Search

Background and Aims: Most population studies that evaluate the relationship between nicotine vaping and cigarette cessation focus on limited segments of the smoker population. We evaluated vaping uptake and smoking cessation considering differences in smokers' plans to quit. Design: Longitudinal International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys were conducted in 2016, 2018 and 2020. Setting: This study was conducted in the United States, Canada, England and Australia. Participants: Participants of this study were adult daily cigarette smokers who had not vaped in the past 6 months at baseline and had participated in two or more consecutive waves of the ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys (n = 2815). Measurements Plans to quit cigarette smoking was assessed at baseline (within 6 months, beyond 6 months, not planning to quit) and at follow‐up (within 6 months vs not within 6 months), cigarette smoking cessation was assessed at follow‐up (smoking less than monthly [including complete cessation] vs daily/weekly/monthly smoking) and inter‐wave vaping uptake was assesed between baseline and follow‐up (none, only non‐daily vaping and any daily vaping). Generalized estimating equations were used to evaluate whether inter‐wave vaping uptake was associated with smoking cessation at follow‐up and with planning to quit at follow‐up, each stratified by plans to quit smoking at baseline. Findings Overall, 12.7% of smokers quit smoking. Smokers not initially planning to quit within 6 months experienced higher odds of smoking cessation when they took up daily vaping (32.4%) versus no vaping (6.8%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 8.58; 95% CI, 5.06–14.54). Among smokers planning to quit, smoking cessation rates were similar between those who did and did not take up daily vaping (25.1% vs 16.8%; AOR, 1.91; 95% CI, 0.91–4.00), although we could not account for potential use of cessation aids. Daily vaping uptake was associated with planning to quit smoking at follow‐up among those initially not planning to quit (AOR,6.32; 95% CI, 4.17–9.59). Conclusions: Uptake of nicotine vaping appears to be strongly associated with cigarette smoking cessation among smokers with no initial plans to quit smoking. Excluding smokers not planning to quit from studies on vaping and smoking cessation may underestimate potential benefit of daily vaping for daily smokers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To examine whether polyuse of cigarettes and other smoked products (polysmoking) is predictive of quit attempts and quit success. Design: A prospective multi‐country cohort design. Setting: Australia, Canada, England and the United States. Participants: A total of 3983 adult daily cigarette smokers were surveyed in 2016 (wave 1 of data collection) and were re‐contacted in 2018 (wave 2) (i.e. waves 1–2 cohort) in the International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping (ITC 4CV) surveys; and 3736 smokers were surveyed in 2018 and re‐contacted in 2020 (wave 3) (i.e. waves 2–3 cohort). Measurements Participants were asked about their cigarette smoking and use of cigars, cigarillos, pipes and waterpipes. Outcomes were quit attempts between two survey waves and success, defined as having quit smoking all the combustible tobacco at the subsequent survey for 1 month or more. Findings Levels of polysmoking were 12.7% in the waves 1–2 cohort and 10.5% for the waves 2–3 cohort. Compared with cigarette‐only smokers, polysmokers were more likely to attempt to quit between waves 1 and 2 [54.9 versus 42.7%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.08–1.74, P < 0.01], but not between waves 2 and 3 (43.8 versus 40.1%, aOR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.72–1.22). Polysmoking predicted reduced likelihood of success in both cohorts among attempters and the overall samples. Between waves 2 and 3 there were significantly more transitions to non‐daily smoking among the polysmokers (12.4 versus 5.3%, χ2 = 40.4, P < 0.001). Conclusions: There is a consistent association between polysmoking (use of cigarettes together with other smoked products) and reduced quit success for combustible tobacco, but it is probably due to increased likelihood of transitioning to non‐daily use rather than complete cessation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To measure the prevalence and changes in smokers' discussions with health professionals (HPs) about nicotine vaping products (NVPs) and HPs' recommendations about NVPs between 2016 and 2020, and their associations with tobacco product use transitions. Design: Cohort study using multinomial logistic regression analyses on data from waves 1 (2016), 2 (2018) and 3 (2020) from the International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys. Setting: Four countries with varying NVP regulatory environments: 'most