Vaping as an alternative to smoking relapse following brief lapse

How do Smokers in a Snus-Prevalent Society Consider E-cigarettes, Snus, and Nicotine Replacement Therapy Products as Relevant Replacements for Cigarettes in the Event They Should Stop Smoking?

INTRODUCTION

Around 50 percent of the tobacco in Norway is consumed in the form of snus, a smokeless oral tobacco. We examined Norwegian smokers' openness, and thereby the potential reach, to use e-cigarettes, nicotine replacement therapy products (NRT), and snus in the event of quitting smoking, in a society where snus use is common.

METHODS

Using data from an online survey of 4073 smokers from 2019 to 2021, we calculated predicted probabilities of smokers' being open, undecided, and not open to use e-cigarettes, snus, and NRT in the event they should quit smoking.

RESULTS

Among daily smokers, the probability of being open to use e-cigarettes in the event of quitting smoking was .32. The corresponding probabilities for using snus and NRT were .22 and .19. Snus was the product with the highest probability of not being open (.60). NRT had the highest probability of being undecided (.39). Among smokers who had never used e-cigarettes or snus, the probabilities of being open were .13 for e-cigarettes, .02 for snus and .11 for NRT.

CONCLUSIONS

In a snus-friendly norm climate where smokers have traditionally used snus as an alternative to cigarettes, the probability of using e-cigarettes in the event of smoking cessation was higher compared to both snus and NRT. However, among smokers who had never used e-cigarettes or snus, the likelihood of being open to use of NRT was similar to e-cigarettes, and higher than snus, which suggests that NRT may still play a role in smoking cessation.

IMPLICATIONS

In a snus-prevalent country in the endgame phase of the cigarette epidemic, where robust infrastructure for tobacco control in combination with the availability of snus has reduced smoking to a minimum, the remaining smokers seem to prefer e-cigarettes to snus if they should quit smoking. This indicates that availability of several nicotine alternatives might increase the likelihood of a future product replacement within the small group of remaining smokers.

What drives public perceptions of e-cigarettes? A mixed-methods study exploring reasons behind adults' perceptions of e-cigarettes in Northern England

BACKGROUND

Despite growing evidence that e-cigarettes are likely less harmful than cigarettes, perceptions of equal or more harm have increased worldwide. This study aimed to identify the most common reasons behind adults' perceptions of the (i) relative harm of e-cigarettes compared with cigarettes and (ii) effectiveness of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation.

METHODS

Adults (N = 1646) from Northern England were recruited through online panels from December-March 2017/2018, using quota sampling to guarantee socio-demographic representativeness. Qualitative content analysis of open-ended responses was performed with codes representing reasons for a given perception about e-cigarettes. Percentages of participants who gave each reason for each perception were calculated.

RESULTS

823 (49.9%) participants agreed that e-cigarettes were less harmful than cigarettes, 283 (17.1%) disagreed, and 540 (32.8%) were undecided. The most common reasons for agreeing that e-cigarettes were less harmful than cigarettes were that they produce no smoke (29.8%) and fewer toxins (28.9%). Those who disagreed were most concerned about a perceived lack of trustworthy research (23.7%) and safety issues (20.8%). Lacking knowledge (50.4%) was the most common reason for being undecided. 815 (49.5%) of participants agreed that e-cigarettes were an effective smoking cessation aid, 216 (13.2%) disagreed, and 615 (37.4%) were undecided. The most common reasons participants gave for agreeing were related to e-cigarettes being successful smoking replacements (50.3%) and advice from family, friends or health professionals (20.0%). Respondents who disagreed were most concerned about e-cigarettes being addictive (34.3%) and containing nicotine (15.3%). Lacking knowledge (45.2%) was the most common reason for being undecided.

CONCLUSIONS

Negative perceptions of e-cigarette harm were driven by concerns about a perceived lack of research and safety issues. Adults who viewed e-cigarettes as ineffective for smoking cessation feared that they perpetuate nicotine addiction. Campaigns and guidelines that address these concerns may help promote informed perceptions.

