Search

Background and aims: Varenicline is one of the most effective smoking cessation treatments. Its supply in England was disrupted in July 2021 due to nitrosamine impurities found by its supplier, Pfizer. This study measured the impact of this disruption on smoking cessation in England. Design, setting and participants: The study used repeated cross‐sectional surveys conducted monthly, from June 2018 to December 2022. Set in England, it comprised a total of 3024 adults who reported smoking during the past year and had made at least one serious attempt to quit in the past 6 months. Measurements: Generalized additive models analyzed the association of the varenicline supply disruption with the trend in self‐reported varenicline use in the most recent quit attempt. We used these results to estimate the population‐level impact of the disruption on smoking cessation. Findings Before July 2021, the proportion of past 6‐month quit attempts using varenicline was stable at approximately 3.9% [risk ratio (RR)trend = 1.034, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.823–1.298]. The trend in varenicline use has changed sharply since the supply disruption (RRΔtrend = 0.297, 95% CI = 0.120–0.738), with prevalence falling by 69.3% per year since; from 4.1% in June 2021 to 0.8% in December 2022. Convergently, National Health Service general practitioner prescribing data reported that just 0.1% of prescriptions for smoking cessation treatments in December 2022 were for varenicline. Assuming that varenicline does not return to the market, we estimate that this could result in ~8400 fewer people stopping smoking for at least 6 months, ~4200 fewer long‐term ex‐smokers and ~1890 more avoidable deaths each year. Conclusions: In England, the disruption in supply of varenicline since 2021 has coincided with a substantial fall in the use of varenicline in attempts to quit smoking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Alcohol and smoking brief interventions (BIs) in general practice have been shown to be effective in lowering alcohol and smoking-related harm. Aim: To assess prevalence of self-reported BI receipt among increasing or higher-risk drinkers and past-year smokers in England, Scotland, and Wales, and associations between intervention receipt and socioeconomic position. Design & setting: Cross-sectional study using data from a monthly population-based survey in England, Scotland, and Wales. Method: The study comprised 47 799 participants (15 573 increasing or higher-risk drinkers [alcohol use disorders identification test consumption score ≥5] and 7791 past-year smokers) surveyed via telephone in 2020-2022 (during the COVID-19 pandemic). All data were self-reported. Prevalence of self-reported BI receipt was assessed descriptively; associations between receipt and socioeconomic position were analysed using logistic regression. Results: Among adults in England, Scotland, and Wales, 32.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 31.8 to 32.7) reported increasing or higher-risk drinking and 17.7% (95% CI = 17.3 to 18.1) past-year smoking. Among increasing or higher-risk drinkers, 58.0% (95% CI = 57.1 to 58.9) consulted with a GP in the past year, and of these, 4.1% (95% CI = 3.6 to 4.6) reported receiving BIs. Among past-year smokers, 55.8% (95% CI = 54.5 to 57.1) attended general practice in the past year; of these, 41.0% (95% CI = 39.4 to 42.7) stated receiving BIs. There was a tendency for patients from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds to receive more alcohol (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.38, 95% CI = 1.10 to 1.73) or smoking BIs (aOR 1.11, 95% CI = 0.98 to 1.26), but for the latter the results were statistically non-significant. Results did not differ notably by nation within Great Britain. Conclusion: BIs in general practice are more common for smoking than for alcohol. A greater proportion of BIs for alcohol were found to be delivered to people who were from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds and who were increasing or higher-risk drinkers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim To examine trends in public awareness and knowledge of drinking guidelines in the UK since their revision in 2016, which had moved from a daily to a weekly guideline, made the guideline the same for men and women, and reduced the guideline for men by around one-third. Method Data were from a representative, repeat cross-sectional survey. We analysed changes in awareness and knowledge of drinking guidelines among 8168 adult drinkers between 2016 and 2022 and associations with sociodemographic characteristics, smoking status and level of alcohol consumption. Results The proportion of drinkers aware of guidelines declined from 86.0% (95%CI 84.0–88.0%) in 2016 to 81.7% (79.5–84.0%) in 2019, then increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, peaking at 91.6% (90.1–93.1%) in 2020. The proportion who correctly identified the guideline as a maximum of exactly 14 units/week remained at around a quarter from 2016 (25.0%, 22.4–27.5%) to 2018 (25.8%, 23.2–28.3%), whereas the proportion who gave a figure of 14 units or fewer rose from 52.1 (49.2–55.0%) to 57.4% (54.6–60.3%). However, by 2022, guideline knowledge had worsened significantly, with these figures falling to 19.7 (17.4–21.9%) and 46.5% (43.6–49.4%), respectively. Changes over time were similar across subgroups. Odds of guideline awareness and knowledge were higher among drinkers who were aged ≥35, female, more educated and from more advantaged social grades. Conclusions The majority of adult drinkers in the UK are aware of low-risk drinking guidelines. However, 6 years since their announcement, knowledge of the revised drinking guidelines remains poor. Less than a quarter know the recommended weekly limit and only around half think it is 14 units or less. Inequalities have persisted over time, such that disadvantaged groups remain less likely to know the guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To examine the association of self‐reported COVID‐19 disease status with cutting down, past‐month and past‐year quit attempts and motivation to stop smoking. Design and setting: Repeat cross‐sectional survey, representative of the adult population in England. Participants: Past‐year smokers, n = 3338 (aged ≥ 18 years) responding between May 2020 and April 2021. Measurements: Outcomes were (i) currently cutting down, (ii) having made a quit attempt in the past month, (iii) having made a quit attempt in the past year and (iv) motivation to stop smoking. The explanatory variable was self‐reported COVID‐19 disease status (belief in never versus ever had COVID‐19). Covariates included age, sex, occupational grade, region, children in the household, alcohol use and survey month. Findings Of past‐year smokers, 720 (21.6%) reported past‐COVID‐19 infection and 48 (1.4%) reported current COVID‐19 infection. In adjusted analyses, rates of currently cutting down [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.93–1.34], past‐year quit attempts (aOR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.82–1.19) and motivation to stop smoking (aOR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.89–1.23) were comparable in those who did and did not report ever having had COVID‐19. People who reported ever having had COVID‐19 had 39% higher odds than those without of attempting to quit in the past month, but the confidence interval contained the possibility of no difference (aOR = 1.39, 95% CI = 0.94–2.06) and for some the quit attempt may have occurred before they had COVID‐19. Conclusion: During the first year of the COVID‐19 pandemic in England, rates of reducing smoking and attempting to quit in the past year were similar in smokers who did or did not self‐report ever having had COVID‐19. There was also little difference in motivation to stop smoking between groups. However, causal interpretation is limited by the study design, and there is potential misclassification of the temporal sequence of infection and changes to