Search

Introduction: Cigarettes, cigars, and marijuana have generally been studied in isolation yet their use does not occur in isolation. Focus on cigarette smoking may overstate the observation that African American youth and young adults are less likely to smoke any combustible product compared with their white counterparts. Assessing cigarette, cigar, and marijuana use trends may help identify the extent of this difference.Methods: Data from the 2002-2012 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (N = 25 541 to N = 28 232) were used to investigate past 30-day cigarette, cigar, and marijuana use trends among African American and white youth (12-17) and young adults (18-25). Logistic regressions assessed trends in combustible tobacco (cigarettes and cigars) and marijuana use, alone and in combination.Results: From 2002-2012, the absolute difference in cigarette smoking prevalence between African American and white youth (9.6%-4.2%) and young adults (19.0%-10.5%) narrowed. Any combustible tobacco/marijuana use was significantly lower among African Americans than whites but, relative to cigarettes, the absolute difference was much smaller among youth (7.2%-2.2%) and young adults (15.8%-5.6%). Among any combustible tobacco/marijuana users, using two or more substances ranged from 31.4% to 40.3% among youth and 29.1% to 39.8% among young adults.Conclusion: Any combustible tobacco/marijuana use trends suggest the smoking prevalence difference between African American and white youth and young adults is real, but less pronounced than when assessing cigarette smoking alone. Policies and programs addressing smoking behaviors may benefit from broadening focus to monitor and address cigar and marijuana use as well.Implications: Trends in any use of cigarettes, cigars, and/or marijuana suggest the difference in smoking prevalence between African American and white youth and young adults is real, but less pronounced than when cigarette smoking is assessed alone. In 2012, more than 10% of African American and white youth, more than a third of African American young adults, and nearly half of white young adults reported past 30-day use of cigarette, cigars, and/or marijuana. Public health programs aimed at reducing these behaviors among youth and young adults could be informed by considering detailed, race-specific information regarding tobacco and marijuana use patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Cigarette smoking prevalence is more than two times greater among incarcerated adults, a population usually excluded from national health surveys. African American young adult (18-25) men are less likely to smoke cigarettes than their white counterparts. However, they are two and a-half-times more likely to be incarcerated. This study estimated smoking prevalence with noninstitutionalized and incarcerated samples combined to determine if excluding incarcerated adults impacts smoking prevalence for certain populations.Methods: The Bureau of Justice Statistics last fielded the Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correction Facilities in 2003-2004. We combined data from Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correction Facilities (n = 17 910) and the 2003 and 2004 National Health Interview Survey (n = 61 470) to calculate combined cigarette smoking estimates by race/ethnicity, sex, and age.Results: Inmates represented the greatest proportion of smokers among African American men. Among African American young adult men, inmates represented 15.2% of all smokers in the combined population, compared to 2.0% among white young adult men. Cigarette smoking prevalence was 17.6% in the noninstitutionalized population of young adult African American men and 19.7% in the combined population. Among white young adult men, cigarette smoking prevalence was 29.8% in the noninstitutionalized population, and 30.2% in the combined population. There was little difference in estimates among women.Conclusions: The exclusion of incarcerated African American young adult men may result in a small underestimation of cigarette smoking prevalence in this population. Increasing access to smoking cessation support among inmates may reduce smoking prevalence in disproportionately incarcerated segments of the US population.Implications: The exclusion of incarcerated adults from national survey data should be considered when examining differences in cigarette smoking prevalence estimates between African American and white young adult men. Approximately one in six African American young adult men who smoke were incarcerated. Increasing access to smoking cessation support among inmates may reduce smoking prevalence among disproportionately incarcerated segments of the population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: African American youth use marijuana at similar rates and tobacco at lower rates compared with white youth; however, in adulthood, tobacco use is similar. Tobacco and marijuana use are closely associated; differing initiation patterns may contribute to observed racial differences in tobacco prevalence by age. Therefore, it is important to assess tobacco and marijuana initiation patterns by race.Methods: Data were obtained from 56,555 adults aged 18-25 who completed the 2005-2012 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. The analysis was restricted to those who reported ever use of marijuana and combustible tobacco (cigarettes and/or cigars). Three mutually exclusive categories of initiation patterns were evaluated: use of marijuana before tobacco; marijuana and tobacco at the same age; and tobacco before marijuana. Multivariable regression models were used to assess