restrictive' (Australia), 'somewhat restrictive' (Canada) and 'less restrictive' (England and the United States). Participants: Adult exclusive daily smokers who did not report NVP use at the time of their baseline survey and had visited a HP in the last 12–24 months. Prevalence data came from 4125, 4503 and 4277 respondents, respectively, for each year. Longitudinal data were from 4859 respondents who participated in at least two consecutive surveys. Measurements Prevalence of self‐reported discussions with HPs and recommendations from HPs about NVPs. Longitudinal transitions from smoking to vaping (either exclusively or concurrently with smoking) and quitting (regardless of NVP uptake). Findings The prevalence of NVP discussions was low among countries with varying regulatory environments and study waves (range = 1.4–6.2%). In 2020, a low percentage of smokers who discussed NVPs with a HP reported that their HPs recommended they use NVPs in the United States (14.7%), Australia (20.2%), Canada (25.7%), with a higher percentage in England (55.7%) where clinical guidelines for smoking cessation include NVPs. Compared with 12.0% of smokers who reported no discussion, 37.0% of those whose HPs recommended NVPs transitioned to vaping at follow‐up. Transition to quitting was 9.6% with HPs' recommendation of NVPs versus 13.5% without discussion, a non‐significant difference. Conclusions: In Australia, Canada, England and the United States between 2016 and 2020, health professionals' discussions with smokers about nicotine vaping products (NVPs) were infrequent. NVP discussions were associated with NVP uptake, but not with quitting smoking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To examine whether norms towards nicotine vaping product (NVP) use varied between Australia, Canada, England and the United States and by socio‐demographics, smoking and NVP status. Design Cross‐sectional data from the 2016 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey. Setting: Four countries with distinct regulatory policies relating to the sale and advertising of NVPs: Australia (most restrictive), Canada (restrictive), England and the United States (least restrictive). Participants: A total of 10900 adult (age 18+) current smokers, former smokers, or at least weekly NVP users. Respondents were from Australia (n = 1366), Canada (n = 3309), England (n = 3835) and the United States (n = 2390). Measurements Questions permitted the categorization of respondents as current smokers, former smokers, NVP users and socio‐demographic categories (sex, age, country, ethnicity, income and education). Further questions were asked regarding the frequency of exposure to NVPs in public, whether they had a partner or close friends who vaped and whether they believed society or those considered important to them approved of NVPs. Findings Adjusting for relevant covariates, compared with Australian respondents, those in England, Canada and the United States were more likely to report frequent exposure to NVPs in public (83.1%, 57.3% and 48.3%, respectively, compared to 19.8% in Australia; P < 0.0001), having a partner who vaped (13.8%, 7.1% and 7.7%, respectively, compared to 2.1% in Australia; P < 0.0001) and having close friend(s) who vaped (31.7%, 25.3%, 20.9%, respectively, compared to 10.0% in Australia; P < 0.0001). Compared with Australian respondents, respondents from England were more likely to report that society (27.6% compared to 12.3% in Australia; P < 0.0001) and people important to them approved of NVP use (28.9% compared to 14.3% in Australia; P < 0.0001). Conclusions: Norms towards nicotine vaping product (NVP) use appear to vary among countries with different regulatory contexts regarding sales and advertising. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To determine whether a simple combination of level of smoking and level of vaping results in a useful typology for characterizing smoking and vaping behaviours. Methods: Cross‐sectional data from adults (≥ 18 years) in the 2016 wave 1 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey in the United States (n = 2291), England (n = 3591), Australia (n = 1376) and Canada (n = 2784) were used. Participants who either smoked, vaped or concurrently used both at least monthly were included and divided into eight groups based on use frequency of each product (daily, non‐daily, no current use). This resulted in four concurrent use groups (predominant smokers, dual daily users, predominant vapers and concurrent non‐daily users). These groups were compared with each other and with the four exclusive use groups, on socio‐demographics, nicotine dependence, beliefs and attitudes about both products, and quit‐related measures using data weighted to reference population surveys in each country. Results: Of the sample, 10.8% were concurrent users, with daily smokers vaping non‐daily (predominant smokers), constituting 