Beliefs, Attitudes, and Confidence to Deliver Electronic Cigarette Counseling among 1023 Chinese Physicians in 2018

E-cigarette or vaping-associated lung injury (EVALI): a review of international case reports from outside the United States of America

INTRODUCTION

E-cigarette or vaping-associated lung injury has been reported extensively throughout the United States without a corresponding number of international cases. Cannabinoid-based products have been implicated in the majority of cases.

OBJECTIVES

To collate published reports of E-cigarette or vaping-associated lung injury outside the United States and to identify the reasons behind the discrepancy in reported cases between the United States and the international community.

METHODS

PubMed and Healthcare Databases Advanced Search were used to identify published case reports of E-cigarette or vaping-associated lung injury prior to February 2021 using the search terms "e-cigarette", "e-cigarettes", "vaping", "vape" and, "lung injury", "pulmonary", "respiratory". Cases occurring in the United States were excluded. Non-United States case reports were excluded if they did not meet the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention "probable case" criteria. This requires use of a vaping device within 90 days of symptom onset, the presence of pulmonary infiltrates on plain film chest radiography or ground glass opacities on computerised tomography, clinical suspicion that infection was not the underlying cause of lung injury, and the absence of other plausible medical processes to account for the presentation. Patient demographics, nature of exposure, symptomatology and outcome were compared to 125 cases from three regional United States based case series, which were chosen on the basis of having complete data for these comparative factors.

RESULTS

Seventeen international cases from 13 countries were identified for analysis. There was a male predominance in both non-United States and United States cohorts (76% vs 58-83%), with a marginally higher median patient age in non-United States cases (31 vs 27, 19, 27 years). Reported use of nicotine/flavoured e-liquids was more common in non-United States cases (100% vs 58-67%), and use of cannabinoid-based products was less common (24% vs 78-92%). The most common symptoms across all cohorts were shortness of breath (76% vs 85-91%), cough (59% vs 78-83%) and fever (47% vs 78-83%). The majority of patients were hypoxic (76% vs 69-86%) and required hospital admission (88% vs 90-94%). Fewer of the non-United States patients required intensive care admission (24% vs 55-67%) though their median length of stay was longer (15 days vs 5, 6, 7 days).

DISCUSSION

Uniformity amongst non-United States cases in regards to nicotine based and/or flavoured e-liquid exposure may underestimate the role of these substances in e-cigarette or vaping-associated lung injury. This is consistent with prior United States based research demonstrating increased presentations to emergency departments prior to the recognised "outbreak" of e-cigarette or vaping-associated lung injury at a time of increased nicotine based e-liquid uptake. A longer length of hospital stay, lower rate of intensive care admission and a higher rate of bronchoscopy in the non-United States cohort could be indicative of clinician inexperience internationally. It is unclear why the non-United States cases also had a lower incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms however this may also be explained by poorer diagnostic awareness.

CONCLUSIONS

E-cigarette or vaping-associated lung injury is not limited to cannabinoid-based products. Apparent similarities in patient demographics, clinical features, and clinical course between non-United States and United States cases raise concern for underreporting of E-cigarette or vaping- associated lung injury internationally.

General practitioners' knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and practices surrounding the prescription of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation: a mixed-methods systematic review

BACKGROUND

General practitioners (GPs) play an important role in providing patients who smoke with health information, support and treatment to encourage them to quit smoking. Despite conflicting evidence on the effectiveness of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) as a smoking cessation aid, there is growing interest in the role e-cigarettes might play as an alternative to smoking tobacco. This systematic review aims to synthesise evidence from qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies of the knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and social norms of GPs with respect to the use of e-cigarettes as smoking cessation aids.

