Parental Smoking and E-cigarette Use in Homes and Cars.
ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES:To determine how smoke-free and vape-free home and car policies differ for parents who are dual users of cigarettes and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), who only smoke cigarettes, or who only use e-cigarettes. To identify factors associated with not having smoke-free or vape-free policies and how often smoke-free advice is offered at pediatric offices. METHODS:Secondary analysis of 2017 parental interview data collected after their children's visit in 5 control practices participating in the Clinical Effort Against Secondhand Smoke Exposure trial. RESULTS:Most dual users had smoke-free home policies, yet fewer had a vape-free home policies (63.8% vs 26.3%; P < .01). Dual users were less likely than cigarette users to have smoke-free car (P < .01), vape-free home (P < .001), or vape-free car (P < .001) policies. Inside cars, dual users were more likely than cigarette users to report smoking (P < .001), e-cigarette use (P < .001), and e-cigarette use with children present (P < .001). Parental characteristics associated with not having smoke-free or vape-free home and car policies include smoking ?10 cigarettes per day, using e-cigarettes, and having a youngest child >10 years old. Smoke-free home and car advice was infrequently delivered. CONCLUSIONS:Parents may perceive e-cigarette aerosol as safe for children. Dual users more often had smoke-free policies than vape-free policies for the home. Dual users were less likely than cigarette-only smokers to report various child-protective measures inside homes and cars. These findings reveal important opportunities for intervention with parents about smoking and vaping in homes and cars.
Project description:BACKGROUND AND AIMS:Most e-cigarette users who also smoke combustible cigarettes (dual users) begin vaping to quit smoking, yet only a subset succeeds. We hypothesized that reinforcing characteristics of e-cigarettes (vaping reinforcement) would positively predict smoking cessation propensity (SCP) among dual users. DESIGN:Secondary analysis of cross-sectional baseline data from dual users in an ongoing smoking cessation trial. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis (EFA and CFA) created latent variables for vaping reinforcement and SCP. A structural equation modeling (SEM) approach was used to test the hypothesis. SETTING:United States. PARTICIPANTS:A national sample of dual users of combustible and electronic cigarettes who smoke and vape at least once per week (n = 2896) were enrolled (63% male; mean age = 29.9 years) into a randomized controlled trial in which they would receive either smoking cessation materials or no smoking cessation materials. MEASUREMENTS:Vaping reinforcement was indexed by vaping frequency (days/week vaping, times/day vaping, puffs/e-cigarette use), e-cigarette characteristics [numbers of modifications and tobacco or non-tobacco flavors, nicotine content (mg) and positive e-cigarette expectancies]. SCP was measured by items of confidence, commitment to being smoke-free, cessation motivation (contemplation ladder), change in cigarettes per day since beginning e-cigarette use and negative smoking expectancies. FINDINGS:Four factors emerged from the EFA: vaping propensity (vaping frequency, positive expectancies), vaping enthusiasm (e-cigarette modifications, using non-tobacco flavors, puffs per use), nicotine/tobacco flavor (nicotine strength, tobacco flavors) and SCP (negative expectancies about smoking, motivation to quit smoking, reduction in smoking). A CFA upheld the exploratory factor structure [root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.046, CFI = 0.91]. An SEM with the three vaping latent variables directly predicting SCP had good model fit (RMSEA = 0.030, CFI = 0.97) with a positive relationship of vaping propensity (0.509, P < 0.001), and small negative relationships of vaping enthusiasm (-0.158, P = 0.014) and nicotine/tobacco flavor (-0.230, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Among e-cigarette users who also smoke combustible cigarettes, frequent vaping combined with positive e-cigarette expectancies appears to predict greater smoking cessation propensity. However, vaping enthusiasm (measured by e-cigarette modifications, using non-tobacco flavors and puffs per use), higher nicotine content and use of tobacco flavored solution may reduce cessation propensity.