51.6% of this group. All eight categories differed from other categories on at least some measures. Concurrent daily nicotine users reported higher levels of indicators of nicotine dependence, and generally more positive attitudes toward both smoking and vaping than concurrent non‐daily users. Among daily nicotine users, compared with exclusive daily smokers, reports of interest in quitting were higher in all concurrent use groups. Dual daily users had the most positive attitudes about smoking overall, and saw it as the least denormalized, and at the same time were equally interested in quitting as other concurrent users and were most likely to report intending to continue vaping. Conclusions: In Australia, Canada, England and the United States in 2016, daily nicotine users differed considerably from non‐daily nicotine users. Among daily nicotine users, dual daily users (those who smoke and vape concurrently) should be treated as a distinct grouping when studying relationships between smoking and vaping. The eight‐level typology characterizing concurrent and exclusive use of smoking and vaping should be considered when studying both products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: The presence and content of health warning labels (HWLs) on nicotine vaping products (NVPs), such as electronic cigarettes, varies by country and manufacturer. We compared proportions of people who report (i) noticing HWLs on NVPs and (ii) feeling concerned having noticed HWLs, by country and by smoking or vaping status. We also examined recall of HWL content and whether this varies by country. Design Cross‐sectional survey. Setting: Australia (AU), Canada (CA), England (EN) and the United States (US). At the time of data collection, HWLs on NVPs were only mandatory in EN. Participants: A total of 11 561 respondents from the following samples in the 2016 International Tobacco Control Four Country Project: (1) re‐contacted smokers and quitters who had participated in the previous wave of the project; (2) newly recruited current smokers and recent quitters; and (3) newly recruited current vapers from CA, EN and US. Measurements Outcomes included: (1) having noticed HWLs on NVPs, (2) feeling concerned having noticed HWLs, and (3) recall of HWL message content. Findings Compared with respondents in EN, respondents in CA were more likely to report having noticed HWLs [odds ratio (OR) = 1.58, P = 0.02], whereas respondents in AU (OR = 0.76, P = 1.00) and the US (OR = 1.54, P = 0.09) were not significantly more or less likely to report having noticed HWLs. Compared with concurrent smokers and vapers, daily smokers, non‐daily smokers and quitters were less likely to report having noticed HWLs (ORs = 0.21, 0.33 and 0.19, respectively, all P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in reports of noticing HWLs when comparing concurrent smokers and vapers with daily (OR = 1.62, P = 0.91) or non‐daily (OR = 1.15, P = 1.00) vapers. There were no significant differences by country in reporting that HWLs made them concerned about using NVPs. Daily vapers were less likely to report feeling concerned than concurrent users (OR = 0.11, P = 0.017). Among those who reported reading HWLs (n = 688), there was little evidence of differences in recall of the HWL content. Conclusions: Respondents in England, where health warning labels on nicotine vaping products are mandatory, were not significantly more likely to report having noticed such warnings than those in Australia, Canada and the United States where warnings are not mandatory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Debate exists about whether health professionals (HPs) should advise smokers to use nicotine vaping products (NVPs) to quit smoking. The objectives were to examine in four countries: (1) the prevalence of HP discussions and recommendations to use an NVP; (2) who initiated NVP discussions; (3) the type of HP advice received about NVPs; and (4) smoker's characteristics related to receiving advice about NVPs. Design Cross‐sectional study using multivariable logistic regression analyses on weighted data from the 2016 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey (ITC 4CV1). Setting: Four countries with varying regulations governing the sale and marketing of NVPs: 'most restrictive' (Australia), 'restrictive' (Canada) or 'less restrictive' (England and United States). Participants: A total of 6615 adult smokers who reported having visited an HP in the last year (drawn from the total sample of 12 294 4CV1 respondents, of whom 9398 reported smoking cigarettes daily or weekly). Respondents were from the United States (n = 1518), England (n = 2116), Australia (n = 1046), and Canada (n = 1935). Measurements Participants' survey responses indicated if they were current daily or weekly smokers and had visited an HP in the past year. Among those participants, further questions asked participants to report (1) whether NVPs were discussed, (2) who raised the topic, (3) advice received on use of NVPs and (4) advice received on quitting smoking. Findings Among the 6615 smokers who visited an HP in the last year, 6.8% reported discussing NVPs with an HP and 2.1% of smokers were encouraged to use an NVP (36.1% of those who had a discussion). Compared with Australia (4.3%), discussing NVPs with an HP was more likely in the United States [8.8%, odds ratio (OR) = 2.