changes over time and compare these outcomes by race while controlling for sociodemographics, risk perceptions, and current substance use.Results: In 2005, 26.6% of African American and 14.3% of white young adults used marijuana before tobacco, compared with 41.5% of African American and 24.0% of white young adults in 2012 (P < .001). Overall, African American young adults had greater odds of using marijuana before tobacco (AOR = 1.79; 95% CI: 1.67, 1.91) compared with whites.Conclusion: African American young adults were more likely than whites to use marijuana before tobacco and both groups were increasingly likely to use marijuana before tobacco over time. A greater understanding of how marijuana initiation interacts with tobacco initiation could inform more effective tobacco and marijuana use prevention efforts.Implications: Among ever users of combustible tobacco and marijuana, greater proportions of African American young adults used marijuana before tobacco or at the same age than their white counterparts. Moreover, both African Americans and whites were more likely to use marijuana before tobacco in 2012 compared with 2005. Tobacco control policy may benefit from a broader understanding of the patterns of initiation to tobacco and marijuana use. Some public health interventions aimed at preventing and reducing combustible tobacco use among African American young adults may be strengthened by considering marijuana use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What is already known on this topic? Since 2010, the proportion of U.S. 12th grade students who reported using marijuana during the preceding 30 days (21.4%) has surpassed the proportion reporting use of cigarettes during the preceding 30 days (19.2%).What is added by this report? During 1997–2013, the proportion of white, black, and Hispanic high school students overall who were exclusive cigarette or cigar users decreased 64%, from 20.5% to 7.4%. The proportion of white, black, and Hispanic students who were exclusive marijuana users more than doubled from 4.2% to 10.2%, and among cigarette or cigar users, marijuana use increased, with considerable increases identified among black and Hispanic students toward the end of the study period.What are the implications for public health practice? Despite significant declines since 1997, approximately 30% of white, black, and Hispanic U.S. high school students were current users of cigarettes, cigars, or marijuana in 2013. Policy and programmatic efforts might benefit from integrated approaches that focus on reducing the use of tobacco and marijuana among youths. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Despite progress in limiting exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) in the United States, little is known about the impact of smoke-free polices in prisons and jails. SHS exposure in this setting may be great, as smoking prevalence among inmates is more than three times higher than among non-incarcerated adults. To inform the implementation of smoke-free policies, this article reviews the literature on the extent, nature, and impact of smoke-free policies in U.S. prisons and jails. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, EconLit, and Social Services Abstracts databases. We examined studies published prior to January 2014 that described policies prohibiting smoking tobacco in adult U.S. correctional facilities. Results: Twenty-seven studies met inclusion criteria. Smoke-free policies in prisons were rare in the 1980s but, by 2007, 87% prohibited smoking indoors. Policies reduced SHS exposure and a small body of evidence suggests they are associated with health benefits. We did not identify any studies documenting economic outcomes. Non-compliance with policies was documented in a small number of prisons and jails, with 20%-76% of inmates reporting smoking in violation of a policy. Despite barriers, policies were implemented successfully when access to contraband tobacco was limited and penalties were enforced. Conclusion: Smoke-free policies have become increasingly common in prisons and jails, but evidence suggests they are not consistently implemented. Future studies should examine the health and economic outcomes of smoke-free policies in prisons and jails. By implementing smoke-free policies, prisons and jails have an opportunity to improve the health of staff and inmates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key Points: Question: Which pharmacotherapies are associated with improved outcomes for people with alcohol use disorder? Findings: In this systematic review and meta-analysis that included 118 clinical trials and 20 976 participants, 50 mg/d of oral naltrexone and acamprosate were each associated with significantly improved alcohol consumption-related outcomes compared with placebo. Meaning: These findings support oral naltrexone at 50 mg/d and acamprosate as first-line therapies for alcohol use disorder. Importance: Alcohol use disorder affects more than 28.3 million people in the United States and is associated with increased rates of morbidity and mortality. Objective: To compare efficacy and comparative efficacy of therapies for alcohol use disorder. Data Sources: PubMed, the Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Central Trials Registry, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and EMBASE were searched from November 2012 to September 9, 2022 Literature was subsequently systematically monitored to identify relevant articles up to August 14, 2023, and the PubMed search was updated on August 14, 2023. Study Selection: For efficacy outcomes, randomized clinical trials of at least 12 weeks' duration were included. For adverse effects, randomized clinical trials and prospective cohort studies that compared drug therapies and reported health outcomes or harms were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers evaluated each study, assessed risk of bias, and graded strength of evidence. Meta-analyses used random-effects models. Numbers needed to treat were calculated for medications with at least moderate strength of evidence for benefit. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was alcohol consumption. Secondary outcomes were motor vehicle crashes, injuries, quality of life, function, mortality, and harms. Results: Data from 118 clinical trials and 20 976 participants were included. The numbers needed to treat to prevent 1 person from returning to any drinking were 11 (95% CI, 1-32) for acamprosate and 18 (95% CI, 4-32) for oral naltrexone at a dose of 50 mg/d. Compared with placebo, oral naltrexone (50 mg/d) was associated with lower rates of return to heavy drinking, with a number needed to treat of 11 (95% CI, 5-41). Injectable naltrexone was associated with fewer drinking days over the 30-day treatment period (weighted mean difference, −4.99 days; 95% CI, −9.49 to −0.49 days) Adverse effects included higher gastrointestinal distress for acamprosate (diarrhea: risk ratio, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.27-1.97) and naltrexone (nausea: risk ratio, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.51-1.98; vomiting: risk ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.23-1.91) compared with placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: In conjunction with psychosocial interventions, these findings support the use of oral naltrexone at 50 mg/d and acamprosate as first-line pharmacotherapies for alcohol use disorder. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates efficacy and comparative efficacy of 9 therapies for alcohol use disorder (AUD). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Depression, suicidal ideation, and self-harm behaviors in youth are associated with functional impairment and suicide.Objective: To review the evidence on screening for depression or suicide risk in children and adolescents to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF).Data Sources: PubMed, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and trial registries through July 19, 2021; references, experts, and surveillance through June 1, 2022.Study Selection: English-language, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of screening for depression or suicide risk; diagnostic test accuracy studies; RCTs of psychotherapy and first-line pharmacotherapy; RCTs, observational studies, and systematic reviews reporting harms.Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers assessed titles/abstracts, full-text articles, and study quality and extracted data; when at least 3 similar studies were available, meta-analyses were conducted.Main Outcomes and Measures: Test accuracy, symptoms, response, remission, loss of diagnosis, mortality, functioning, suicide-related events, and adverse events.Results: Twenty-one studies (N = 5433) were included for depression and 19 studies (N = 6290) for suicide risk. For depression, no studies reported on the direct effects of screening on health outcomes, and 7 studies (n = 3281) reported sensitivity of screening instruments ranging from 0.59 to 0.94 and specificity from 0.38 to 0.96. Depression treatment with psychotherapy was associated with improved symptoms (Beck Depression Inventory pooled standardized mean difference, -0.58 [95% CI, -0.83 to -0.34]; n = 471; 4 studies; and Hamilton Depression Scale pooled mean difference, -2.25 [95% CI, -4.09 to -0.41]; n = 262; 3 studies) clinical response (3 studies with statistically significant results using varying thresholds), and loss of diagnosis (relative risk, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.00 to 3.00; n = 395; 4 studies). Pharmacotherapy was associated with improvement on symptoms (Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised mean difference, -3.76 [95% CI, -5.95 to -1.57; n = 793; 3 studies), remission (relative risk, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.00 to 1.45]; n = 793; 3 studies) and functioning (Children's Global Assessment Scale pooled mean difference, 2.60 (95% CI, 0.78 to 4.42; n = 793; 3 studies). Other outcomes were not statistically significantly different. Differences in suicide-related outcomes and adverse events for pharmacotherapy when compared with placebo were not statistically significant. For suicide risk, no studies reported on the direct benefits of screening on health outcomes, and 2 RCTs (n = 2675) reported no harms of screening. One study (n = 581) reported on sensitivity of screening, ranging from 0.87 to 0.91; specificity was 0.60. Sixteen RCTs (n = 3034) reported on suicide risk interventions. Interventions were associated with lower scores for the Beck Hopelessness Scale (pooled mean difference, -2.35 [95% CI, -4.06 to -0.65]; n = 644; 4 RCTs). Findings for other suicide-related outcomes were mixed or not statistically significantly different.Conclusion and Relevance: Indirect evidence suggested that some screening instruments were reasonably accurate for detecting depression. Psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy were associated with some benefits and no statistically significant harms for depression, but the evidence was limited for suicide risk screening instruments and interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Anxiety in children and adolescents is associated with impaired functioning, educational underachievement, and future mental health conditions.Objective: To review the evidence on screening for anxiety in children and adolescents to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.Data Sources: PubMed, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and trial registries through July 19, 2021; references, experts, and surveillance through June 1, 2022.Study Selection: English-language, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of screening; diagnostic test accuracy studies; RCTs of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) or US Food and Drug Administration-approved pharmacotherapy; RCTs, observational studies, and systematic reviews reporting harms.Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers assessed titles/abstracts, full-text articles, and study quality and extracted data; when at least 3 similar studies were available, meta-analyses were conducted.Main Outcomes and Measures: Test accuracy, symptoms, response, remission, loss of diagnosis, all-cause mortality, functioning, suicide-related symptoms or events, adverse events.Results: Thirty-nine studies (N = 6065) were included. No study reported on the direct benefits or harms of screening on health outcomes. Ten studies (n = 3260) reported the sensitivity of screening instruments, ranging from 0.34 to 1.00, with specificity ranging from 0.47 to 0.99. Twenty-nine RCTs (n = 2805) reported on treatment: 22 on CBT, 6 on pharmacotherapy, and 1 on CBT, sertraline, and CBT plus sertraline. CBT was associated with gains on several pooled measures of symptom improvement (magnitude of change varied by outcome measure), response (pooled relative risk [RR], 1.89 [95% CI, 1.17 to 3.05]; n = 606; 6 studies), remission (RR, 2.68 [95% CI, 1.48 to 4.88]; n = 321; 4 studies), and loss of diagnosis (RR range, 3.02-3.09) when compared with usual care or wait-list controls. The evidence on functioning for CBT was mixed. Pharmacotherapy, when compared with placebo, was associated with gains on 2 pooled measures of symptom improvement-mean difference (Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale mean difference, -4.0 [95% CI, -5.5 to -2.5]; n = 726; 5 studies; and Clinical Global Impression-Severity scale mean difference, -0.84 [95% CI, -1.13 to -0.55]; n = 550; 4 studies) and response (RR, 2.11 [95% CI, 1.58 to 2.98]; n = 370; 5 studies)-but was mixed on measures of functioning. Eleven RCTs (n = 1293) reported harms of anxiety treatments. Suicide-related harms were rare, and the differences were not statistically significantly different.Conclusions and Relevance: Indirect evidence suggested that some screening instruments were reasonably accurate. CBT and pharmacotherapy were associated with benefits; no statistically significant association with harms was reported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Beginning in the 1970s, US national surveys showed African American youth having a lower prevalence of cigarette smoking than white youth. Yet, during adulthood, African Americans have a smoking prevalence comparable to white adults. Data sources chosen can contribute in different ways to understanding tobacco use behaviors among African American youth and adults; this article is a review of national and/or state-based health surveys to examine their methodology, racial and ethnic classifications, and tobacco-use related measures.Methods: Eleven national and/or state based surveys were selected for review. Eight surveys were multitopic and included questions on tobacco use and three surveys were tobacco specific. Survey methods included telephone (4), household (3), and school (4). Three major characteristics examined for each survey were: (1) survey design and methods, (2) racial and ethnic background classification, and (3) selected tobacco smoking questions. Within these three characteristics, 15 factors considered to be important for examining tobacco use behaviors by African Americans were identified a priori using previously published reviews and studies.Results: Within survey design and methods, the majority of surveys (≥7) oversampled African Americans and did not use proxy respondents for tobacco questions. All surveys used Office of Management and Budget standard classification for race/ethnicity classification. The majority of surveys (≥7) captured five of the seven tobacco-related smoking questions.Conclusions: Programmatic objectives and/or research questions should guide the selection of data sources for tobacco control programs and researchers examining African American tobacco use behaviors.Implications: This review of 11 national and state tobacco-related surveys shows that these surveys provide much needed estimates of tobacco use behaviors. However, as tobacco programs and researchers seek to examine tobacco use behaviors among African Americans, it is important to consider multiple surveys as each can contribute to informing the tobacco experience in African Americans. Most importantly, programmatic objectives and/or research questions should guide the selection of data sources for tobacco control programs and researchers examining African American tobacco use behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Fifty years after the first Surgeon General’s report, tobacco use remains the nation’s leading preventable cause of death and disease, despite declines in adult cigarette smoking prevalence. Smoking-attributable healthcare spending is an important part of overall smoking-attributable costs in the U.S. Purpose To update annual smoking-attributable healthcare spending in the U.S. and provide smoking-attributable healthcare spending estimates by payer (e.g., Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance) or