Project description:Although total cessation of nicotine and tobacco products would be most beneficial to improve public health, exclusive e-cigarette use has potential health benefits for smokers compared to cigarette smoking. This study investigated differences between dual users and exclusive e-cigarette users provide information to optimize health communication about smoking and vaping. A cross-sectional survey (n = 116) among 80 current, adult dual users and 36 current, adult-exclusive e-cigarette users was conducted in the Netherlands. The questionnaire assessed four clusters of factors: (1) Past and current smoking and vaping behavior, (2) product characteristics used, (3) attractiveness and reasons related to cigarettes and e-cigarettes, and (4) socio-cognitive factors regarding smoking, vaping, and not smoking or vaping. We used random forest-a machine learning algorithm-to identify distinguishing features between dual users and e-cigarette users. We are able to discern a dual user from an exclusive e-cigarette user with 86.2% accuracy based on seven factors: Social ties with other smokers, quantity of tobacco cigarettes smoked in the past (e-cigarette users) or currently (dual users), self-efficacy to not vape and smoke, unattractiveness of cigarettes, attitude towards e-cigarettes, barriers: accessibility of e-cigarettes, and intention to quit vaping (A). This combination of features provides information on how to improve health communication about smoking and vaping.
Project description:<h4>Introduction</h4>Despite increases in e-cigarette sales restrictions, support for sales restrictions and perceived impact on young adult use are unclear.<h4>Aims and methods</h4>We analyzed February-May 2020 data from a longitudinal study of 2159 young adults (ages 18-34; Mage = 24.75 ± 4.71; n = 550 past 30-day e-cigarette users) in six metropolitan areas (Atlanta, Boston, Minneapolis, Oklahoma City, San Diego, and Seattle). We examined support for e-cigarette sales restrictions and-among e-cigarette users-perceived impact of flavored vape product and all vape product sales restrictions on e-cigarette and cigarette use (and potential correlates; ie, e-cigarette/tobacco use, use-related symptoms/health concerns).<h4>Results</h4>About 24.2% of e-cigarette users (and 57.6% of nonusers) supported (strongly/somewhat) sales restrictions on flavored vape products; 15.1% of e-cigarette users (45.1% of nonusers) supported complete vape product sales restrictions. If restricted to tobacco flavors, 39.1% of e-cigarette users reported being likely (very/somewhat) to continue using e-cigarettes (30.5% not at all likely); 33.2% were likely to switch to cigarettes (45.5% not at all). Considering complete vape product sales restrictions, equal numbers (~39%) were likely versus not at all likely to switch to cigarettes. Greater policy support correlated with being e-cigarette nonusers (adjusted R2 [aR2] = .210); among users, correlates included fewer days of use and greater symptoms and health concerns (aR2 = .393). If such restrictions were implemented, those less likely to report continuing to vape or switching to cigarettes used e-cigarettes on fewer days, were never smokers, and indicated greater health concern (aR2 = .361).<h4>Conclusions</h4>While lower-risk users may be more positively impacted by such policies, other young adult user subgroups may not experience benefit.<h4>Implications</h4>Young adult e-cigarette users indicate low support for e-cigarette sales restrictions (both for flavored products and complete restrictions). Moreover, if vape product sales were restricted to tobacco flavors, 39.1% of users reported being likely to continue using e-cigarettes but 33.2% were likely to switch to cigarettes. If vape product sales were entirely restricted, e-cigarette users were equally likely to switch to cigarettes versus not (~40%). Those most likely to report positive impact of such policies being implemented were less frequent users, never smokers, and those with greater e-cigarette-related health concerns. This research should be considered in future tobacco control initiatives.