A Qualitative Analysis of the Experiences of People Who Resumed Smoking Following Exclusive Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems Use

INTRODUCTION

For electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) to reduce harms caused by smoking, people who smoke must be able to switch to exclusive ENDS use without subsequently returning to smoking. Identifying factors prompting a return to smoking among former exclusive ENDS users is crucial, yet few qualitative studies have probed experiences of this process.

AIMS AND METHODS

We conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 20 people (seven indigenous Māori and 13 non-Māori) who smoked tobacco at least weekly, had smoked at least 100 cigarettes in their lifetime, and reported using ENDS to stop smoking cigarettes for at least 30 days (ideally, within the preceding 6 months). We explored their experiences of ENDS use, probed critical return-to-smoking settings and triggers, and analyzed strategies that could promote sustained smoking abstinence. We managed data using NVivo12 and used a reflexive thematic analysis approach to interpret the transcripts.

RESULTS

We identified three themes that explained participants' experiences. ENDS performed a functional role by mimicking some aspects of smoking. Yet participants experienced ENDS as inauthentic and unsatisfying across physical, social, and affectual domains, including in the most common return-to-smoking situations. Furthermore, fewer constraints on ENDS usage led participants to feel they could perpetuate addiction and risk of harm.

CONCLUSIONS

Return to smoking reflected two factors: ENDS' failure to replicate core smoking attributes that remained appealing, and the burden of self-regulation required when using ENDS. Understanding and informing people about the challenges involved in transitioning to ENDS, beyond obtaining sufficient nicotine, could help support informed ENDS use and may potentially prevent people returning to smoking.

IMPLICATIONS

Our study extends our understanding of the satisfaction people seek when attempting to transition from smoking to exclusive ENDS use, and how ENDS' failure to replicate that satisfaction, in addition to uncertainty about ENDS-related risks, contributes to smoking resumption. Satisfaction went beyond nicotine delivery, and included affective experiences, maintenance of rituals, rewards, and social connections. Conceptualizing satisfaction more broadly could support a richer understanding of factors that prompt return to smoking. People might manage challenges more effectively if they understood these before attempting to switch from smoking to ENDS, and if they are advised to monitor and regulate their ENDS use. Educational resources and behavioral support could provide more guidance on these points.

Electronic Cigarettes and Asthma: What Do We Know So Far?

Electronic cigarettes (EC) are a novel product, marketed as an alternative to tobacco cigarette. Its effects on human health have not been investigated widely yet, especially in specific populations such as patients with asthma. With this review, we use the existing literature in order to answer four crucial questions concerning: (1) ECs' role in the pathogenesis of asthma; (2) ECs' effects on lung function and airway inflammation in patients with asthma; (3) ECs' effects on asthma clinical characteristics in asthmatics who use it regularly; and (4) ECs' effectiveness as a smoking cessation tool in these patients. Evidence suggests that many EC compounds might contribute to the pathogenesis of asthma. Lung function seems to deteriorate by the use of EC in this population, while airway inflammation alters, with the aggravation of T-helper-type-2 (Th2) inflammation being the most prominent but not the exclusive effect. EC also seems to worsen asthma symptoms and the rate and severity of exacerbations in asthmatics who are current vapers, whilst evidence suggests that its effectiveness as a smoking cessation tool might be limited. Asthmatic patients should avoid using EC.

User pathways of e-cigarette use to support long term tobacco smoking relapse prevention: a qualitative analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

E-cigarettes are the most popular consumer choice for support with smoking cessation in the United Kingdom. However, there are concerns that long-term e-cigarette use may sustain concurrent tobacco smoking or lead to relapse to smoking in ex-smokers. We aimed to explore vaping trajectories, establishing e-cigarette users' perspectives on continued e-cigarette use in relation to smoking relapse or abstinence.

DESIGN

Qualitative longitudinal study collecting detailed subjective data at baseline and ~12 months later.

SETTING

United Kingdom.

PARTICIPANTS

E-cigarette users (n = 37) who self-reported that they had used e-cigarettes to stop smoking at baseline.