type of medical services. Methods Analyses used data from the 2006–2010 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey linked to the 2004–2009 National Health Interview Survey. Estimates from two-part models were combined to predict the share of annual healthcare spending that could be attributable to cigarette smoking. The analysis was conducted in 2013. Results By 2010, 8.7% (95% CI=6.8%, 11.2%) of annual healthcare spending in the U.S. could be attributed to cigarette smoking, amounting to as much as $170 billion per year. More than 60% of the attributable spending was paid by public programs, including Medicare, other federally sponsored programs, or Medicaid. Conclusions These findings indicate that comprehensive tobacco control programs and policies are still needed to continue progress toward ending the tobacco epidemic in the U.S. 50 years after the release of the first Surgeon General’s report on smoking and health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of disease and death in the United States, and nearly all tobacco use begins during youth and young adulthood. Among U.S. youths, cigarette smoking has declined in recent years; however, the use of some other tobacco products has increased, and nearly half of tobacco users use two or more tobacco products. CDC analyzed data from the 2013 National Youth Tobacco Survey to determine the prevalence of ever (at least once) and current (at least 1 day in the past 30 days) use of one or more of 10 tobacco products (cigarettes, cigars, hookahs, smokeless tobacco, electronic cigarettes [e-cigarettes], pipes, snus, bidis, kreteks, and dissolvable tobacco) among U.S. middle school (grades 6-8) and high school (grades 9-12) students. In 2013, 22.9% of high school students reported current use of any tobacco product, and 12.6% reported current use of two or more tobacco products; current use of combustible products (i.e., cigarettes, cigars, pipes, bidis, kreteks, and/or hookahs) was substantially greater (20.7%) than use of other types of tobacco. Also, 46.0% of high school students reported having ever tried a tobacco product, and 31.4% reported ever trying two or more tobacco products. Among middle school students, 3.1% reported current use of cigars, and 2.9% reported current use of cigarettes, with non-Hispanic black students more than twice as likely to report current use of cigars than cigarettes. Monitoring the prevalence of the use of all available tobacco products, including new and emerging products, is critical to support effective population-based interventions to prevent and reduce tobacco use among youths as part of comprehensive tobacco prevention and control programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on the use of tobacco in the U.S., the leading preventable cause of disease and death in the U.S. as of November 14, 2014. One of the topics discussed is the findings of the 2013 National Youth Tobacco Survey. Several tables are presented including percentage of use of tobacco and tobacco use among middle and high school students.

Importance: Childhood hypertension can result in adverse outcomes during adulthood; identifying and treating primary and secondary childhood hypertension may reduce such risks.Objective: To update the evidence on screening and treatment of hypertension in childhood and adolescence for the US Preventive Services Task Force.Data Sources: PubMed, Cochrane Library, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, EMBASE, and trial registries through September 3, 2019; bibliographies from retrieved articles, experts, and surveillance of the literature through October 6, 2020.Study Selection: Fair- or good-quality English-language studies evaluating diagnostic accuracy of blood pressure screening; cohort studies assessing the association of hypertension in childhood and adolescence with blood pressure or other intermediate outcomes in adulthood; randomized clinical trials (RCTs) or meta-analyses of pharmacological and lifestyle interventions.Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two reviewers independently assessed titles/abstracts and full-text articles, extracted data, and assessed study quality; the evidence was synthesized qualitatively.Main Outcomes and Measures: Sensitivity, specificity, and measures of association between childhood and adulthood blood pressure; reduction of childhood blood pressure; adverse effects of treatments.Results: Forty-two studies from 43 publications were included (N>12 400). No studies evaluated the benefits or harms of screening and the effect of treating childhood hypertension on outcomes in adulthood. One study reported a sensitivity of 0.82 and a specificity of 0.70 for 2 office-based blood pressure measurements. Twenty observational studies suggested a significant association between childhood hypertension and abnormal blood pressure in adulthood (odds ratios, 1.1-4.5; risk ratios, 1.45-3.60; hazard ratios, 2.8-3.2). Thirteen placebo-controlled RCTs and 1 meta-analysis assessed reductions in systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure from pharmacological treatments. Pooled reductions of SBP were -4.38 mm Hg (95% CI, -7.27 to -2.16) for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and -3.07 mm Hg (95% CI, -4.99 to -1.44) for angiotensin receptor blockers. Candesartan reduced SBP by -6.56 mm Hg (P < .001; n = 240). β-Blockers, calcium channel blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists did not achieve significant reductions over 2 to 4 weeks. SBP was significantly reduced by exercise over 8 months (-4.9 mm Hg, P ≤ .05; n = 69), by dietary approaches to stop hypertension over 3 months (-2.2 