Project description:<h4>Introduction</h4>Identifying predictors of electronic nicotine product (ENP) cessation can inform ENP cessation interventions. High rates of cooccurring ENP and cigarette (dual) use and transitions between these products underscore the importance of considering cigarette smoking status when assessing and addressing ENP cessation.<h4>Aims and methods</h4>We analyzed waves 3 (W3) and 4 (W4) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study to identify (1) W3 socio-demographics, tobacco and ENP use characteristics, and psychosocial correlates of W3 cigarette smoking status (non-smoker, former, and current) among W3 adult ENP users, and (2) W3 predictors of W4 combined ENP and cigarette smoking abstinence relative to use of one or both products.<h4>Results</h4>At W3, 65.6% of ENP users concurrently smoked cigarettes. Adjusted multinomial regression results indicated that different W3 socio-demographics, tobacco and ENP use characteristics, and psychosocial correlates were significantly associated with distinct W3 cigarette use profiles. At W4, 9.9% of individuals were abstinent from both products. These individuals were less likely to: (1) be current smokers (vs. non-smokers) or be advised to quit using tobacco, compared with cigarette only or dual users, and (2) use ENPs daily or live in a household allowing ENP use, compared with ENP only or dual users (p < .05).<h4>Conclusions</h4>ENP cessation approaches need to be tailored to the distinct cigarette use profiles of ENP users. Dual users and daily ENP users may require more intensive interventions to achieve the cessation of both products. Supportive physical environments, such as home vape-free policies, may facilitate ENP cessation.<h4>Implications</h4>This analysis contributes to advancing the nascent literature on predictors of electronic nicotine product (ENP) cessation, which can guide the development of ENP cessation interventions by indicating which populations, psychosocial and environmental constructs, and cooccurring behaviors interventions should target. This research also highlights the importance of considering cigarette smoking status when designing ENP cessation interventions and defining intervention outcomes.
Project description:<h4>Aim</h4>To describe systemic nicotine exposure and subjective effects of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) in people who use both e-cigarettes and cigarettes (dual users), including within-subject comparisons of e-cigarette and cigarette use.<h4>Design</h4>Two-arm, counterbalanced cross-over study. Participants used their usual brand of e-cigarette or cigarette during a standardized session in a 2-week study.<h4>Setting</h4>Hospital research ward, San Francisco, CA, USA.<h4>Participants</h4>Thirty-six healthy (eight women, 28 men) participants.<h4>Measurements</h4>Plasma nicotine was analyzed by gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry; nicotine withdrawal, urge to smoke and vape, affective states, craving, satisfaction and psychological reward were measured by standardized questionnaires.<h4>Findings</h4>Compared with cigarettes, average maximum plasma nicotine concentration (C<sub>max</sub> ) was lower with e-cigarettes [6.1 ± 5.5 ng/ml, mean ± standard deviation (SD) versus 20.2 ± 11.1 ng/ml, P < 0.001] and time of maximal concentration (T<sub>max</sub> ) was longer (6.5 ± 5.4 versus 2.7 ± 2.4 minutes, P < 0.001). Use of both products resulted in a reduction in the severity of withdrawal symptoms, negative affect and urge to use either product. E-cigarettes were less rewarding and satisfying and reduced craving to a lesser degree than cigarettes. We were not able to detect any differences in withdrawal symptoms, affective states and urge to smoke cigarettes between e-cigarette and cigarette use.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Systemic nicotine exposure was, on average, lower with single use of e-cigarettes compared with cigarettes, and e-cigarettes were judged to be less satisfying and rewarding and reduced craving less than cigarettes.