MEASUREMENTS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews (face-to-face or telephone) collected self-reported patterns of e-cigarette use. Thematic analysis of transcripts and a mapping approach of individual pathways enabled exploration of self-reported experiences, motives, resources, and environmental and social influences on vaping and any concurrent tobacco smoking.

FINDINGS

Three broad participant pathways were identified: 'maintainer' (e-cigarette use and not smoking), 'abstainer' (neither smoking nor using e-cigarettes), and 'relapser' (dual-using, or relapsed back to tobacco smoking only). In each pathway, individual experiences with vaping nicotine appeared to play an important role and appeared to be related to psychological and social factors. A social context supportive of vaping was important for the maintainers, as was a belief in the need to overcome nicotine addiction for the abstainers, and dislike of the 'vaping culture' expressed by some in the relapser group. Dual-users held beliefs such as a need for cigarettes at time of acute stress that affirmed dependence on tobacco.

CONCLUSIONS

In a sample of UK e-cigarette users who report having used e-cigarettes to quit smoking, a social context that supports continued vaping was perceived to be helpful in preventing relapse to smoking.

Responsibility, normalisation and negotiations of harm: E-cigarette users' opinions and experiences of vaping around children

BACKGROUND

Concern about youth uptake of vaping is widespread. Regulation and education campaigns aim to protect children from initiating use, yet it is likely that children will be primarily influenced by the behaviour of people in their immediate environment. This is the first known study exploring e-cigarette users' views and reported experiences of vaping around children.

METHODS

Following informed consent, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 40 adults who had attempted to give up smoking by vaping. Participants were recruited from England as part of a wider study into e-cigarette use trajectories and smoking relapse (ECtra study). Data were extracted from 28 interviews where participants had spontaneously discussed vaping around children. Extracted data were analysed thematically and situated in previous analysis of vaping identity which distinguished between recreational and medicinal vapers.

RESULTS

Vaping behaviour around children was in part a habituated replication of smoking norms but also guided by broad vaping identity; recreational users were more permissive and medicinal users more secretive. Vaping in the home appeared to be determined by caregivers' need to reconcile vaping behaviour so that it was congruent with parental identity as a responsible caregiver. Participant perspectives reflected existing moral discourses applied to e-cigarettes around the use of "harm reduction for smokers" and "potential for youth harm".

CONCLUSION

Vaping is likely to be role modelled within the community and home despite attempts by e-cigarette users to conceal the behaviour. The ambivalent contextualisation of e-cigarettes means that e-cigarette users may lack a clear narrative to draw on when discussing vaping with children. Public health guidance for vaping around children could be helpful, but to be most effective, should take into consideration users' vaping identity.

Nicotine replacement treatment, e-cigarettes and an online behavioural intervention to reduce relapse in recent ex-smokers: a multinational four-arm RCT

BACKGROUND

Relapse remains an unresolved issue in smoking cessation. Extended stop smoking medication use can help, but uptake is low and several behavioural relapse prevention interventions have been found to be ineffective. However, opportunistic 'emergency' use of fast-acting nicotine replacement treatment or electronic cigarettes may be more attractive and effective, and an online behavioural Structured Planning and Prompting Protocol has shown promise. The present trial aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these two interventions.

DESIGN

A randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

English stop smoking services and Australian quitlines, Australian social media and St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Fitzroy, VIC.

PARTICIPANTS

Ex-smokers abstinent for at least 4 weeks, with some participants in Australia also recruited from 1 week post quit date. The planned sample size was 1400, but the trial was curtailed when 235 participants were recruited.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomised in permuted blocks of random sizes to (1) oral nicotine replacement treatment/electronic cigarettes to use if at risk of relapse, plus static text messages (n = 60), (2) the Structured Planning and Prompting Protocol and interactive text messages (n = 57), (3) oral nicotine replacement treatment/electronic cigarettes plus the Structured Planning and Prompting Protocol with interactive text messages (n = 58) or (4) usual care plus static text messages (n = 59).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Owing to delays in study set-up and recruitment issues, the study was curtailed and the primary outcome was revised. The original objective was to determine whether or not the two interventions, together or separately, reduced relapse rates at 12 months compared with usual care. The revised primary objective was to determine whether or not number of interventions received (i.e. none, one or two) affects relapse rate at 6 months (not biochemically validated because of study curtailment). Relapse was defined as smoking on at least 7 consecutive days, or any smoking in the last month at final follow-up for both the original and curtailed outcomes. Participants with missing outcome data were included as smokers. Secondary outcomes included sustained abstinence (i.e. no more than five cigarettes smoked over the 6 months), nicotine product preferences (e.g. electronic cigarettes or nicotine replacement treatment) and Structured Planning and Prompting Protocol coping strategies used. Two substudies assessed reactions to interventions quantitatively and qualitatively. The trial statistician remained blinded until analysis was complete.