METHODS

This study adhered to the PRISMA guidelines. Studies from MEDLINE, CINAHL, SCOPUS, PsycINFO, EMBASE and grey literature were searched. Two independent reviewers screened abstracts and full-text articles to identify studies that met the inclusion criteria. A data extraction form was used to extract relevant data from included papers and were quality appraised using the MMAT checklist. A PRISMA flow diagram was used to record the flow of papers and reasons for exclusion. Studies were included if they collected quantitative, qualitative or mixed methods data to determine knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and social norms of GPs for use of e-cigarettes as smoking cessation aids.

RESULTS

A total of 4056 abstracts were screened and 25 articles were included. Our findings showed that GPs had mixed views on recommending e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation aid. Some GPs were optimistic and had recommended e-cigarettes to their patients. Others were reluctant and disagreed that e-cigarettes are an effective method to quit smoking. Most GPs lacked knowledge and confidence in having discussions with patients around e-cigarette safety and efficacy as smoking cessation alternatives.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review shows there are mixed views on e-cigarettes as smoking cessation aids. Clear guidance on the role of e-cigarettes is needed to inform and upskill GPs about e-cigarettes for smoking cessation.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42021227612.

Beliefs and perceptions of electronic cigarettes among medical staff in respiratory departments of Fujian Province, China, in 2021

INTRODUCTION

Due to the popularity of e-cigarettes, more and more patients ask about e-cigarettes, and it is particularly important to understand doctors' beliefs and perceptions on e-cigarettes. The aim was to evaluate the belief and perception of electronic cigarettes among medical staff in the respiratory department of medical institutions located in Fujian Province.

METHODS

The electronic questionnaires were conveyed to the medical staff of the respiratory department in Fujian Province during March to April 2021. Descriptive statistics were calculated for all questions, and the relationship between relevant factors and the perception of e-cigarette-related statements was analyzed by logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Among 1028 medical staff in the respiratory departments of Fujian Province, 90.5% of medical staff agreed that electronic cigarettes are harmful to the human body; 61.4% of medical staff agreed that e-cigarettes cannot be regarded as a type of smoking cessation treatment; 71.7% of medical staff agreed that e-cigarettes could be a 'gateway' to other tobacco use; and 69.2% of medical staff agreed that electronic cigarettes are in 'Three No' states. The multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the respondents' perception of 'e-cigarettes cannot be regarded as a type of smoking cessation treatment' were related to gender, professional title and whether they participated in the cessation clinic.

CONCLUSIONS

The medical staff of the respiratory department in Fujian Province put more emphasis on the adverse effects of e-cigarettes on health, but lack the cognition of the effect of e-cigarette smoking cessation. In order to better carry out smoking cessation work, it is necessary to strengthen the training of respiratory medical staff at all levels of medical institutions on e-cigarette knowledge.

Screening and counseling for nicotine use in youth with diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To assess current practice patterns and identify knowledge gaps among pediatric endocrinologists in the United States regarding screening and counseling for combustible tobacco and e-cigarette use in youth with diabetes.

INTRODUCTION

Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are the most used tobacco product among adolescents and may be associated with an increased risk of progression to combustible cigarette smoking, cardiovascular disease, and stroke. Diabetes mellitus is a known risk factor for cardiovascular disease, and nicotine products can increase this risk. We sought to assess current practice patterns and identify knowledge gaps among pediatric endocrinologists in the United States regarding screening and counseling for combustible tobacco and e-cigarette use in youth with diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted an anonymous, online-based survey of Pediatric Endocrine Society members who provide care to youth with Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes. The survey collected information about provider demographics and smoking habits, knowledge and attitudes regarding screening and counseling for combustible tobacco and e-cigarette use, and current practice patterns.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 106 individuals of whom 64 reported providing care to youth with diabetes mellitus and ever asking about combustible tobacco or e-cigarette use. The majority of respondents were female, attending providers, and working in academic medical centers. None reported a history of formal training in e-cigarette counseling but recognized the harms of e-cigarette use. Nearly all (98%) who ever screen for nicotine use reported routinely screening for combustible tobacco use, while 18% never screen for e-cigarette use (p < 0.01). Over 80% of respondents reported feeling confident or very confident about discussing the harms of combustible tobacco, compared to 58% reporting the same confidence in discussing harms of e-cigarette use (p < 0.0001). Over 90% of respondents agreed that pediatric endocrinology providers should ask about nicotine use with over half agreeing that counseling reduces the risk of initiating nicotine product use, and 30% reported lack of change with counseling as a barrier to discussing nicotine use. Lack of visit time was the most reported barrier to discussing nicotine use. More providers cited lack of knowledge regarding e-cigarettes compared to combustible tobacco as a barrier to discussing its use.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric endocrinology providers recognize the harms of e-cigarette use, but more frequently ask about combustible tobacco use compared to e-cigarette use. This may be related to lower reported confidence and provider knowledge in counseling about e-cigarette use. Increased utilization of existing resources and expanding opportunities for providers to learn more about e-cigarettes may increase provider confidence and comfort in screening and counseling.

