing the decision aids and consulting with their physician (p < 0.01). Patients reported the decision aid helped prepare them to make a decision about quitting smoking and expressed satisfaction with the decision aid and clinician consultation. We did not observe an impact of including e-cigarette information. Smoking cessation decision aids are acceptable to patients and may promote behavior change. Future studies should explore the impact of providing patients e-cigarette information using larger sample sizes and rigorous designs. Further research is needed to identify strategies to promote shared decision-making regarding e-cigarettes.

Optimal use of smoking cessation pharmacotherapy

The most effective intervention for stopping smoking is a combination of professional counselling and pharmacotherapy. Medicines are recommended for all smokers who are motivated to quit and are nicotine dependent. Combination nicotine replacement therapy with a patch and an oral product is more effective than the patch alone. An adequate dose of nicotine must be used for an adequate duration. Varenicline is the most effective oral drug. It is safe in people with stable mental illness. Vaping nicotine is a second-line treatment which can be considered for smokers who are unable to quit with other methods.

"When I Don't Have a Cigarette It's Helpful, but It Really Don't Satisfy:" Qualitative Study of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) Use among Low-Income Smokers

Background: Little is known about the use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) among low-income adult cigarette smokers, who experience severe tobacco-related health disparities. Methods: This study conducted interviews to examine experiences and perceptions associated with ENDS use among predominantly low-income adult smokers (n = 30; mean age 30.2 ± 12.9; 60% male, 46.7% African American, 30% white, 10% more than one race; 76.7% annual household income ≤USD 24,000). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded in NVivo 11. Results: Overall, participants reported complementing rather than substituting their smoking with ENDS use (e.g., using ENDS only when smoking is not allowed). Predominant reasons for vaping were convenience, smoking reduction/cessation, stress management, social acceptability, lower long-term costs than smoking, and appealing flavors. Common reasons for not switching to exclusive vaping were that ENDS did not satisfy cigarette cravings and concerns about ENDS health effects. Participants indicated higher likelihood of switching to exclusive ENDS use if the products were more affordable, perceived as substantially less harmful, tasted and felt more like smoking a cigarette, and more effective for reducing cravings. Conclusions: Continued research is needed to maximize any harm reduction potential of ENDS and ensure that these products do not contribute to worsening health disparities.

Youth vaping: a review and update on global epidemiology, physical and behavioral health risks, and clinical considerations

Worldwide, youth electronic cigarette use (vaping) has risen significantly over the past decade. This public health concern has spurred many high-quality studies characterizing country-specific prevalence, risk factors, physical and behavioral health complications, and optimal methods of assessment and counseling for youth vaping. Clinicians remain underexposed to this recent work, limiting translation of evidence into higher quality patient care. This review aims to provide pediatricians and other clinicians working with youth a clinically focused survey of key research findings and considerations based on recent evidence. This narrative review surveys emerging trends in EC use across different countries, reasons for youth vaping, characteristics of vaping materials that promote youth use, associations with combustible cigarette use, relation with cannabis and other illicit substances, physical and behavioral health risks associated with vaping, and methods of assessment, counseling, and intervention for problematic vaping in youth. Since vaping remains a relatively new phenomenon, long-term health consequences remain unknown.Conclusion: Youth vaping is an increasingly well-studied phenomenon with both physical and behavioral health risks. Pediatricians and other youth-focused clinicians can apply the lessons of recent research in work with youth and their families. What is Known: • Youth vaping is an increasingly prevalent public health concern. • Recent research demonstrates physical and behavioral health risks associated with vaping as well as methods for assessment, counseling, and intervention. What is New: • The current review summarizes the latest evidence in a clinically focused framework to facilitate translation of emerging knowledge to practice.

Barriers and facilitators to using vaporised nicotine products as smoking cessation aids among people receiving treatment for substance use disorder

INTRODUCTION

Vaporised nicotine products (VNPs) may be useful smoking cessation aids for people in alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment, a population with high tobacco-related morbidity and mortality rates. This qualitative study aimed to examine the barriers and facilitators of using VNPs as part of a clinical trial to reduce or quit smoking among people in AOD treatment.

METHODS

Thirteen people in AOD treatment who were participating in a trial of VNPs for smoking cessation (QuitENDs) completed a brief semi-structured interview examining experiences of using VNPs to reduce or quit smoking. Transcribed data was analysed using the iterative categorisation framework.