mm Hg, P < .01; n = 57), and by a combination of drug treatment and lifestyle interventions over 6 months (-7.6 mm Hg; P < .001; n = 95). Low-salt diet did not achieve reductions of blood pressure.Conclusions and Relevance: Observational studies indicate an association between hypertension in childhood and hypertension in adulthood. However, the evidence is inconclusive whether the diagnostic accuracy of blood pressure measurements is adequate for screening asymptomatic children and adolescents in primary care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) were the most commonly used tobacco product among U.S. middle school and high school students in 2016 (1). CDC and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) analyzed data from the 2016 National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS) to assess self-reported reasons for e-cigarette use among U.S. middle school (grades 6-8) and high school (grades 9-12) student e-cigarette users. Among students who reported ever using e-cigarettes in 2016, the most commonly selected reasons for use were 1) use by "friend or family member" (39.0%); 2) availability of "flavors such as mint, candy, fruit, or chocolate" (31.0%); and 3) the belief that "they are less harmful than other forms of tobacco such as cigarettes" (17.1%). The least commonly selected reasons were 1) "they are easier to get than other tobacco products, such as cigarettes" (4.8%); 2) "they cost less than other tobacco products such as cigarettes" (3.2%); and 3) "famous people on TV or in movies use them" (1.5%). Availability of flavors as a reason for use was more commonly selected by high school users (32.3%) than by middle school users (26.8%). Efforts to prevent middle school and high school students from initiating the use of any tobacco product, including e-cigarettes, are important to reduce tobacco product use among U.S. youths (2). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Accounting for occasional or intermittent e-cigarette use has yielded higher estimates of current use among U.S. adults. However, frequency of e-cigarette use by population subgroups is not well described. This study assessed e-cigarette use frequency by sociodemographic characteristics and other tobacco product use among U.S. adults.Methods: This study analyzed combined data from the 2012-2013 (n=60,192) and 2013-2014 (n=75,233) National Adult Tobacco Survey, a telephone-based survey of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years, to assess frequency of e-cigarette use (daily, some days, rarely) by sex, age, race/ethnicity, education, annual household income, U.S. region, marital status, sexual orientation, and cigarette smoking and other tobacco product use (cigars, cigarillos, little filtered cigars; traditional pipes; water pipes; and chewing tobacco, snuff, dip, snus, and dissolvable tobacco products). Analyses took place in 2016.Results: Among current e-cigarette users, 19.3% used daily, 29.3% used some days, and 51.4% used rarely. Daily use was lowest among younger adults, Hispanics, and those who were single, never married, or not living with a partner; and greatest among non-Hispanic Asians (p<0.0001). Among current e-cigarette users, 25.3% were cigarette-only smokers, 52.8% smoked cigarettes and used other tobacco products, 5.5% used other tobacco products only, 6.5% were former cigarette-only smokers, 6.7% were former users of cigarettes and other tobacco products, 1.3% were former other tobacco product users only, and 1.8% never used cigarettes or other tobacco products.Conclusions: E-cigarette use frequency varies by sociodemographic characteristics and other tobacco use. Further surveillance, particularly related to frequency of e-cigarette use and its impact on cigarette cessation, could inform public health policy, planning, and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To conduct a systematic review of clinical interventions to reduce secondhand smoke (SHS) exposure among non-smoking pregnant women. Data sources We searched 16 databases for publications from 1990 to January 2013, with no language restrictions. Study selection Papers were included if they met the following criteria: (1) the study population included non-smoking pregnant women exposed to SHS, (2) the clinical interventions were intended to reduce SHS exposure at home, (3) the study included a control group and (4) outcomes included either reduced SHS exposure of non-smoking pregnant women at home or quit rates among smoking partners during the pregnancy of the woman. Data extraction Two coders independently reviewed each abstract or full text to identify eligible papers. Two abstractors independently coded papers based on US Preventive Services Task Force criteria for study quality (good, fair, poor), and studies without biochemically-verified outcome measures were considered poor quality. Data synthesis From 4670 papers, we identified five studies that met our inclusion criteria: four focused on reducing SHS exposure among non-smoking pregnant women, and one focused on providing cessation support for smoking partners of pregnant women. All were randomised controlled trials, and all reported positive findings. Three studies were judged poor quality because outcome measures were not biochemically-verified, and two were considered fair quality. Conclusions Clinical interventions delivered in prenatal care settings appear to reduce SHS exposure, but study weaknesses limit our ability to draw firm conclusions. More rigorous studies, using biochemical validation, are needed to identify strategies for reducing SHS exposure in pregnant women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]