RESULTS

The 6-month relapse rates were 60.0%, 43.5% and 49.2% in the usual-care arm, one-intervention arm and the two-intervention arm, respectively (p = 0.11). Sustained abstinence rates were 41.7%, 54.8% and 50.9%, respectively (p = 0.17). Electronic cigarettes were chosen more frequently than nicotine replacement treatment in Australia (71.1% vs. 29.0%; p = 0.001), but not in England (54.0% vs. 46.0%; p = 0.57). Of participants allocated to nicotine products, 23.1% were using them daily at 6 months. The online intervention received positive ratings from 63% of participants at 6 months, but the majority of participants (72%) completed one assessment only. Coping strategies taught in the Structured Planning and Prompting Protocol were used with similar frequency in all study arms, suggesting that these are strategies people had already acquired. Only one participant used the interactive texting, and interactive and static messages received virtually identical ratings.

LIMITATIONS

The inability to recruit sufficient participants resulted in a lack of power to detect clinically relevant differences. Self-reported abstinence was not biochemically validated in the curtailed trial, and the ecological momentary assessment substudy was perceived by some as an intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Recruiting recent ex-smokers into an interventional study proved problematic. Both interventions were well received and safe. Combining the interventions did not surpass the effects of each intervention alone. There was a trend in favour of single interventions reducing relapse, but it did not reach significance and there are reasons to interpret the trend with caution.

FUTURE WORK

Further studies of both interventions are warranted, using simpler study designs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN11111428.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 68. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Funding was also provided by the National Health and Medical Research Council, Canberra, ACT, Australia (NHMRC APP1095880). Public Health England provided the funds to purchase the nicotine products in England.

Perception of the relative harm of electronic cigarettes compared to cigarettes amongst US adults from 2013 to 2016: analysis of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study data

BACKGROUND

Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have been characterised as significantly less harmful than cigarettes by many health agencies and regulators globally. In this study, we examined to what extent perceived relative harms of e-cigarettes compared to cigarettes have changed in the USA.

METHODS

We analysed the data from the longitudinal and nationally representative, Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study to assess the relative perceived harm of e-cigarettes amongst US adults between 2013 and 2016.

RESULTS

The proportion of US adults who correctly perceived e-cigarettes as less harmful than cigarettes decreased each year from 41.1% (CI 40.1-42.1%) in 2013-2014, 31.5% (CI 30.8-32.2%) in 2014-2015 and 25.3% (CI 24.6-26.0%) in 2015-2016. Concurrently, the proportion of US adults who perceived e-cigarettes as equally, or more, harmful than cigarettes increased from 53.7% (CI 52.3-55.1%), 64.9% (CI 63.6-66.2%) to 72.7% (CI 71.5-73.9%) respectively. The proportion of US adults who held negative relative harm perceptions of e-cigarettes increased regardless of current smoking or vaping status by 24.6% and 29.6% respectively within 3 years. In Wave 3, the proportion of current smokers who perceived the relative harm of e-cigarettes as less harmful was lower at 29.3% (CI 28.2-30.4%) compared to current e-cigarette users at 43.5% (CI 40.3-46.7%). Former smokers who used e-cigarettes and believed that they were equally, or more, harmful than cigarettes in 2014-2015 had significantly higher rates of smoking relapse in the following year, 29% and 37% (p < 2.2e-16), respectively, compared to those with positive relative harm perceptions who reported relapse rates of 19%.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, the proportion of US adults who incorrectly perceived e-cigarettes as equal to, or more, harmful than cigarettes increased steadily regardless of smoking or vaping status. Current adult smokers appear to be poorly informed about the relative risks of e-cigarettes yet have potentially the most to gain from transitioning to these products. The findings of this study emphasise the urgent need to accurately communicate the reduced relative risk of e-cigarettes compared to continued cigarette smoking and clearly differentiate absolute and relative harms. Further research is required to elucidate why the relative harm of e-cigarettes is misunderstood and continues to deteriorate.