smoking behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To estimate recent trends in the prevalence of disposable e‐cigarette vaping in Great Britain, overall and across ages, and to measure these trends in the context of changes in smoking and vaping prevalence. Design: The Smoking Toolkit Study, a monthly representative cross‐sectional survey. Setting: Great Britain. Participants: A total of 36 876 adults (≥ 18 years) completed telephone interviews between January 2021 and April 2022. Measurements Current e‐cigarette vapers were asked which type of device they mainly use. We estimated age‐specific monthly time trends in the prevalence of current disposable e‐cigarette use among vapers and inhaled nicotine use (vaping/smoking), smoking and vaping among adults. Findings From January 2021 to April 2022, there was an 18‐fold increase in the percentage of vapers who used disposables, rising from 1.2 to 22.2% [prevalence ratio (PR) = 18.0; 95% compatibility interval (CI) = 9.18–49.0]. Growth in disposable e‐cigarette vaping was most pronounced in younger adults (interaction P‐value = 0.013): for example, the percentage of 18‐year‐old vapers using disposables rose from 0.4 to 54.8% (PR = 129; 95% CI = 28.5–4520), while it rose from 2.1 to 10.0% (PR = 4.73; 95% CI = 2.06–23.6) among 45‐year‐old vapers. However, the overall percentage of people currently using any inhaled nicotine remained stable over time both among all adults (20.0 versus 21.2%; PR = 1.06; 95% CI = 0.92–1.22) and among 18‐year‐olds (30.2 versus 29.7%; PR = 0.99; 95% CI = 0.80–1.22). In 18‐year‐olds, vaping prevalence grew (11.3 versus 17.7%; PR = 1.57; 95% CI = 1.12–2.29), and there was imprecise evidence for a decline in smoking (24.5 versus 19.5%; PR = 0.80; 95% CI = 0.63–1.04). In 45‐year‐olds, there was relatively little change in vaping (PR = 1.08; 95% CI = 0.88–1.33) or smoking prevalence (PR = 1.01; 95% CI = 0.88–1.16). Conclusions: Use of disposable e‐cigarettes in Great Britain grew rapidly between 2021 and 2022, especially among younger adults, but the overall prevalence of inhaled nicotine use was stable over time. Most young adult vapers in Great Britain now use disposable products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To measure whether the prevalence of use and real‐world effectiveness of different smoking cessation aids has changed in England since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. Design: Representative monthly cross‐sectional surveys, January 2015–June 2021. Setting: England. Participants: A total of 7300 adults (≥18 y) who had smoked within the previous 12 months and had made ≥1 quit attempt during that period. Measurements The independent variable was the timing of the COVID‐19 pandemic (pre‐pandemic [January 2015–February 2020] vs pandemic [April 2020–June 2021]). We analysed (i) the association between the pandemic period and self‐reported use (vs non‐use) during the most recent quit attempt of: prescription medication (nicotine replacement therapy [NRT]/varenicline/bupropion), NRT bought over‐the‐counter, e‐cigarettes, traditional behavioural support and traditional remote support (telephone support/written self‐help materials/websites) and (ii) the interaction between the pandemic period and use of these cessation aids on self‐reported abstinence from quit date to survey. Covariates included age, sex, social grade, level of cigarette addiction and characteristics related to the quit attempt. Findings After adjustment for secular trends, there was a significant increase from the pre‐pandemic to pandemic period in the prevalence of use of traditional remote support by past‐year smokers in a quit attempt (OR = 2.18; 95% CI, 1.42–3.33); specifically telephone support (OR = 7.16; 95% CI, 2.19–23.45) and websites (OR = 2.39; 95% CI, 1.41–4.08). There was also an increase in the prevalence of use of prescription medication (OR = 1.47; 95% CI, 1.08–2.00); specifically varenicline (OR = 1.66; 95% CI, 1.09–2.52). There were no significant changes in prevalence of use of other cessation aids after adjustment for secular trends. People who reported using prescription medication (OR = 1.41; 95% CI, 1.09–1.84) and e‐cigarettes (OR = 1.87; 95% CI, 1.62–2.16) had greater odds of reporting abstinence than people who did not. There were no significant interactions between the pandemic period and use of any cessation aid on abstinence, after adjustment for covariates and use of the other aids, although data were insensitive to distinguish no change from meaningful modest (OR = 1.34) effects (Bayes factors 0.72–1.98). Conclusions: In England, the COVID‐19 pandemic was associated with an increase in use of remote support for smoking cessation and varenicline by smokers in a quit attempt up to June 2021. The data were inconclusive regarding an association between the pandemic and changes in the real‐world effectiveness of popular smoking cessation aids. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: The three-question Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-C) is frequently used in healthcare for screening and brief advice about levels of alcohol consumption. AUDIT-C scores (0-12) provide feedback as categories of risk rather than estimates of actual alcohol intake, an important metric for behaviour change. The study aimed to (i) develop a continuous metric from the Extended AUDIT-C expressed in United Kingdom (UK) units (8 g pure ethanol), offering equivalent accuracy, and providing a direct estimator of weekly alcohol consumption (EWAC) and (ii) evaluate the EWAC's bias and error using the graduated-frequency (GF) questionnaire as a reference standard of alcohol consumption. Design: Cross-sectional diagnostic study based on a nationally-representative survey. Settings: Community dwelling households in England. Participants: A total of 22 404 household residents aged =16 years reporting drinking alcohol at least occasionally. Measurements: Computer-assisted personal interviews consisting of (i) AUDIT questionnaire with extended response items (the 'Extended AUDIT') and (ii) GF. Primary outcomes were: mean deviation <1 UK unit (metric of bias); root-mean-square deviation <2 UK units (metric of total error) between EWAC and GF. The secondary outcome was the receiver operating characteristic area under the curve for predicting alcohol consumption in excess of 14 and 35 UK units. Findings: EWAC had a positive bias of 0.2 UK units (95% CI = 0.08, 0.4) compared with GF. Deviations were skewed: whereas the mean error was 11 UK units/week [9.5, 11.9], in half of participants the deviation between EWAC and GF was between 0 and 2.1 UK units/week. EWAC predicted consumption in excess of 14 UK units/week with a significantly greater area under the curve (0.918 [0.914, 0.923]) than AUDIT-C (0.870 [0.864, 0.876]) or the full AUDIT (0.854 [0.847, 0.860]). Conclusions: A new estimator of weekly alcohol consumption, which uses answers to the Extended AUDIT-C, meets the targeted bias tolerance. It is superior in accuracy to AUDIT-C and the full 10-item AUDIT when predicting consumption thresholds, making it a reliable complement to the Extended AUDIT-C for health promotion interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To estimate the associations between regular exposure to smoking by other people and motivation and attempts to quit among current smokers. To examine whether socio‐demographic and other factors moderate these associations. Design A repeat nationally representative cross‐sectional survey. Data were collected monthly between November 2014 and February 2019. Setting: England. Participants: Current smokers ≥16 years of age from the Smoking Toolkit Study (n = 15 136). Measurements Participants were asked whether other people regularly smoke in their presence, how motivated they were to quit and whether they had made a quit attempt in the past year. Moderators assessed were occupation‐based social grade, housing tenure, urges to smoke, high‐risk alcohol consumption, and disability. Adjusted analyses included moderators, socio‐demographic (age/sex/ethnicity/sexual orientation/marital status/children in household) and seasonal (quarter/year) confounders. Findings Current smokers who were regularly exposed to other people smoking in their presence were less likely to be highly motivated to quit (OR = 0.88 [95% CI 0.80–0.97]), but were no less likely to have made a quit attempt in the past year (OR 1.04 [0.97–1.13], Bayes Factor (BF) = 0.05). The inverse relationship between regular smoking exposure and motivation to quit was moderated by urges to smoke, such that exposure was only associated with a reduction in motivation among those without strong urges to smoke (OR 0.83 [0.75–0.93] versus OR 1.04 [0.86–1.26]; P = 0.048). None of the other factors significantly moderated the association with motivation to quit, and none moderated the relationship between regular smoking exposure and quit attempts. All non‐significant interactions, except social grade (BF = 1.44) with quit attempts, had Bayes Factors that supported the hypothesis of no moderation (BF range: 0.12–0.21). Conclusions: Among current smokers in England, regular exposure to other smokers appears to be associated with lower motivation to quit in people without strong urges to smoke, yet there appears to be no association with quit attempts in the previous year. Social grade, housing tenure, high‐risk alcohol consumption and disability do not moderate these associations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has called for research into tobacco harm reduction across ethnicities, genders and socio‐economic status. Although there is increasing research focused on the latter two, relatively few studies have considered ethnic variations. Therefore this study aimed to assess (i) the association between ethnicity and use of e‐cigarettes and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for temporary abstinence and cutting down, and (ii) trends in prevalence of these over time. Design Repeated cross‐sectional household survey. Setting: England. Participants: Between April 2013 and September 2019, data were collected on 24 114 smokers, 16+ of age, taking part in the Smoking Toolkit Study (STS). Measurements Ethnicity coding included: White, mixed/multiple ethnic group, Asian, Black and Arab/other ethnic group. Smokers reported whether they were currently using e‐cigarettes and/or NRT for cutting down or during periods of temporary abstinence. Findings Odds of e‐cigarette use for cutting down and temporary abstinence were significantly lower among those of Asian ethnicity (OR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.66–0.93) and Arab/other ethnicity (OR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.40–0.83) compared with White ethnicity. Those of mixed/multiple ethnicity had higher odds for NRT us (OR = 1.42, 95% CI = 1.04–1.94) compared with those of White ethnicity. Trend analysis indicated that for White ethnicity, e‐cigarette use by smokers for cutting down and temporary abstinence followed an 'inverse S' shaped cubic curve indicating an overall rise, whereas NRT use followed an 'S' shaped cubic curve, indicating an overall decline. For mixed/multiple ethnicity a similar trend was found for NRT use only, with other ethnicities showing no statistically significant trends (suggesting relative stability over time). Conclusions: In England, e‐cigarette use by smokers for cutting down and temporary abstinence is less common among Asian and Arab/other ethnicity smokers compared with White smokers. Smokers of mixed/multiple ethnicity are the most likely to be using NRT compared with other ethnic groups for cutting down and temporary abstinence. E‐cigarette use by smokers for cutting down and temporary abstinence has increased over time among White smokers, whereas prevalence in other ethnic groups has remained stable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To establish the number of smokers in England who would be targeted by increasing the age of sale of cigarettes from 18 to 21 years and to assess the smoking and socio‐demographic profile of those smokers. Design and setting: Nationally representative cross‐sectional survey of adults in England conducted between January 2009 and July 2019. Participants: A total of 219 720 adults. Measurements All participants reported their current smoking status and socio‐demographic characteristics (i.e. age, gender, home ownership, social grade and ethnicity). Smokers reported motivation to quit, urges to smoke and the Heaviness of Smoking Index (HIS). Weighted prevalence statistics were calculated. Multinomial regression and logistic regression were used to assess differences in smoking characteristics among smokers and socio‐demographic characteristics relative to non‐smokers. Findings The prevalence of smoking between January 2009 and July 2019 was highest among those aged 21–30. In 2019, 15.6% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 12.8–18.8%] of 18–20‐year‐olds reported smoking, which is estimated to represent 364 000 individuals in England. Relative to smokers aged 18–20, older smokers (aged 21+) had a higher motivation to quit smoking [odds ratios (ORs) = 1.40–1.45 range] and higher nicotine dependency as measured by urges to smoke (ORs = 1.06–1.24 range) and HSI (ORs = 1.05–2.85 range). Compared with non‐smokers aged 18–20, smokers in this age group had lower odds of being female (OR = 0.89) and higher odds of being of white ethnicity (OR = 2.78) and from social grades C1–E (lower social grades) compared with AB (higher social grades) (OR = 1.19–1.83 range). Conclusion: Increasing the age of sale of cigarettes to 21 years in England would currently target approximately 364 000 lower dependent smokers from more disadvantaged backgrounds aged 18–20, who have less motivation to quit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: There are concerns that national population‐based estimates of illicit drug use are underestimated. We investigated this by comparing estimates of illicit substance use at age 24 from the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) with a birth cohort (Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, ALSPAC) and by comparing the Smoking and Alcohol Toolkit Studies (STS/ATS) to ALSPAC. Design Cross‐sectional household survey and cross‐sectional data from one wave of a longitudinal birth cohort. Setting: England and Wales. Participants: Young adults aged 23–25 reporting on substance use in 2017 to CSEW (n = 1165), ALSPAC (n = 3389) and STS/ATS (n = 950). Measurements Lifetime and past‐year illicit drug use, smoking status and hazardous drinking at age 24. Findings The 2017 CSEW estimate of lifetime illicit drug use was 40.6%, compared with 62.8% in ALSPAC (risk difference % [RD%] = 22.2%; 95% CI = 18.9–25.5%; P ≤ 0.001). The RD in lifetime use between ALSPAC and the CSEW was 23.2% (95% CI = 20.0–26.4%) for cannabis, 16.9% (95% CI = 14.4–19.4%) for powder cocaine and 24.8% (95% CI = 22.6–27.0%) for amphetamine. Past‐year drug use was 16.4% in CSEW, compared with 36.7% in ALSPAC (RD% = 20.3%; 95% CI = 17.6–23.0%; P ≤ 0.001). For past‐year substance use, the RD between ALSPAC and the CSEW was 15.4% (95% CI = 12.9–17.9%) for cannabis, 14.8% (95% CI = 13.0%–16.6%) for powder cocaine and 15.9% (95% CI = 14.5–17.4%) for amphetamine. Levels of current smoking were similar between STS (27.4%) and ALSPAC (29.4%). Hazardous drinking was substantially higher in ALSPAC (60.3%) than the ATS (32.1%; RD% = 28.2%; 95% CI = 24.8–31.6%; P ≤ 0.001). Conclusions: The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children provides one source of validation for measurements of drug use in government household surveys and indicates that illicit drug use may be underestimated in the Crime Survey for England and Wales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aim: National social marketing campaigns have been shown to promote smoking cessation in England. There is reason to believe that regional and city‐wide campaigns can play a valuable role in reducing smoking prevalence over and above any national tobacco control