Project description:To examine strict smoke-free home policies among smoking parents assessed in pediatric offices.We analyzed baseline parental survey data from 10 control practices in a national trial of pediatric office-based tobacco control interventions (Clinical Effort Against Secondhand Smoke Exposure, CEASE). We used logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations to examine factors associated with strict smoke-free home policies.Subjects were 952 parents who were current smokers. Just over half (54.3%) reported strict smoke-free home policies. Few reported being asked (19.9%) or advised (17.1%) regarding policies by pediatricians. Factors associated with higher odds of policies were child 5 years or younger (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.53, 3.86), nonblack race/ethnicity (aORs 2.17-2.60, 95% CIs 1.25-5.00), non-Medicaid (HMO/private (aOR 1.84, 95% CI 1.31, 2.58); self-pay/other aOR 1.76, 95% CI 1.12, 2.78); well-child versus sick child visit (aOR 1.61, 95% CI 1.11, 2.34), fewer than 10 cigarettes per day (aOR 1.80, 95% CI 1.31, 2.47), no other home smokers (aOR 1.68, 95% CI 1.26, 2.25), only father smoking (aOR 1.73, 95% CI 1.06, 2.83), and strict smoke-free car policy (aOR 3.51, 95% CI 2.19, 5.64).Nearly half of smoking parents did not have strict smoke-free home policies. Parents were less likely to report policies if they were heavier smokers, black, living with other smokers, or attending a sick child visit; if they did not have a young child or smoke-free car policy; if they had a child on Medicaid; and if anyone other than only the father smoked. Few pediatricians addressed or recommended strict smoke-free home policies in an office visit. The pediatric office encounter represents a currently missed opportunity to intervene regarding smoke-free homes, particularly for high-risk groups.
Project description:Exposure to e-cigarette communications (eg, advertisements, news and entertainment media, and interpersonal discussion) may influence support for smoke-free or vape-free policies. This study examined the sociodemographic correlates of self-reported exposure to e-cigarette communications and their relationships with support for restricting vaping and smoking in public venues.Online survey data was collected from a representative sample of US adults (n=1449) between October and December 2013 (mean age=50?years, 51% female, 8% African-American, 10% Hispanic, 6% other races) and weighted to match the US adult population. We fitted multiple regression models, adjusting for demographic variables, to examine associations between support for policies to restrict vaping and smoking in public venues and self-reported frequency of exposure to e-cigarette communications in the preceding month. We fitted separate models to assess associations between policy support and frequency of exposures weighted by whether each category of e-cigarette communications was perceived as positive or negative.Higher self-reported exposure to advertising (B=-0.022, p=0.006), other media (B=-0.022, p=0.043) and interpersonal discussion (B=-0.071, p<0.0005) perceived as positive were associated with lower support for vaping restrictions, adjusting for covariates. Exposure to e-cigarette communications was associated with lower support for smoking restrictions in bivariate analyses but was not significant after adjusting for covariates.Further research is needed to assess whether messages portraying e-cigarettes as a way to circumvent smoking restrictions from advertisements and other media are influencing public support for vape-free policies. These findings provide empirical evidence to inform the policy debate over regulating specific e-cigarette advertising claims.
Project description:To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of e-cigarettes, by comparing users of only e-cigarettes, smokers of only tobacco cigarettes and dual users.Prospective cohort study. We update previous 12-month findings and report the results of the 24-month follow-up.Direct contact and questionnaires by phone or via internet.Adults (30-75?years) were classified as: (1) tobacco smokers, if they smoked ?1 tobacco cigarette/day, (2) e-cigarette users, if they inhaled ?50 puffs/week of any type of e-cigarette and (3) dual users, if they smoked tobacco cigarettes and also used e-cigarettes. Carbon monoxide levels were tested in 50% of those declaring tobacco smoking abstinence. Hospital discharge data were used to validate possibly related serious adverse events in 46.0% of the sample.Sustained abstinence from tobacco cigarettes and/or e-cigarettes after 24?months, the difference in the number of tobacco cigarettes smoked daily between baseline and 24?months, possibly related serious adverse events.Data at 24?months were available for 229 e-cigarette users, 480 tobacco smokers and 223 dual users (overall response rate 68.8%). Of the e-cigarette users, 61.1% remained abstinent from tobacco (while 23.1% and 26.0% of tobacco-only smokers and dual users achieved tobacco abstinence). The rate (18.8%) of stopping use of either product (tobacco and/or e-cigarettes) was not higher for e-cigarette users compared with tobacco smokers or dual users. Self-rated health and adverse events were similar between all groups. Among those continuing to smoke, there were no differences in the proportion of participants reducing tobacco cigarette consumption by 50% or more, the average daily number of cigarettes and the average self-rated health by baseline group. Most dual users at baseline abandoned e-cigarettes and continued to smoke tobacco. Those who continued dual using or converted from tobacco smoking to dual use during follow-up experienced significant improvements in the 3 outcomes compared with those who continued or switched to only smoking tobacco (p<0.001).E-cigarette use alone might support tobacco quitters remaining abstinent from smoking. However, dual use did not improve the likelihood of quitting tobacco or e-cigarette use, but may be helpful to reduce tobacco consumption. Adverse event data were scarce and must be considered preliminary.NCT01785537.
