Search

Introduction This study examined user behavior, e-cigarette dependence, and device characteristics on nicotine intake among users of pod-mod e-cigarettes. Aims and Methods In 2019–2020, people who use pod-mods in the San Francisco Bay Area completed questionnaires and provided a urine sample for analysis of total nicotine equivalents (TNE). The relationship between TNE and e-cigarette use, e-cigarette brands, e-liquid nicotine strength, e-cigarette dependence, and urine 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL), as a measure of combustible cigarette exposure, were examined. Results Of 100 participants (64% male, 71% in the 18–34 age group, 45% white), 53 used JUUL primarily, 12 used Puff Bar primarily, and 35 used other brands, including Suorin; 48 participants reported current cigarette smoking. Participants most often reported use of e-liquid with 4.5%–6.0% nicotine (68%), fruit (35%), tobacco (28%), and menthol or mint flavors (26%), used e-cigarettes on 25.5 (SD = 6.3) days a month, 10.2 (SD = 14.2) times a day, and 40% used 1–2 pods/cartridges per week. In bivariate analysis, urinary TNE was higher with greater frequency (days used) and intensity (number of pods used) of e-cigarette use, e-cigarette dependence, and combustible cigarette use. In multivariable analysis, days of e-cigarette use in the last 30 days, number of pods used per week, and NNAL levels were significantly associated with TNE. There was no significant impact of e-liquid nicotine strength on TNE. Conclusions Nicotine intake among people who used pod-mod e-cigarettes increased with e-cigarette consumption and e-cigarette dependence, but not with e-liquid nicotine strength. Our findings may inform whether FDA adopts a nicotine standard for e-cigarettes. Implications The study examined how device and user characteristics influence nicotine intake among pod-mod e-cigarette users. Nicotine intake increased with frequency (days of e-cigarette use in past 30 days) intensity of use (number of pods used per day) and e-cigarette dependence but not with the flavor or nicotine concentration of the e-liquids. Regulation of nicotine concentration of e-liquids is unlikely to influence nicotine exposure among adult experienced pod-mod users.

Purpose Results of a study to determine whether i.v. administration of a single dose of 4 mg of ondansetron was associated with QT interval prolongation in emergency department (ED) patients are reported. Methods In a prospective observational study conducted at an urban academic medical center ED, a convenience sample of adult ED patients treated with ondansetron 4 mg i.v. were enrolled. A 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) was obtained immediately before and 5 minutes after ondansetron administration. Measurements of heart rate–corrected QT interval (QTc measurements) provided by ECG machines were evaluated. An electrophysiologist analyzed all ECGs for adverse electrical events and verified the accuracy of QTc values. The primary objective was to measure the QTc change from baseline after ondansetron administration. The secondary objective was to describe adverse electrical cardiac events. Interactions between ondansetron and patients’ home medications or ED-provided medications were analyzed. Results Among patients included in the data analysis ( n = 20), ondansetron administration was associated with a mean QTc increase of 16.2 msec (95% confidence interval, 4.2–28.2 msec; p = 0.01) and a median increase of 12 msec (interquartile range, 5.5–18.0 msec; p Conclusion Significant QTc prolongation occurred in ED patients receiving a single 4-mg i.v. dose of ondansetron. None of the patients had an ondansetron-related cardiac adverse event.