RESULTS

Many participants expressed the benefit of having a smoking cessation aid that addressed nicotine cravings and the behavioural hand-to-mouth action to help them reduce or quit smoking. Although many participants reported that VNPs were easy to use, some found maintaining the device to be challenging. Some participants described Australian regulations limiting use of VNPs as reducing their desire to use the device as a cessation aid. Many participants attempting to reduce or quit tobacco and cannabis simultaneously stated that VNPs alone were insufficient to help them reduce or quit tobacco.

CONCLUSIONS

VNPs hold significant promise as smoking cessation aids among people in AOD treatment because of their unique ability to satisfy both nicotine cravings and behavioural habits. However, multiple barriers, such as accessibility, maintenance, and the challenges of reducing other substance use simultaneously also need to be addressed for optimal engagement in clinical trials with VNPs to quit smoking.

Lebensstil und kardiovaskuläre Gesundheit – wie schädlich sind E-Zigaretten und Shisha-Rauchen?

Tabakrauchen ist ein Hauptauslöser chronischer nicht übertragbarer Krankheiten und ein Risikofaktor für kardiovaskuläre und pulmonale Erkrankungen. Obwohl der weltweite Tabakkonsum während der letzten 2 Jahrzehnte reduziert wurde, zeigt der Gebrauch von E-Zigaretten und Wasserpfeifen (Shisha) eine pandemische Zunahme mit hohem Anteil jüngerer Anwender. E-Zigaretten sind keine komplett schadensfreie Alternative zu herkömmlichen Tabakzigaretten, auch weil die zahlreichen Geschmacksaromen und die einfache/schnelle Verwendung eine steigende Zahl von abhängigen Anwendern hervorbringt. E-Zigaretten sind nicht unbedingt geeignet, die Nikotinabhängigkeit hinter sich zu lassen. Diese Arbeit bietet eine Übersicht über die kardiovaskulären Gesundheitsauswirkungen des Shisharauchens und E-Zigaretten-Dampfens mit Fokus auf die negativen Effekte auf die Endothelfunktion. Die schädlichen biologischen Auswirkungen der toxischen Inhaltsstoffe dieser Produkte werden vor allem im Hinblick auf oxidativen Stress und Entzündungsreaktionen diskutiert. Abschließend wird der aktuelle Stand hinsichtlich der Empfehlungen, gesetzlichen Regelungen und kommerziellen Werbung kurz zusammengefasst.

Smoking Cessation

Tobacco smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States, and its harms are well established. Physicians have more evidence-based resources than ever before to effectively treat smoking, including new uses and combinations of U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved pharmacotherapies and expanded community programs. In addition, electronic nicotine delivery systems are potential treatment tools, but their safety and efficacy need to be established. Finally, high-priority groups, such as persons with cancer diagnoses or hospitalized patients, may benefit from particular attention to their tobacco use.

Study protocol: evaluation of the addictive potential of e-cigarettes (EVAPE): neurobiological, sociological, and epidemiological perspectives

BACKGROUND

Tobacco use is the largest preventable cause of diseases and deaths; reducing tobacco intake is, therefore, an urgent public health goal. In recent years, e-cigarettes have been marketed as a 'healthier' alternative to tobacco smoking, whilst product features have evolved tremendously in the meantime. A lively scientific debate has developed regarding the potential benefits and risks of e-cigarettes although, surprisingly, there are few studies investigating the addictive potential of nicotine-containing e-cigarettes. The present work comprises three work packages investigating the addictive potential of e-cigarettes from different perspectives: (1) the neurobiological addictive potential of e-cigarettes; (2) the experience and perception of dependence symptoms among users of e-cigarettes in a social context; and (3) the epidemiological perspective regarding factors influencing the potential for dependence.

METHODS

Work package I: the neurobiological study will investigate the key elements of addiction in e-cigarettes compared to tobacco cigarettes using neurobiological and neuropsychological correlates associated with craving, incentive motivation, cue reactivity and attentional bias. Work package II: the sociological study part examines self-reports on the experience and perception of dependence symptoms in a social context, using focus group interviews and the analysis of posts in online discussion forums on e-cigarettes. Work package III: the epidemiological study part focuses on tolerance development and the role of psychosocial and product factors by analyzing longitudinal data from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project (ITC).

DISCUSSION

The present study offers a chosen mix of three methodological approaches, thereby comprehensively examining core symptoms of positive and negative reinforcement in addiction. Whether e-cigarettes are as reinforcing and addictive as combustible tobacco cigarettes is an important public health issue with implications for prevention and treatment programs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Work package I: Registered at clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04772014. Work package II: Registered at OSF Registries: https://osf.io/dxgya (2021, January 14).