E-cigarettes and Smoking Cessation in the United States According to Frequency of E-cigarette Use and Quitting Duration: Analysis of the 2016 and 2017 National Health Interview Surveys

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to examine the association between electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use and smoking cessation among US adults. Duration of smoking cessation was taken into consideration because e-cigarette awareness and use were low in the United States before 2010.

METHODS

A pooled analysis of the 2016 and 2017 National Health Interview Surveys on current (N = 9935) and former smokers (N = 14 754) was performed. Adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs), for sociodemographic factors, were calculated.

FINDINGS

Current e-cigarette use was reported by 10.5% (95% CI = 9.8% to 11.3%) of current smokers and 4.5% (95% CI = 4.0% to 5.0%) of former smokers. Prevalence was high in former smokers of less than 1 year (16.8%, 95% CI = 13.9% to 20.2%), 1-3 years (15.0%, 95% CI = 13.0% to 17.3%), and 4-6 years (10.5%, 95% CI = 8.6% to 12.7%), and very low in former smokers of more than 6 years (0.7%, 95% CI = 0.5% to 0.9%). Similar patterns were observed for daily e-cigarette use. Current e-cigarette use was negatively associated with being a former smoker when quit duration was ignored (aPR = 0.64, 95% CI = 0.59 to 0.69) but was positively associated with being a former smoker of less than 1 year (aPR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.12 to 1.84) and 1-3 years (aPR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.42). Daily e-cigarette use was not associated with being a former smoker when quit duration was ignored but was positively associated with being a former smoker of less than 1 year (aPR = 3.44, 95% CI = 2.63 to 4.49), 1-3 years (aPR = 2.51, 95% CI = 2.13 to 2.95), and 4-6 years (aPR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.49 to 2.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Daily e-cigarette use is strongly associated with recent smoking cessation (≤6 years) among US adults. Frequency of e-cigarette use and smoking cessation duration are important parameters when analyzing the effects of e-cigarettes in population surveys.

IMPLICATIONS

There is controversy on whether e-cigarettes promote or prevent smoking cessation. This study presents a detailed analysis of the association between e-cigarette use and smoking cessation in the United States considering frequency of e-cigarette use and duration of smoking cessation. The latter was considered appropriate because e-cigarette awareness and use were low in the United States before 2010. Daily e-cigarette use is strongly associated with recent (≤6 years) smoking cessation in the United States. Both frequency of e-cigarette use and duration of smoking cessation are important factors in determining the effects of e-cigarettes in population studies.

A Qualitative Exploration of Consumers' Perceived Impacts, Behavioural Reactions, and Future Reflections of the EU Tobacco Products Directive (2017) as Applied to Electronic Cigarettes

BACKGROUND

Electronic cigarette regulations included in the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD), Article 20, implemented in Europe by May 2017, aimed to improve safety for e-cigarette consumers, and prevent uptake among non-smokers, particularly young people. Before implementation, there were significant concerns from consumers, industry, and some in the scientific community about the potential negative impact of the TPD on people using e-cigarettes to remain abstinent from smoking. To date, there is limited evidence on how the TPD has affected consumers. This study aimed to add insight into how consumers perceived and experienced the regulations.

METHODS

Qualitative data, collected between March 2018 and March 2019, relating to participant views of the TPD were extracted from 160 interviews/extended surveys of e-cigarette consumers as part of a wider study into e-cigarette use trajectories (ECtra study). Data were thematically analysed.