General practitioner knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and practices surrounding the prescription of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation: protocol for a mixed-method systematic review

Background

Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are being marketed to people who smoke (PWS) as a smoking cessation aid. GPs have an important role in providing patients with support to encourage them to quit smoking. The emergence and marketing of e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation alternative poses challenges to GPs in advising and supporting PWS to quit.

Aim

This systematic review aims to synthesise available evidence on the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of GPs about e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation aid.

Design & setting

Mixed-methods study review including quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies of GPs in primary care settings.

Method

MEDLINE, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Scopus, PsycINFO, and Embase databases will be searched to identify articles published between 1 January 2003 and 30 June 2021. A Google search will be conducted to identify grey literature. Two independent reviewers will screen abstracts for relevance and full-text studies. Articles will be appraised for quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) and a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews, and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) diagram will illustrate the flow of articles and reasons for exclusion. An evidence synthesis method will be employed and guided by the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB). A descriptive qualitative synthesis of the findings will be reported.

Conclusion

Findings will provide a synthesis of current evidence regarding the knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions among GPs of e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation aid. This information will be useful to guide future research on the needs of GPs in advising and supporting patients to quit smoking. It will also assist in the development of health policy and guidelines on the role and place of e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation aid.

An Evaluation of the Knowledge and Perceptions of Pharmacy Staff and Pre-Registration Students of E-Cigarettes Use: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacy staff are a trusted source of advice on the safe and appropriate use of medicines and devices. Retail pharmacies deliver smoking cessation services and sell e-cigarettes in the UK. This review asks 'what knowledge, experience and ability do staff have to support e-cigarette users to quit smoking'.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was undertaken drawn on predefined eligibility criteria and a comprehensive search strategy following the PRISMA guideline. Eligible papers reported survey-research published in English from 2015 to 2020. PubMed, Google Scholar, OVID, EMBASE and MEDLINE Databases were searched. No restrictions on study design or language were applied. Two reviewers independently screened for inclusion/exclusion and then extracted the relevant information from the articles for synthesis.

RESULTS

Of 12 potentially eligible full-text studies, 1 was a duplicate, 7 were excluded as per eligibility criteria. Four papers were finally included in this literature review. Two studies indicated that pharmacy staff are less confident in giving advice on e-cigarette use. Knowledge on the adverse effects of e-cigarettes compared to traditional smoking cessation aids remain unclear. In one study, 42% of community pharmacists did not believe that e-cigarettes could be used for smoking cessation. Three studies identified need for specific regulations and professional support. The overall certainty of the evidence is 'low' or 'very low', with moderate levels of bias.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacists may be well placed to implement e-cigarette smoking cessation interventions, but most practitioners lacked knowledge and ability to support these customers citing unclear risk of harm. Pharmacists felt secure in recommending traditional cessation tools. Further regulation, guidelines and training is needed. Findings may be less generalizable in countries where e-cigarettes are banned. Their extent of knowledge, experience and ability to support users of e-cigarettes within their community to quit smoking is lacking.