activity. This study aimed to assess the impact of the London Smoking Cessation Transformation Programme, a multi‐component citywide smoking cessation programme, on quit attempts and quit success rates. Design and Setting: Interrupted time–series analyses, using Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) and generalized additive models (GAM) of population trends in the difference between monthly quit attempts and quit success rates among smokers who made a quit attempt in London versus the rest of England before and during the first year of the programme. Participants: A total of 55 528 past‐year adult smokers who participated in a monthly series of nationally representative cross‐sectional surveys in England between November 2006 and August 2018. Twelve and a half per cent of smokers lived in London (intervention region) and 87.5% lived in the rest of England (control region). Measurements Monthly prevalence of quit attempts and quit success rates among smokers who made a quit attempt. Findings The monthly difference in prevalence of quit attempts in London compared with the rest of England increased by 9.59% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 4.35–14.83, P < 0.001] from a mean of 0.04% pre‐intervention to 9.63% post‐intervention. The observed increase in success rates among those who tried was not statistically significant (B = 4.72; 95% CI = –2.68 to 12.11, P = 0.21); Bayes factors indicated that these data were insensitive. GAM analyses confirmed these results. Conclusion: The promotion of the London Smoking Cessation Transformation Programme during September 2017 was associated with a significant increase in quit attempts compared with the rest of England. The results were inconclusive regarding an effect on quit success among those who tried. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To estimate (1) associations between self‐reported COVID‐19, hand‐washing, smoking status, e‐cigarette use and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) use and (2) the extent to which COVID‐19 has prompted smoking and vaping quit attempts and more smoking inside the home. Design Cross‐sectional household surveys. Setting and participants: A representative sample of the population in England from April to May 2020. The sample included 3179 adults aged ≥ 18 years. Measurements Participants who reported that they definitely or thought they had coronavirus were classified as having self‐reported COVID‐19. Participants were asked how often they wash their hands after returning home, before preparing foods, before eating or before touching their face. They were also asked whether, due to COVID‐19, they had (i) attempted to quit smoking, (ii) attempted to quit vaping and (iii) changed the amount they smoke inside the home. Findings Odds of self‐reported COVID‐19 were significantly greater among current smokers [20.9%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.04–1.73] and long‐term (> 1‐year) ex‐smokers (16.1%, aOR = 1.33, 95% CI = 1.05–1.68) compared with never smokers (14.5%). Recent (< 1‐year) ex‐smokers had non‐significantly greater odds of self‐reported COVID‐19 (22.2%, aOR = 1.50, 95% CI = 0.85–2.53). Bayes factors indicated there was sufficient evidence to rule out large differences in self‐reported COVID‐19 by NRT use and medium differences by e‐cigarette use. With the exception of hand‐washing before face‐touching, engagement in hand‐washing behaviours was high (> 85%), regardless of nicotine use. A minority (12.2%) of quit attempts in the past 3 months were reportedly triggered by COVID‐19, and approximately one in 10 current e‐cigarette users reported attempting to quit vaping because of COVID‐19. Conclusions: In England, current smokers and long‐term ex‐smokers appear to have higher odds of self‐reported COVID‐19 compared with never smokers in adjusted analyses, but there were no large differences between people who used nicotine replacement therapy or e‐cigarettes. Engagement in hand‐washing appears to be high, regardless of nicotine or tobacco use. A minority of past‐year smokers and current e‐cigarette users, respectively, report attempting to quit smoking/vaping due to COVID‐19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Advice from a general practitioner (GP) can encourage smokers to quit. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence and correlates of receipt of GP advice on smoking, what type of advice and support was offered and characteristics and quitting activity associated with different types of advice. Design/setting Data were collected between 2016 and 2019 in a series of monthly cross‐sectional surveys of representative samples of the adult population in England. Participants: A total of 11 588 past‐year smokers. Measurements Participants reported whether they had received advice or offer of support for smoking cessation from their GP in the last year. Socio‐demographic and behavioural characteristics and past‐year quit attempts and cessation were also recorded. Findings One in two [47.2%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 46.1–48.3%] past‐year smokers who reported visiting their GP in the last year recalled receiving advice on smoking, and one in three (30.1%, 95% CI = 29.1–31.1%) reported being offered cessation support. The most common form of support offered was stop smoking services (16.5%, 95% CI = 15.7–17.3%) followed by prescription medication (8.1%, 95% CI = 7.5–8.7%); 3.7% (95% CI = 3.3–4.1%) reported having been recommended to use e‐cigarettes. Smokers who were older, non‐white, more addicted, and smoked five or more cigarettes/day had consistently higher odds of receiving advice or support. There were some differences by region, housing tenure, presence of children in the home and high‐risk drinking in the types of advice/support received. There were no significant differences by sex, occupational social grade, disability, type of cigarettes smoked, or survey year. Advice with any offer of support was associated with higher odds of attempting to quit than advice alone [adjusted odds ratio (ORadj) = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.30–1.76]. Advice alone was associated with higher odds of quit attempts than no advice in smokers with higher (ORadj = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.10–1.64) but not lower occupational social grade (ORadj = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.75–1.08). Conclusions: In England, a minority of smokers receive support from their GP to stop smoking. Those who do are more likely to be older, non‐white and more addicted to cigarettes. Advice plus offer of support appears to be associated with increased odds of making a quit attempt, while advice without offer of support appears only to be associated with increased odds of making a quit attempt in higher occupational social grade smokers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: To gain a better understanding of the complex and independent associations between different measures of socioeconomic position (SEP) and smoking in England.Aims and Methods: Between March 2013 and January 2019 data were collected from 120 496 adults aged 16+ in England taking part in the Smoking Toolkit Study. Of these, 18.04% (n = 21 720) were current smokers. Six indicators of SEP were measured: social grade, employment status, educational qualifications, home and car ownership and income. Models were constructed using ridge regression to assess the contribution of each measure of SEP, taking account of high collinearity.Results: The strongest predictor of smoking status was housing tenure. Those who did not own their own home had twice the odds of smoking compared with homeowners (odds ratio [OR] = 2.01). Social grade, educational qualification, and income were also good predictors. Those in social grades C1 (OR = 1.04), C2 (OR = 1.29), D (OR = 1.39), and E (OR = 1.78) had higher odds of smoking than those in social grade AB. Similarly, those with A-level/equivalent (OR = 1.15), GCSE/vocational (OR = 1.48), other/still studying (OR = 1.12), and