Preliminary Evaluation of a New German Translated Tobacco Quality of Life Impact Tool to Discriminate Between Healthy Current and Former Smokers and to Explore the Effect of Switching Smokers to a Reduced Toxicant Prototype Cigarette

Impact of tobacco and/or nicotine products on health and functioning: a scoping review and findings from the preparatory phase of the development of a new self-report measure

BACKGROUND

Measuring self-reported experience of health and functioning is important for understanding the changes in the health status of individuals switching from cigarettes to less harmful tobacco and/or nicotine products (TNP) or reduced-risk products (RRP) and for supporting tobacco harm reduction strategies.

METHODS

This paper presents insights from three research activities from the preparatory phase of the development of a new self-report health and functioning measure. A scoping literature review was conducted to identify the positive and negative impact of TNP use on health and functioning. Focus groups (n = 29) on risk perception and individual interviews (n = 40) on perceived dependence in people who use TNPs were reanalyzed in the context of health and functioning, and expert opinion was gathered from five key opinion leaders and five technical consultants.

RESULTS

Triangulating the findings of the review of 97 articles, qualitative input from people who use TNPs, and expert feedback helped generate a preliminary conceptual framework including health and functioning and conceptually-related domains impacted by TNP use. Domains related to the future health and functioning measurement model include physical health signs and symptoms, general physical appearance, functioning (physical, sexual, cognitive, emotional, and social), and general health perceptions.

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary conceptual framework can inform future research on development and validation of new measures for assessment of overall health and functioning impact of TNPs from the consumers' perspective.

Assessing modified risk tobacco and nicotine products: Description of the scientific framework and assessment of a closed modular electronic cigarette

Cigarette smoking causes many human diseases including cardiovascular disease, lung disease and cancer. Novel tobacco products with reduced yields of toxicants compared to cigarettes, such as tobacco-heating products, snus and electronic cigarettes, hold great potential for reducing the harms associated with tobacco use. In the UK several public health agencies have advocated a potential role for novel products in tobacco harm reduction. Public Health England has stated that "The current best estimate is that e-cigarettes are around 95% less harmful than smoking" and the Royal College of Physicians has urged public health to "Promote e-cigarettes widely as substitute for smoking". Health related claims on novel products such as 'reduced exposure' and 'reduced risk' should be substantiated using a weight of evidence approach based on a comprehensive scientific assessment. The US FDA, has provided draft guidance outlining a framework to assess novel products as Modified Risk Tobacco Products (MRTP). Based on this, we now propose a framework comprising pre-clinical, clinical, and population studies to assess the risk profile of novel tobacco products. Additionally, the utility of this framework is assessed through the pre-clinical and part of the clinical comparison of a commercial e-cigarette (Vype ePen) with a scientific reference cigarette (3R4F) and the results of these studies suggest that ePen has the potential to be a reduced risk product.

Standardizing disease-specific quality of life measures across multiple chronic conditions: development and initial evaluation of the QOL Disease Impact Scale (QDIS®)

BACKGROUND

To document the development and evaluation of the Quality of life Disease Impact Scale (QDIS®), a measure that standardizes item content and scoring across chronic conditions and provides a summary, norm-based QOL impact score for each disease.

METHODS

A bank of 49 disease impact items was constructed from previously-used descriptions of health impact to represent ten frequently-measured quality of life (QOL) content areas and operational definitions successfully utilized in generic QOL surveys. In contrast to health in general, all items were administered with attribution to a specific disease (osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, angina, myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, chronic kidney disease (CKD), diabetes, asthma, or COPD). Responses from 5418 adults were analyzed as five disease groups: arthritis, cardiovascular, CKD, diabetes, and respiratory. Unidimensionality, item parameter and scale-level invariance, reliability, validity and responsiveness to change during 9-month follow-up were evaluated by disease group and for all groups combined using multi-group confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA), item response theory (IRT) and analysis of variance methods. QDIS was normed in an independent chronically ill US population sample (N = 4120).

RESULTS

MGCFA confirmed a 1-factor model, justifying a summary score estimated using equal parameters for each item across disease groups. In support of standardized IRT-based scoring, correlations were very high between disease-specific and standardized IRT item slopes (r = 0.88-0.96), thresholds (r = 0.93-0.99) and person-level scores (r ≥ 0.99). Internal consistency, test-retest and person-level IRT reliability were consistently satisfactory across groups. In support of interpreting QDIS as a disease-specific measure, in comparison with generic measures, QDIS consistently discriminated markedly better across disease severity levels, correlated higher with other disease-specific measures in cross-sectional tests, and was more responsive in comparisons of groups with better, same or worse evaluations of disease-specific outcomes at the 9-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Standardization of content and scoring across diseases was shown to be justified psychometrically and enabled the first summary measure of disease-specific QOL impact normed in the chronically ill population. This disease-specific approach substantially improves discriminant validity and responsiveness over generic measures and provides a basis for better understanding the relative QOL impact of multiple chronic conditions in research and clinical practice.