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.41–3.29] and Canada (7.8%, OR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.26–2.78). Smokers in Australia were less likely to discuss NVPs than smokers in England (6.2%), although this was not statistically significant (OR = 1.47, 95% CI = 0.98–2.20). Overall, the prevalence of HPs recommending NVPs was three times more likely in the United States than in Australia (OR = 3.07, 95% CI = 1.45–6.47), and twice as likely in Canada (OR = 2.28, 95% CI = 1.06–4.87) than in Australia. Australia and England did not differ (OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 0.83–3.74). Just over half (54%) of respondents brought up NVPs themselves; there were no significant differences among countries. Conclusions: Discussions in Australia, Canada, England, and the United States between smokers and health professionals about nicotine vaping products appear to be infrequent, regardless of the regulatory environment. A low percentage of health professionals recommended vaping products. This was particularly evident in Australia, which has the most restrictive regulatory environment of the four countries studied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: This paper presents updated prevalence estimates of awareness, ever‐use, and current use of nicotine vaping products (NVPs) from 14 International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project (ITC Project) countries that have varying regulations governing NVP sales and marketing. Design, Setting, Participants and Measurements: A cross‐sectional analysis of adult (≥ 18 years) current smokers and ex‐smokers from 14 countries participating in the ITC Project. Data from the most recent survey questionnaire for each country were included, which spanned the period 2013–17. Countries were categorized into four groups based on regulations governing NVP sales and marketing (allowable or not), and level of enforcement (strict or weak where NVPs are not permitted to be sold): (1) most restrictive policies (MRPs), not legal to be sold or marketed with strict enforcement: Australia, Brazil, Uruguay; (2) restrictive policies (RPs), not approved for sale or marketing with weak enforcement: Canada, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand; (3) less restrictive policies (LRPs), legal to be sold and marketed with regulations: England, the Netherlands, Republic of Korea, United States; and (4) no regulatory policies (NRPs), Bangladesh, China, Zambia. Countries were also grouped by World Bank Income Classifications. Country‐specific weighted logistic regression models estimated adjusted NVP prevalence estimates for: awareness, ever/current use, and frequency of use (daily versus non‐daily). Findings NVP awareness and use were lowest in NRP countries. Generally, ever‐ and current use of NVPs were lower in MRP countries (ever‐use = 7.1–48.9%; current use = 0.3–3.5%) relative to LRP countries (ever‐use = 38.9–66.6%; current use = 5.5–17.2%) and RP countries (ever‐use = 10.0–62.4%; current use = 1.4–15.5%). NVP use was highest among high‐income countries, followed by upper–middle‐income countries, and then by lower–middle‐income countries. Conclusions: With a few exceptions, awareness and use of nicotine vaping products varied by the strength of national regulations governing nicotine vaping product sales/marketing, and by country income. In countries with no regulatory policies, use rates were very low, suggesting that there was little availability, marketing and/or interest in nicotine vaping products in these countries where smoking populations are predominantly poorer. The higher awareness and use of nicotine vaping products in high income countries with moderately (e.g. Canada, New Zealand) and less (e.g. England, United States) restrictive policies, is likely due to the greater availability and affordability of nicotine vaping products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents addition-related news briefs on topics including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's plan to regulate tobacco and nicotine in an effort to reduce the number of tobacco use-related deaths in America. According to the article, Ozamiz, Philippines Mayor Reynaldo Parojinog and several other people have been killed during the nation's War on Drugs. A report from the U.S. Commission on Combating Drug Addiction and the Opioid Crisis is addressed.