no post-16 qualifications (OR = 1.48) had higher odds of smoking than those with university qualifications, as did those who earned in the lowest (OR = 1.23), third (OR = 1.18), and second quartiles (OR = 1.06) compared with those earning in the highest. Associations between smoking and employment (OR = 1.03) and car ownership (OR = 1.05) were much smaller.Conclusions: Of a variety of socioeconomic measures, housing tenure appears to be the strongest independent predictor of smoking in England, followed by social grade, educational qualifications, and income. Employment status and car ownership have the lowest predictive power.Implications: This study used ridge regression, a technique which takes into account high collinearity between variables, to gain a better understanding of the independent associations between different measures of SEP and smoking in England. The findings provide guidance as to which SEP measures one could use when trying to identifying individuals most at risk from smoking, with housing tenure identified as the strongest independent predictor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: At a time of declining smoking prevalence in England, it is useful to document any changes in the characteristics of smokers. This has implications for targeting tobacco control policies and interventions. This study compared the characteristics of smokers from 2008 to 2017 to assess changes in smoking and quitting patterns and socio‐demographic profile. Design and setting Analysis of annual trends in results from repeated cross‐sectional surveys of representative samples of the population in England from 2008 to 2017. Participants: The study included 208 813 adults aged 16+. Measurements Information was gathered on age, sex, social grade and region, cigarette consumption, cigarette dependence as measured by time to first cigarette of the day, daily smoking, smoking roll‐your‐own cigarettes, attempts to cut down, use of an e‐cigarette or nicotine replacement therapy, attempts to cut down or quit, use of support in quit attempts and whether the quit attempt was abrupt. Findings During the period, mean daily cigarette consumption [B = –0.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) = –0.33 to −0.27] and the time to first cigarette score decreased (B = –0.03, 95% CI = –0.03 to −0.02). The proportion of smokers attempting to cut down or quit decreased (odds ratio (OR) range = 0.96–0.97, 95% CI range = 0.95–0.97). Use of behavioural support [odds ratio (OR) = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.86–0.92] or no support decreased (OR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.96–0.99), while use of pharmacological support, including e‐cigarettes, increased (OR = 1.04, 95% CI = 1.02–1.05). There was no significant change in the difference in social grade between smokers and non‐smokers comparing 2008 with 2017. Changes in smoking and quitting behaviour were independent of changes in socio‐demographic characteristics. Conclusions: Between 2008 and 2017 in England, smokers appear to have become less dependent on cigarettes but less likely to try to quit or cut down. Of those who tried to quit, fewer used behavioural support and more used pharmacological support. The proportion from more disadvantaged backgrounds did not change significantly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Understanding whether and how far smokers' characteristics influence the effectiveness of treatment may be important for tailoring recommendations on cessation aids to those most likely to help the user achieve abstinence. This study aimed to estimate the effectiveness of commonly used smoking cessation aids and test whether their effectiveness differs according to cigarette addiction, socio‐economic status, age or sex. Design Correlational design using cross‐sectional survey data collected monthly between 2006 and 2018. Setting: England. Participants: A total of 18 929 adults (aged ≥ 16 years, 52.0% female) who had smoked within the previous 12 months and had made at least one quit attempt during that period. Measurements The outcome was self‐reported abstinence from quit date to survey. Independent variables were self‐reported use during the most recent quit attempt of: prescription nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), NRT over‐the‐counter, varenicline, bupropion, e‐cigarettes, face‐to‐face behavioural support, telephone support, written self‐help materials, websites and hypnotherapy. Moderators were cigarette addiction, social grade, age and sex. Findings After adjustment for covariates and use of other cessation aids, users of e‐cigarettes [odds ratio (OR) = 1.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.69–2.24] and varenicline (OR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.51–2.21) had significantly higher odds of reporting abstinence than those who did not report use of these cessation aids. Use of prescription NRT was associated with increased abstinence in older (≥ 45 years) (OR = 1.58, 95% CI = 1.25–2.00) but not younger (< 45 years) smokers (OR = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.85–1.42). Use of websites was associated with increased abstinence in smokers from lower (OR = 2.20, 95% CI = 1.22–3.98) but not higher social grades (OR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.40–1.38). There was little evidence of benefits of using other cessation aids. Conclusions: Use of e‐cigarettes and varenicline are associated with higher abstinence rates following a quit attempt in England. Use of prescription of nicotine replacement therapy is also associated with higher abstinence rates, but only in older smokers, and use of websites only in smokers from lower socio‐economic status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Concern about weight gain is a barrier to smoking cessation. E-cigarettes may help quitters to control their weight through continued exposure to the appetite-suppressant effects of nicotine and behavioural aspects of vaping. This study explored the views and practices of smokers, ex-smokers and current e-cigarette users relating to vaping and weight control.Methods: Cross-sectional survey of past-year smokers (n = 1320), current smokers (n = 1240) and current e-cigarette users (n = 394) in England, conducted April-July 2018. Data were weighted to match the English population on key sociodemographic characteristics.Results: Of e-cigarette users, 4.6% (95%CI 2.6-6.6) reported vaping for weight control, and 1.9% (95%CI 0.6-3.2) reported vaping to replace meals/snacks. It was rare for individuals who had smoked in the past year to have heard (8.8%, 95%CI 7.3-10.3) or believe (6.4%, 95%CI 5.1-7.7) that vaping could help control weight. Women (OR = 0.62, 95%CI 0.42-0.93) and older people (OR = 0.30, 95%CI 0.13-0.72) were less likely to have heard the claim and women were less likely to believe it (OR = 0.44, 95%CI 0.27-0.72). However, 13.4% (95%CI 11.3-15.5) and 13.1% (95%CI 11.0-15.2) of current smokers who did not use e-cigarettes said they would be more likely to try e-cigarettes or quit smoking, respectively, if vaping could help control their weight.Conclusion: One in 16 English people who have smoked in the last year believe that vaping would prevent weight gain after stopping. One in 22 people who vape are using e-cigarettes for this purpose. However, should evidence emerge that e-cigarettes prevent weight gain, one in eight people who smoke would be tempted to quit smoking and use e-cigarettes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To examine smoking prevalence, motivation and attempts to stop smoking, markers of cigarette addiction and success in quit attempts of people living in social housing in England compared with other housing tenures. Design and setting: A large cross‐sectional survey of a representative sample of the English population conducted between January 2015 and October 2017. Participants: A total of 57 522 adults (aged ≥ 16 years). Measurements Main outcomes were smoking status, number of cigarettes per day, time to first cigarette, exposure to smoking by others, motivation to stop smoking, past‐year quit attempts and use of cessation support. Covariates were age, sex, social grade, region and survey year. Findings Adults in social housing had twice the odds of being smokers than those living in other housing types [odds ratio (OR) = 2.