Electronic cigarette use and smoking cessation in cohort studies and randomized trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the association between e-cigarette use and subsequent smoking cessation in cohort studies and randomized controlled trials (RCT).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was finalized 11 November 2019 using EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, PubMed Health, NICE evidence search, PROSPERO, CRD, PsycInfo, and PubMed including Medline. Inclusion criteria were: reporting empirical results; longitudinal observational design with a minimum of 3 months of follow-up; including general population samples; and allowing for comparison between users and non-users of e-cigarettes. Studies rated as having high risk of bias were excluded. The procedures described by PRISMA were followed, and the quality of evidence was rated using GRADE.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight longitudinal, peer-reviewed publications from 26 cohort studies, and eight publications from seven RCTs assessing the association between e-cigarette use and smoking cessation were included in this review. A random-effects meta-analysis based on 39147 participants in cohort studies showed a pooled unadjusted odds ratio (OR) for smoking cessation among baseline e-cigarette users compared with baseline non-users of 0.97 (95% CI: 0.67-1.40), while the adjusted OR was 0.90 (95% CI: 0.63-1.27). The pooled odds ratio for smoking cessation in RCTs was 1.78 (95% CI: 1.41-2.25). The evidence for cohort studies was graded as very low and for RCTs as low.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not find quality evidence for an association between e-cigarette use and smoking cessation. Although RCTs tended to support a more positive association between e-cigarette use and smoking cessation than the cohort studies, the grading of evidence was consistently low.

Pilot Ecological Momentary Assessment Study of Subjective and Contextual Factors Surrounding E-Cigarette and Combustible Tobacco Product Use among Young Adults

Background: Dual use of e-cigarettes and combustible tobacco products is common in young adults. We aimed to explore how ratings of subjective and contextual factors differed between discrete episodes of e-cigarette use vs. combustible tobacco product smoking among a sample of young adults. Methods: Young adults (N = 29, ages 18–30) who used e-cigarettes and ≥1 combustible tobacco product at least once weekly completed a 1-week smartphone-based ecological momentary assessment (EMA). Twice daily random prompts assessed past-15-min use of tobacco products, ratings of subjective factors (e.g., negative affect, craving), and contextual factors related to activity, location, and companionship. A multivariable GEE model assessed whether subjective or contextual factors were associated with e-cigarette vs. combustible tobacco product episodes. Results: 184 tobacco use episodes were reported (39.7% e-cigarette, 60.3% combustible tobacco product). High baseline cigarette dependence, as measured by the Fagerström Test for Cigarette Dependence, was associated with lower odds of e-cigarette vs. combustible tobacco product episodes (aOR 0.01, 95% CI (0.002–0.08); p < 0.001). Neither between- or within-subjects negative affect or craving scores were associated with e-cigarette use. Activities of eating/drinking (aOR 0.20, 95% CI (0.08–0.49); p = 0.001) and being in the companionship of a person who smoked cigarettes (aOR 0.13, 95% CI (0.04–0.43); p = 0.001) were associated with lower odds of e-cigarette vs. combustible tobacco product use episodes. However, traveling (aOR 12.02, 95% CI (3.77–38.26); p ≤ 0.001) and being in a public space (aOR 2.76, 95% CI (1.10–6.96); p = 0.03) were associated with higher odds of e-cigarette than combustible tobacco product use episodes. Conclusions: This pilot data suggests that unique contextual factors may be associated with e-cigarette use, compared to combustible tobacco smoking in a sample of young adults who use both e-cigarettes and combustible tobacco products. Future research with larger samples is needed to better characterize varying contexts and cues for tobacco use among young adults who are dual users.

Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation

BACKGROUND

Electronic cigarettes (ECs) are handheld electronic vaping devices which produce an aerosol formed by heating an e-liquid. Some people who smoke use ECs to stop or reduce smoking, but some organizations, advocacy groups and policymakers have discouraged this, citing lack of evidence of efficacy and safety. People who smoke, healthcare providers and regulators want to know if ECs can help people quit and if they are safe to use for this purpose. This is an update conducted as part of a living systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of using electronic cigarettes (ECs) to help people who smoke tobacco achieve long-term smoking abstinence.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO to 1 May 2021, and reference-checked and contacted study authors. We screened abstracts from the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT) 2021 Annual Meeting.   SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and randomized cross-over trials, in which people who smoke were randomized to an EC or control condition. We also included uncontrolled intervention studies in which all participants received an EC intervention. Studies had to report abstinence from cigarettes at six months or longer or data on safety markers at one week or longer, or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods for screening and data extraction. Our primary outcome measures were abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up, adverse events (AEs), and serious adverse events (SAEs). Secondary outcomes included the proportion of people still using study product (EC or pharmacotherapy) at six or more months after randomization or starting EC use, changes in carbon monoxide (CO), blood pressure (BP), heart rate, arterial oxygen saturation, lung function, and levels of carcinogens or toxicants or both. We used a fixed-effect Mantel-Haenszel model to calculate risk ratios (RRs) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) for dichotomous outcomes. For continuous outcomes, we calculated mean differences. Where appropriate, we pooled data in meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 61 completed studies, representing 16,759 participants, of which 34 were RCTs. Five of the 61 included studies were new to this review update. Of the included studies, we rated seven (all contributing to our main comparisons) at low risk of bias overall, 42 at high risk overall (including all non-randomized studies), and the remainder at unclear risk. There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by imprecision, that quit rates were higher in people randomized to nicotine EC than in those randomized to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (risk ratio (RR) 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21 to 1.93; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 1924 participants). In absolute terms, this might translate to an additional three quitters per 100 (95% CI 1 to 6). There was low-certainty evidence (limited by very serious imprecision) that the rate of occurrence of AEs was similar (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.19; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 485 participants). SAEs were rare, but there was insufficient evidence to determine whether rates differed between groups due to very serious imprecision (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.90: I2 = 0; 4 studies, 1424 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence, again limited by imprecision, that quit rates were higher in people randomized to nicotine EC than to non-nicotine EC (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.21 to 3.13; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 1447 participants). In absolute terms, this might lead to an additional seven quitters per 100 (95% CI 2 to 16). There was moderate-certainty evidence of no difference in the rate of AEs between these groups (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.11; I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 601 participants). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether rates of SAEs differed between groups, due to very serious imprecision (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.38; I2 = 0; 5 studies, 792 participants). Compared to behavioural support only/no support, quit rates were higher for participants randomized to nicotine EC (RR 2.61, 95% CI 1.44 to 4.74; I2 = 0%; 6 studies, 2886 participants). In absolute terms this represents an additional six quitters per 100 (95% CI 2 to 15). However, this finding was of very low certainty, due to issues with imprecision and risk of bias. There was some evidence that non-serious AEs were more common in people randomized to nicotine EC (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.32; I2 = 41%, low certainty; 4 studies, 765 participants), and again, insufficient evidence to determine whether rates of SAEs differed between groups (RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.70 to 3.24; I2 = 0%; 7 studies, 1303 participants).  Data from non-randomized studies were consistent with RCT data. The most commonly reported AEs were throat/mouth irritation, headache, cough, and nausea, which tended to dissipate with continued use. Very few studies reported data on other outcomes or comparisons, hence evidence for these is limited, with CIs often encompassing clinically significant harm and benefit.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that ECs with nicotine increase quit rates compared to NRT and compared to ECs without nicotine. Evidence comparing nicotine EC with usual care/no treatment also suggests benefit, but is less certain. More studies are needed to confirm the effect size. Confidence intervals were for the most part wide for data on AEs, SAEs and other safety markers, with no difference in AEs between nicotine and non-nicotine ECs. Overall incidence of SAEs was low across all study arms. We did not detect  evidence of harm from nicotine EC, but longest follow-up was two years and the  number of studies was small. The main limitation of the evidence base remains imprecision due to the small number of RCTs, often with low event rates, but further RCTs are underway. To ensure the review continues to provide up-to-date information to decision-makers, this review is now a living systematic review. We run searches monthly, with the review updated when relevant new evidence becomes available. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the review's current status.

Association between electronic nicotine delivery systems and electronic non-nicotine delivery systems with initiation of tobacco use in individuals aged < 20 years. A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review described the association between electronic nicotine delivery systems and electronic non-nicotine delivery systems (ENDS/ENNDS) use among non-smoking children and adolescents aged <20 years with subsequent tobacco use.

METHODS

We searched five electronic databases and the grey literature up to end of September 2020. Prospective longitudinal studies that described the association between ENDS/ENNDS use, and subsequent tobacco use in those aged < 20 years who were non-smokers at baseline were included. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist was used to assess risk of bias. Data were extracted by two reviewers and pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis. We generated unadjusted and adjusted risk ratios (ARRs) describing associations between ENDS/ENNDS and tobacco use.