Background: Use of nicotine vaping products (NVPs) to replace smoking is often influenced by perceived harmfulness of these products relative to smoking. This study aimed to identify factors that conjointly influenced NVP relative harm perception among smokers and ex-smokers., Methods: Data (n = 11,838) from adult smokers and ex-smokers (quit < 2 years) who participated in the 2016 ITC 4 Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys in Australia, Canada, England and the US were analyzed. Decision tree models were used to classify respondents into those who perceived vaping as less harmful than smoking ("correct" perception) versus otherwise ("incorrect" perception) based on their socio-demographic, smoking and vaping related variables., Results: Decision tree analysis identified nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) harmfulness perceptions relative to smoking, perceived vaping portrayal in the media and other sources as positive, negative or balanced, recency of seeking online vaping information, and age as the key variables that interacted conjointly to classify respondents into those with "correct" versus "incorrect" harm perceptions of vaping relative to smoking (model performance accuracy = 0.70-0.74). In all countries, NRT relative harmfulness perception and vaping portrayal perception were consistently the two most important classifying variables, with other variables showing some country differences., Conclusions: In all four countries, perception of NVP relative harmfulness among smokers and recent ex-smokers is strongly influenced by a combination of NRT relative harmfulness perception and vaping portrayal in the media and other sources. These conjoint factors can serve as useful markers for identifying subgroups more vulnerable to misperception about NVP relative harmfulness to benefit from corrective intervention., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: The regulatory environment for nicotine vaping products (NVPs) varies widely across countries and this will probably affect the devices used, nicotine content and usage, and hence the ability of NVPs to substitute for cigarettes. We aimed to describe the types of NVPs used by current vapers in four countries with varying regulatory and enforcement approaches toward the marketing and sale of NVPs., Methods: Data are from wave 1 (July-November 2016) of the ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey (4CV1), conducted among a cohort of current and former smokers, and current NVP users (n = 5147 adults; ≥ 18 years) in Australia (AU), Canada (CA), England (EN) and the United States (US) reporting either current daily, weekly or occasional NVP use. Devices were described by type, brand, voltage variability and refill capacity. Refill solutions were described by flavour and nicotine content. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were conducted on the overall sample and stratified by country. A multinomial logistic regression examined factors associated with device preference across the whole sample., Results: The types of NVPs used differed by pattern of use and country. Exclusive, daily vapers were more likely to use refillable pen-shaped devices [odds ratio (OR) = 10.0] or refillable box-shaped devices (OR = 5.4) than disposable cigalike devices, when compared with other (non-daily/dual) users. Nearly all respondents reported using flavoured NVPs, fruit (28.3%) being the most common flavour. Refillable devices were the most popular: refillable box-shaped devices were more commonly reported by vapers in AU (36.8%) and US (31.4%), whereas in EN (47.4%) and CA (29.7%), vapers more often reported using refillable pen-style devices. Most users also reported that their products contained nicotine, even in CA (87.8%) and AU (91.2%), where vaping products containing nicotine were technically illegal., Conclusions: In Australia, Canada, England and the United States in 2016, refillable nicotine vaping products were the most common type of nicotine vaping products used by daily vapers. Most daily vapers reported using flavoured e-liquids/refills (with variance across countries) and most reported using products that contain nicotine, even where vaping products with nicotine were banned., (© 2019 Society for the Study of Addiction.)

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), χ 2  = 16.92, P < 0.001]; having smoked > 10 cigarettes/day (74.4 versus 47.2%, aOR = 4.39, 95% CI = 2.22, 8.68), χ 2  = 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, χ 2  = 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, χ 2  = 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, χ 2  = 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., (© 2019 Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Aim: This study examines where vapers purchase their vaping refills in countries having different regulations over such devices, Canada (CA), the United States (US), England (EN), and Australia (AU). Methods: Data were available from 1899 current adult daily and weekly vapers who participated in the 2016 (Wave 1) International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping. The outcome was purchase location of vaping supplies (online, vape shop, other). Adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were reported for between country comparisons. Results: Overall, 41.4% of current vapers bought their vaping products from vape shops, 27.5% bought them online, and 31.1% from other retail locations. The vast majority of vapers (91.1%) reported using nicotine-containing e-liquids. In AU, vapers were more likely to buy online vs other locations compared to CA (OR = 6.4, 2.3⁻17.9), the US (OR = 4.1, 1.54⁻10.7), and EN (OR = 7.9, 2.9⁻21.8). In the US, they were more likely to buy from vape shops (OR = 3.3, 1.8⁻6.2) or online (OR = 1.9, 1.0⁻3.8) vs other retail locations when compared to those in EN. In CA, vapers were more likely to purchase at vape shops than at other retail locations when compared to vapers in EN (5.9, 3.2⁻10.9) and the US (1.87, 1.0⁻3.1). Conclusions: The regulatory environment and enforcement of such regulations appear to influence the location where vapers buy their vaping products. In AU, banning the retail sale of nicotine vaping products has led vapers to rely mainly on online purchasing sources, whereas the lack of enforcement of the same regulation in CA has allowed specialty vape shops to flourish.