RESULTS

Awareness of the TPD among consumers was not universal. Participants' smoking behaviour did not appear to be influenced by the legislation. Participants were reassured by manufacturing regulations and requirements for ingredients labels. Participants responded negatively to changes perceived to cause inconvenience and extra plastic waste. The product restrictions prompted some participants to purchase non-compliant products illegally, potentially putting their safety at risk.

CONCLUSIONS

E-cigarette regulation should focus on ensuring product safety. Raising awareness of the TPD among consumers and smokers could be beneficial.

Associations between vaping and relapse to smoking: preliminary findings from a longitudinal survey in the UK

BACKGROUND

Most smokers attempting to quit relapse. There is little evidence whether the use of e-cigarettes ('vaping') increases or decreases relapse. This study aimed to assess 1) whether vaping predicted relapse among ex-smokers, and 2) among ex-smokers who vaped, whether vaping characteristics predicted relapse.

METHODS

Longitudinal web-based survey of smokers, recent ex-smokers and vapers in the UK, baseline in May/June 2016 (n = 3334), follow-up in September 2017 (n = 1720). Those abstinent from smoking ≥ 2 months at baseline and followed up were included. Aim 1: Relapse during follow-up was regressed onto baseline vaping status, age, gender, income, nicotine replacement therapy use and time quit smoking (n = 374). Aim 2: Relapse was regressed onto baseline vaping frequency, device type, nicotine strength and time quit smoking (n = 159).

RESULTS

Overall, 39.6% relapsed. Compared with never use (35.9%), past/ever (45.9%; adjOR = 1.13; 95% CI, 0.61-2.07) and daily vaping (34.5%; adjOR = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.61-1.89) had similar odds of relapse, for non-daily vaping evidence of increased relapse was inconclusive (65.0%; adjOR = 2.45; 95% CI, 0.85-7.08). Among vapers, non-daily vaping was associated with higher relapse than daily vaping (adjOR = 3.88; 95% CI, 1.10-13.62). Compared with modular devices (18.9% relapse), tank models (45.6%; adjOR = 3.63; 95% CI, 1.33-9.95) were associated with increased relapse; evidence was unclear for disposable/cartridge refillable devices (41.9%; adjOR = 2.83; 95% CI, 0.90-8.95). Nicotine strength had no clear association with relapse.

CONCLUSION

Relapse to smoking is likely to be more common among ex-smokers vaping infrequently or using less advanced devices. Research into the effects of vaping on relapse needs to consider vaping characteristics.

Indicators of cigarette smoking dependence and relapse in former smokers who vape compared with those who do not: findings from the 2016 International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

It has been proposed that many smokers switch to vaping because their nicotine addiction makes this their only viable route out of smoking. We compared indicators of prior and current cigarette smoking dependence and of relapse in former smokers who were daily users of nicotine vaping products ('vapers') or who were not vaping at the time of survey ('non-vapers').

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey-based comparison between vaping and non-vaping former smokers, including a weighted logistic regression of vaping status onto predictor variables, adjusting for covariates specified below.

SETTING

United States, Canada, Australia and England.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 1070 people aged 18+ years from the 2016 International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Smoking and Vaping Wave 1 Survey who reported having ever been daily smokers but who stopped less than 2 years ago and who were currently vapers or non-vapers.

MEASUREMENTS

Dependent variable was current vaping status. Predictor variables were self-reported: (1) smoking within 5 minutes of waking and usual daily cigarette consumption, both assessed retrospectively; (2) current perceived addiction to smoking, urges to smoke and confidence in staying quit. Covariates: country, sample sources, sex, age group, ethnicity, income, education, current nicotine replacement therapy use and time since quitting.

FINDINGS

Vapers were more likely than non-vapers to report: (1) having smoked within 5 minutes of waking [34.3 versus 15.9%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 3.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.99, 7.03), χ2  = 16.92, P < 0.001]; having smoked > 10 cigarettes/day (74.4 versus 47.2%, aOR = 4.39, 95% CI = 2.22, 8.68), χ2  = 18.18, P < 0.001); (2) perceiving themselves to be still very addicted to smoking (41.3 versus 26.2%, aOR = 2.89, 95% CI = 1.58, 5.30, χ2  = 11.87, P < 0.001) and feeling extremely confident about staying quit (62.1 versus 36.6%, aOR = 3.22, 95% CI = 1.86, 5.59, χ2  = 17.36, P < 0.001). Vapers were not more likely to report any urges to smoke than non-vapers (27.7 versus 38.8%, aOR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.44, 1.65, χ2  = 0.21, P = 0.643).