Project description:Introduction:While smoking rates have declined, use of smokeless tobacco (ST) has remained constant. ST is heavily marketed to cigarette smokers, and many ST users smoke cigarettes. This study provides updated comparisons of the characteristics, smoking behaviors, and perceptions of US adult dual ST and cigarette users and exclusive cigarette smokers in 2015-2016. Methods:Data were from nationally representative, cross-sectional surveys from 2015 and 2016. Adult smokers reported past 30-day use of ST, current cigarette smoking, risk perceptions, smoking, and quitting behaviors. We estimated Rao-Scott ?2 and adjusted odds ratios (AORs) to compare dual users and exclusive smokers. Results:Dual users were more likely to be younger, reside in nonmetropolitan statistical areas (MSA) and outside the Northeast United States. Adjusting for covariates, dual users did not differ significantly from exclusive smokers on most smoker characteristics, including number of past year quit attempts. Dual users were more likely to report past 30-day use of novel tobacco products (AORs 2.90 [little cigars and cigarillos] to 11.02 [hookah]). Dual users who reported at least 1 past year cigarette quit attempt were more likely than exclusive smokers to report using ST, traditional cigars, hookah, or heat-not-burn as a past year quit method (AOR: 9.54 [95% CI: 3.22 to 28.23]). Conclusions:Smokers who use ST are more likely than exclusive smokers to attempt to quit smoking cigarettes using other tobacco products. These findings may be attributed to increasing use prevalence of novel products. We recommend further monitoring to assess polytobacco use and differences among these populations. Implications:Many current ST users smoke cigarettes and ST promotions often target cigarette smokers. As the FDA considers ST regulations and implements a nicotine centered regulatory framework, it is imperative to evaluate how these policies and promotion of ST as potentially reduced risk products impact dual and polytobacco use. Our study found that many dual users engage in novel tobacco use in general and as a cessation method. Consideration of ST and polytobacco use among smokers may be helpful in the development of forthcoming FDA regulations, messaging, and interventions.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>While much is known about the demand for conventional cigarettes, little is known about the determinants of demand for electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS or e-cigarettes). The goal of this study is to estimate the own and cross-price elasticity of demand for e-cigarettes and to examine the impact of cigarette prices and smoke-free policies on e-cigarette sales.<h4>Methods</h4>Quarterly e-cigarette prices and sales and conventional cigarette prices from 2009 to 2012 were constructed from commercial retail store scanner data from 52 U.S. markets, for food, drug and mass stores, and from 25 markets, for convenience stores. Fixed-effects models were used to estimate the own and cross-price elasticity of demand for e-cigarettes and associations between e-cigarette sales and cigarette prices and smoke-free policies.<h4>Results</h4>Estimated own price elasticities for disposable e-cigarettes centred around -1.2, while those for reusable e-cigarettes were approximately -1.9. Disposable e-cigarette sales were higher in markets where reusable e-cigarette prices were higher and where less of the population was covered by a comprehensive smoke-free policy. There were no consistent and statistically significant relationships between cigarette prices and e-cigarette sales.<h4>Conclusions</h4>E-cigarette sales are very responsive to own price changes. Disposable e-cigarettes appear to be substitutes for reusable e-cigarettes. Policies increasing e-cigarette retail prices, such as limiting rebates, discounts and coupons and imposing a tax on e-cigarettes, could potentially lead to significant reductions in e-cigarette sales. Differential tax policies based on product type could lead to substitution between different types of e-cigarettes.