FINDINGS

A total of 36 publications met the eligibility criteria, of which 25 were included in the systematic review (23 in the meta-analysis) after exclusion of overlapping studies. Sixteen studies had high to moderate risk of bias. Ever users of ENDS/ENNDS had over three times the risk of ever cigarette use (ARR 3·01 (95% CI: 2·37, 3·82; p<0·001, I2: 82·3%), and current cigarette use had over two times the risk (ARR 2·56 (95% CI: 1·61, 4·07; p<0·001, I2: 77·3%) at follow up. Among current ENDS/ENNDS users, there was a significant association with ever (ARR 2·63 (95% CI: 1·94, 3·57; p<0·001, I2: 21·2%)), but not current cigarette use (ARR 1·88 (95% CI: 0·34, 10·30; p = 0·47, I2: 0%)) at follow up. For other tobacco use, ARR ranged between 1·55 (95% CI 1·07, 2·23) and 8·32 (95% CI: 1·20, 57·04) for waterpipe and pipes, respectively. Additionally, two studies examined the use of ENNDS (non-nicotine devices) and found a pooled adjusted RR of 2·56 (95% CI: 0·47, 13·94, p = 0.035).

CONCLUSION

There is an urgent need for policies that regulate the availability, accessibility, and marketing of ENDS/ENNDS to children and adolescents. Governments should also consider adopting policies to prevent ENDS/ENNDS uptake and use in children and adolescents, up to and including a ban for this group.

Vaping during the COVID-19 lockdown period in Belgium

BACKGROUND

Due to the Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), the Belgian government set out a range of measures to prevent the spread of the virus. One measure included closing all non-food shops, including vape shops.

METHODS

A retrospective online questionnaire was used to investigate the impact of closing the vape shops on the vaping and/or smoking behavior of current vapers.

RESULTS

The sample (n = 202) reached consisted of 70% exclusive vapers, 29% dual users and 1% no-product users. Over half (55%, 112/202) of participants needed to buy e-liquid during the lockdown, with a small majority being able to buy e-liquids - mostly with their usual nicotine concentrations, flavor or brand -, but as much as 39% (44/112) of them ran out of e-liquid. Those buying e-liquid mainly did so by making purchases via foreign online webshops. A similar pattern was observed with respect to purchasing hardware, with about half (47%, 95/202) of participants reporting hardware availability and with a small majority (53%, 107/202) reporting hardware unavailability. Of those indicating that hardware was not available, 38% (41/107) ran out of a properly functioning e-cigarette. A non-trivial minority had to consume e-liquids with another nicotine concentration, flavor or brand than usual. One seventh of exclusive vapers before lockdown relapsed partly or completely to smoking during the lockdown. The main reasons for changing vaping and/or smoking behavior included the unavailability of e-liquid with nicotine, the unavailability of hardware, and stress/worries about COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of vapers succeeded in maintaining their vaping behavior as usual, highly likely due to (illegally) buying consumables online. Nevertheless, for a minority the lockdown period resulted in unintended consequences and these vapers relapsed (completely) to smoking. Even during periods of lockdown, smokers and vapers should be able to purchase low(er)-risk alternatives to smoking, for example e-cigarettes.

Vaping-Related Adverse Events and Perceived Health Improvements: A Cross-Sectional Survey among Daily E-Cigarette Users

Web-based samples of e-cigarette users commonly report significant vaping-related health improvements (HIs) and mild adverse events (AEs). This cross-sectional study with in-person interviewing data collection examined self-reported AEs and perceived HIs among Hungarian adult current daily exclusive e-cigarette (n = 65) and dual users (n = 127), and former daily e-cigarette users (n = 91) in 2018. Logistic regression was used to evaluate associations between reporting any AEs/HIs, vaping status, and covariates. More former users (52.7%) reported AEs than current users (39.6%; p = 0.038). Exclusive and dual daily users reported similar rates of AEs (44.6% and 37.0%, respectively; p = 0.308). More current users (46.9%) experienced HIs than former users (35.2%; p = 0.064). Exclusive daily users were more likely to report HIs than dual users (63.1% versus 38.6%; p = 0.001). Former user status and smoking cessation/reduction reasons increased the odds of reporting AEs, whereas nicotine-containing e-liquid use and older age decreased the odds of reporting AEs. Exclusive vaper status, using advanced generation devices, and smoking cessation/reduction reasons increased the odds of experiencing HIs. This study, which used a traditional data collection methodology, found a higher rate of AEs and a lower rate of HIs compared to web-based surveys. Our results highlight that experiencing AEs and HIs is affected by users’ characteristics, in addition to the device and e-liquid type.