CONCLUSIONS

While former smokers who currently vape nicotine daily report higher levels of cigarette smoking dependence pre- and post-cessation compared with former smokers who are current non-vapers, they report greater confidence in staying quit and similar strength of urges to smoke.

'I Felt Welcomed in Like They're a Little Family in There, I Felt Like I Was Joining a Team or Something': Vape Shop Customers' Experiences of E-Cigarette Use, Vape Shops and the Vaping Community

Background: Specialist electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) shops, known as vape shops, provide access to a less harmful alternative to smoking. This study aimed to understand customers’ experiences of vaping and vape shops, and the extent to which smoking cessation advice is and should be provided in these shops. Methods: We conducted telephone interviews with 22 customers recruited in vape shops in the East Midlands region of England. Interviews explored participants’ smoking histories, reasons for using e-cigarettes, the role of vape shops in their e-cigarette use, and whether smoking cessation was discussed in vape shops. Interviews were analysed following framework approach principles. Results: Most respondents regarded e-cigarettes as a quitting tool and reported very positive experiences of vaping. Vape shops were central to participants’ positive experiences, in that they provided access to a wide variety of high-quality products and reliable product information and advice. The shop staff engendered a sense of loyalty in customers which, together with the community of other vapers, created a network that helped to support e-cigarette use. Vape shops were not regarded as a setting in which cessation advice was generally provided but were acknowledged as potentially appropriate places to provide quitting support. Conclusions: Vape shops have the potential to play an important role in tobacco harm reduction, which could be increased if their service model were to extend to help smokers to quit.

The unique contribution of e-cigarettes for tobacco harm reduction in supporting smoking relapse prevention

BACKGROUND

We have little understanding of how vapers use e-cigarettes beyond cessation. E-cigarettes may have a role to play in reducing the health-related harms of tobacco smoking, through not only assisting smoking cessation attempts but also supporting long-term abstinence from smoking. However, there are fears that vaping may lead to the 'renormalisation' of smoking type behaviours. This study aimed to explore patterns of use and reported experiences of vapers quitting smoking using an e-cigarette in relation to long-term smoking status (abstinence or relapse).

METHODS

A purposive sample of 40 UK vapers was matched to a sampling frame of demographic characteristics from a representative sample of UK quitters. Following full informed consent, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted. Data were thematically analysed by two members of the research team. Final thematic analysis was verified and agreed by consensus.

RESULTS

The sample self-reported long histories of tobacco use and multiple previous quit attempts which had eventually resulted in relapse back to smoking, although a small but important group had never before attempted to quit. Initiating e-cigarette use was experienced as a revelation for some, who were quickly able to fully switch to using e-cigarettes as an alternative to tobacco smoking. For others, periods of dual use or smoking relapse combined with attempts at vaping that were not initially satisfactory. Many of these chose a cheaper 'cig-a-like' device which they found to be inadequate. Experimentation with different devices and different setups, over time, resulted in some 'sliding' rather than switching to vaping. This involved periods of 'dual use'. Some settled on patterns of vaping as a direct substitute of previous tobacco smoking, whereas others reported 'grazing' patterns of vaping throughout the day that were perceived to support tobacco smoking abstinence.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data demonstrates that e-cigarettes may be a unique harm reduction innovation for smoking relapse prevention. E-cigarettes meet the needs of some ex-smokers by substituting physical, psychological, social, cultural and identity-related aspects of tobacco addiction. Some vapers reported that they found vaping pleasurable and enjoyable-being more than a substitute but actually preferred, over time, to tobacco smoking. This clearly suggests that vaping is a viable long-term substitute for smoking, with substantial implications for tobacco harm reduction.