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.98–2.22, P < 0.001]. Smokers in social housing consumed more cigarettes daily (adjusted mean difference = 1.09 cigarettes, 95% CI = 0.72–1.46, P < 0.001) and were more likely to smoke within 30 minutes of waking (OR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.48–1.79, P < 0.001) than smokers living in other housing types. Prevalence of high motivation to stop smoking was similar across housing types (OR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.91–1.19, P = 0.553). The prevalence of quit attempts and use of cessation support within the past year were greater in social compared with other housing (OR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.03–1.26, P = 0.011; OR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.09–1.54, P = 0.003), but success in quitting was much lower (OR = 0.57, 95% CI = 0.45–0.72, P < 0.001). Conclusions: In England, living in social housing is a major independent risk factor for smoking. These easily identifiable hot‐spots consist of smokers who are at least as motivated to stop as other smokers, but find it more difficult. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Higher levels of anxiety and depression have been found to be associated with greater difficulty in stopping smoking. This raises the question as to whether mood disturbance may be associated with exposure to, and use of, quitting support. Aims: This study examined whether General Practitioner (GP) advice and/or offer of support, or stop-smoking service use differed between smokers reporting or not reporting depression/anxiety. Methods: Data came from the Smoking Toolkit Study. Participants were 1,162 English adults who reported currently smoking or having stopped within the past 12 months, aged 40+ years, surveyed between April and September 2012. Anxiety/depression was assessed by the mood disturbance item of the EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D). This was compared to recall of GP quit advice and/or support, and stop-smoking aid use adjusting for age, gender, and social grade. Results/Findings: Smokers reporting depression/anxiety were more likely to recall being offered advice and support to stop smoking by their GP (OR = 1.50, 95% C.I. = 1.05–2.13). However, there were no significant differences in use of stop-smoking aids during the past year. Conclusions: Smokers reporting depression/anxiety are more likely to be offered stop-smoking support by their GPs, but this does not appear to translate into stop-smoking aid use, despite high motivation to quit. Given higher nicotine dependence in this group, mental health specific support may need to be offered, and more needs to be done to make this offer of aid attractive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Aims: To compare the proportion of people in England with probable alcohol dependence [Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) score ≥ 20] with those with other drinking patterns (categorized by AUDIT scores) in terms of motivation to reduce drinking and use of alcohol support resources. Design: A combination of random probability and simple quota sampling to conduct monthly cross‐sectional household computer‐assisted interviews between March 2014 and August 2017. Setting: The general population in all nine regions of England. Participants: Participants in the Alcohol Toolkit Study (ATS), a monthly household survey of alcohol consumption among people aged 16 years and over in England (n = 69 826). The mean age was 47 years [standard deviation (SD) = 18.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 46.8–47] and 51% (n = 35 560) were female. Measurements: χ2 tests were used to investigate associations with demographic variables, motivation to quit drinking, attempts to quit drinking, general practitioner (GP) engagement and types of support accessed in the last 12 months across AUDIT risk zones. Findings: A total of 0.6% were classified as people with probable alcohol dependence (95% CI = 0.5–0.7). Motivation to quit (χ2 = 1692.27, P < 0.001), current attempts (χ2 = 473.94, P < 0.001) and past‐year attempts (χ2 = 593.67, P < 0.001) differed by AUDIT risk zone. People with probable dependence were more likely than other ATS participants to have a past‐year attempt to cut down or quit (51.8%) and have received a specialist referral from their GP about drinking (13.7%), and less likely to report no motivation to reduce their drinking (26.2%). Those with probable dependence had higher use of self‐help books and mobile applications (apps) than other ATS participants; however, 27.7% did not access any resources during their most recent attempt to cut down. Conclusions: Adults in England with probable alcohol dependence, measured through the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, demonstrate higher motivation to quit drinking and greater use of both specialist treatment and self‐driven support compared with those in other Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test zones, but most do not access treatment resources to support their attempts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Given the rapid increase in the popularity of e-cigarettes and the paucity of associated longitudinal health-related data, the need to assess the potential risks of long-term use is essential.Objective: To compare exposure to nicotine, tobacco-related carcinogens, and toxins among smokers of combustible cigarettes only, former smokers with long-term e-cigarette use only, former smokers with long-term nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) use only, long-term dual users of both combustible cigarettes and e-cigarettes, and long-term users of both combustible cigarettes and NRT.Design: Cross-sectional study.Setting: United Kingdom.Participants: The following 5 groups were purposively recruited: combustible cigarette-only users, former smokers with long-term (≥6 months) e-cigarette-only or NRT-only use, and long-term dual combustible cigarette-e-cigarette or combustible cigarette-NRT users (n = 36 to 37 per group; total n = 181).Measurements: Sociodemographic and smoking characteristics were assessed. Participants provided urine and saliva samples and were analyzed for biomarkers of nicotine, tobacco-specific N-nitrosamines (TSNAs), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs).Results: After confounders were controlled for, no clear between-group differences in salivary or urinary biomarkers of nicotine intake were found. The e-cigarette-only and NRT-only users had significantly lower metabolite levels for TSNAs (including the carcinogenic metabolite 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol [NNAL]) and VOCs (including metabolites of the toxins acrolein; acrylamide; acrylonitrile; 1,3-butadiene; and ethylene oxide) than combustible cigarette-only, dual combustible cigarette-e-cigarette, or dual combustible cigarette-NRT users. The e-cigarette-only users had significantly lower NNAL levels than all other groups. Combustible cigarette-only, dual combustible cigarette-NRT, and dual combustible cigarette-e-cigarette users had largely similar levels of TSNA and VOC metabolites.Limitation: Cross-sectional design with self-selected sample.Conclusion: Former smokers with long-term e-cigarette-only or NRT-only use may obtain roughly similar levels of nicotine compared with smokers of combustible cigarettes only, but results varied. Long-term NRT-only and e-cigarette-only use, but not dual use of NRTs or e-cigarettes with combustible cigarettes, is associated with substantially reduced levels of measured carcinogens and toxins relative to smoking only combustible cigarettes.Primary Funding Source: Cancer Research UK. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Alcohol consumption during attempts at smoking cessation can provoke relapse and so smokers are often advised to restrict their alcohol consumption during this time. This study assessed at a population-level whether smokers having recently initiated an attempt to stop smoking are more likely than other smokers to report i) lower alcohol consumption and ii) trying to reduce their alcohol consumption.Method: Cross-sectional household surveys of 6287 last-year smokers who also completed the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test consumption questionnaire (AUDIT-C). Respondents who reported attempting to quit smoking in the last week were compared with those who did not. Those with AUDIT-C≥5 were also asked if they were currently trying to reduce the amount of alcohol they consume.Results: After adjustment for socio-demographic characteristics and current smoking status, smokers who reported a quit attempt within the last week had lower AUDIT-C scores compared with those who did not report an attempt in the last week (βadj = -0.56, 95 % CI = -1.08 to -0.04) and were less likely to be classified as higher risk (AUDIT-C≥5: ORadj = 0.57, 95 % CI = 0.38 to 0.85). The lower AUDIT-C scores appeared to be a result of lower scores on the frequency of 'binge' drinking item (βadj = -0.25, 95 % CI = -0.43 to -0.07), with those who reported a quit attempt within the last week compared with those who did not being less likely to binge drink at least weekly (ORadj = 0.54, 95 % CI = 0.29 to 0.999) and more likely to not binge drink at all (ORadj = 1.70, 95 % CI = 1.16 to 2.49). Among smokers with higher risk consumption (AUDIT-C≥5), those who reported an attempt to stop smoking within the last week compared with those who did not were more likely to report trying to reduce their alcohol consumption (ORadj = 2.98, 95 % CI = 1.48 to 6.01).Conclusion: Smokers who report starting a quit attempt in the last week also report lower alcohol consumption, including less frequent binge drinking, and appear more likely to report currently attempting to reduce their alcohol consumption compared with smokers who do not report a quit attempt in the last week. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Brief interventions have a modest but meaningful effect on promoting smoking cessation and reducing excessive alcohol consumption. Guidelines recommend offering such advice opportunistically and regularly but incentives vary between the two behaviours.Aim: To use representative data from the perspective of patients to compare the prevalence and characteristics of people who smoke or drink excessively and who receive a brief intervention.Design and Setting: Data was from a representative sample of 15,252 adults from household surveys in England.Method: Recall of brief interventions on smoking and alcohol use, sociodemographic information, and smoking and alcohol consumption patterns were assessed among smokers and those who drink excessively (AUDIT score of ≥8), who visited their GP surgery in the previous year.Results: Of 1775 smokers, 50.4% recalled receiving brief advice on smoking in the previous year. Smokers receiving advice compared with those who did not were more likely to be older (odds ratio [OR] 17-year increments 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] =1.06 to 1.34), female (OR 1.35, 95% CI =1.10 to 1.65), have a disability (OR 1.44, 95% CI = 1.11 to 1.88), have made more quit attempts in the previous year (compared with no attempts: one attempt, OR 1.65, 95% CI = 1.32 to 2.08; ≥2 attempts, OR 2.02, 95% CI =1.49 to 2.74), and have greater nicotine dependence (OR 1.17, 95% CI =1.05 to 1.31) but were less likely to have no post-16 qualifications (OR 0.81, 95% CI = 0.66 to 1.00). Of 1110 people drinking excessively, 6.5% recalled receiving advice in their GP surgery on their alcohol consumption in the previous year. Those receiving advice compared with those who did not had higher AUDIT scores (OR 1.17, 95% CI =1.12 to 1.23) and were less likely to be female (OR 0.44, 95% CI = 0.23 to 0.87).Conclusion: Whereas approximately half of smokers in England visiting their GP in the past year report having received advice on cessation, <10% of those who drink excessively report having received advice on their alcohol consumption. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The rise in electronic cigarette use by smokers may be responsible for the decreased use of licensed nicotine products and/or increased overall use of non-tobacco nicotine-containing products. This paper reports findings from the Smoking Toolkit Study (STS) tracking use of electronic cigarettes and licensed nicotine products to address this issue.Methods: Data were obtained from monthly surveys involving 14 502 cigarette smokers in England between March 2011 and November 2014. Smokers were asked about their use of electronic cigarettes and licensed nicotine products.Results: Prevalence of electronic cigarette use increased rapidly from 2.2% (95% CI 1.4% to 3.2%) in quarter 2 of 2011 to 20.8% (95% CI 18.3% to 23.4%) in quarter 3 of 2013, after which there was no change. Prevalence of licensed nicotine product use in smokers remained stable from quarter 2 of 2011 (17.4%, 95% CI 15.3% to 19.8%) to quarter 3 of 2013 (17.9%, 95% CI 15.62% to 20.5%), and thereafter declined steadily to 7.9% (95% CI 6.0% to 10.4%). Prevalence of use of any product was stable to quarter 1 of 2012, after which it increased from 18.5% (95% CI 16.3% to 21.0%) to 33.3% (95% CI 30.4% to 36.3%) in quarter 3 of 2013, and then decreased to 22.7% (95% CI 19.3% to 26.3%).Conclusions: The shapes of trajectories since 2011 suggest that electronic cigarettes are probably not responsible for the decline in use of licensed nicotine products. Electronic cigarettes appear to have increased the total market for use of non-tobacco nicotine-containing products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. In 2008, the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) published a national survey that revealed only 6.8% of hospitals surveyed had a pharmacist assigned to the emergency department (ED) for any period of time. This survey was distributed among general and children's medical-surgical hospitals in the United States and did not include any Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Centers. To date, there have been no identified survey studies describing the prevalence of pharmacy services within VA EDs. The objectives of this study are to determine the prevalence of dedicated pharmacy services within VA EDs, categorize the types of pharmacy services, determine if interventions/outcomes related to pharmacy services were collected, and assess the desire for pharmacy services in facilities that did not currently have dedicated pharmacy services. Methods. The study was designed as a cross-sectional survey study conducted between January 14, 2010 and March 29, 2010. The study population included Pharmacy Clinical Coordinators employed at a VA facility. An initial email containing a link to the web-based survey was distributed via the national Pharmacy Clinical Coordinator listserv. Results of the survey were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results. The survey was distributed to 153 VA Medical Centers and a total of 33 (21.6%) responses were received. Of the responses, 24 facilities (72.7%) documented the presence of an ED, and of those, 5 (20.8%) indicated that they had a pharmacist dedicated to providing pharmacy services to the ED. The most common pharmacy services provided included medication reconciliation, patient education/ counseling, pharmacotherapy recommendations, ED staff education, precepting activities, adverse drug reaction (ADR) reporting, and ensuring formulary compliance. Three of the 5 facilities documented interventions, with 1 facility documenting ADRs prevented and cost avoidance in addition to interventions. Of the 19 facilities that did not have a pharmacist dedicated to the ED, 16 (84.2%) indicated a desire for such services. Conclusion. A greater prevalence of ED pharmacy services was reported in VA facilities compared with a national sample of non-VA facilities. Despite the high prevalence and variety of dedicated pharmacy services provided to the ED, documentation of these services remains an area in need of improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Although the characteristics of pharmacy postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) residency programs have been examined among large academic medical centers, there are no identified studies comparing the attributes of individual programs in the Veterans Affairs (VA) Health Administration System. The primary objective of this study was to describe and contrast characteristics of VA PGY1 residency programs. Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey of VA pharmacy residency programs. An online survey was distributed electronically to residency program directors of VA PGY1 residencies. Results: Responses from 33 (33%) PGY1 programs were available for the analysis. Programs reported growth over the previous 2 years and expected continued expansion. There was a wide variety of learning opportunities, although experiences were customizable based on residents’ interests. Notably, many programs allowed residents to seek rotations at other locations if specific experiences were not available on-site. Additionally, most programs had a mandatory staffing component and required residents to present the results of residency research projects. Conclusion: There is a high degree of variability among individual VA facilities with regard to the requirements and opportunities available to PGY1 pharmacy residents. This assessment is able to characterize the currently established residency programs and allows for an active comparison of programs in a nationally integrated health care system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are rapidly increasing in popularity. Two randomized controlled trials have suggested that e-cigarettes can aid smoking cessation, but there are many factors that could influence their real-world effectiveness. This study aimed to assess, using an established methodology, the effectiveness of e-cigarettes when used to aid smoking cessation compared with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) bought over-the- counter and with unaided quitting in the general population. Design and Setting A large cross-sectional survey of a representative sample of the English population. Participants The study included 5863 adults who had smoked within the previous 12 months and made at least one quit attempt during that period with either an e-cigarette only (n = 464), NRT bought over-the-counter only (n = 1922) or no aid in their most recent quit attempt (n = 3477). Measurements The primary outcome was self-reported abstinence up to the time of the survey, adjusted for key potential confounders including nicotine dependence. Findings E-cigarette users were more likely to report abstinence than either those who used NRT bought over-the-counter [odds ratio (OR) = 2.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.70–2.93, 20.0 versus 10.1%] or no aid (OR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.08–1.76, 20.0 versus 15.4%). The adjusted odds of non-smoking in users of e-cigarettes were 1.63 (95% CI = 1.17–2.27) times higher compared with users of NRT bought over-the-counter and 1.61 (95% CI = 1.19–2.18) times higher compared with those using no aid. Conclusions Among smokers who have attempted to stop without professional support, those who use e-cigarettes are more likely to report continued abstinence than those who used a licensed NRT product bought over-the-counter or no aid to cessation. This difference persists after adjusting for a range of smoker characteristics such as nicotine dependence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Stopping smoking leads to greater happiness and life satisfaction. This raises the question as to whether harm reduction, i.e. smoking reduction (SR) and the use of Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) for SR, might lead to a similar benefit. This is of importance, given that the National Institute of Clinical Excellence in the UK is due to release guidance on harm reduction in 2013.Design: Data were collected from 1,532 smokers involved in the Smoking Toolkit Study.Method: Participants were asked if they were cutting down and if they were using Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT). Smokers also rated happiness and life satisfaction.Results: There was no evidence of an association between SR or use of NRT for SR and either reported ‘happiness’ or ‘life satisfaction’. Nor was there an association between measures of ‘happiness’ or ‘life satisfaction’ and cigarette consumption.Conclusion: It appears that SR is not associated with mental health benefits. This suggests that complete cessation may be necessary for benefits to be incurred. Prospective studies are necessary to confirm these findings. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background and aims There is a need for more evidence on the 'real-world' effectiveness of commonly used aids to smoking cessation from population-level studies. This study assessed the association between abstinence and use of different smoking cessation treatments after adjusting for key potential confounding factors. Design Cross-sectional data from aggregated monthly waves of a household survey: the Smoking Toolkit Study. Setting England. Participants A total of 10 335 adults who smoked within the previous 12 months and had made at least one quit attempt during that time. Measurements Participants were classified according to their use of cessation aids in their most recent quit attempt: (i) medication (nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion or varenicline) in combination with specialist behavioural support delivered by a National Health Service Stop Smoking Service; (ii) medication provided by the prescribing health-care professional without specialist behavioural support; (iii) nicotine replacement therapy ( NRT) bought over the counter; and (iv) none of these. The main outcome measure was self-reported abstinence up to the time of the survey, adjusted for key potential confounders including tobacco dependence. Findings Compared with smokers using none of the cessation aids, the adjusted odds of remaining abstinent up to the time of the survey were 3.25 [95% confidence interval ( CI) = 2.05-5.15] greater in users of prescription medication in combination with specialist behavioural support, 1.61 (95% CI = 1.33-1.94) greater in users of prescription medication combined with brief advice and 0.96 (95% CI = 0.81-1.13) in users of NRT bought over the counter. Conclusions After adjusting for major confounding variables such as tobacco dependence, smokers in England who use a combination of behavioural support and pharmacotherapy in their quit attempts have almost three times the odds of success than those who use neither pharmacotherapy nor behavioural support. Smokers who buy nicotine replacement therapy over the counter with no behavioural support have similar odds of success in stopping as those who stop without any aid. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aims to understand how wives’ mental health and life enjoyment are affected by their perceptions of the sufficiency of the support they render to their husbands who have prostate cancer. Its specific purpose is to determine whether these outcomes accrue more strongly to wives who perceive their husbands coping in avoidant ways. Drawing on data from an interview study of 51 wives of men diagnosed with prostate cancer, the authors employ heiarchical regression analysis to examine the wives’ adjustment in relation to their provision of support to their husbands. Our findings reveal a significant moderating effect of the husbands’ avoidant coping; consistent with cognitive dissonance theory, wives who provided sufficient support to more avoidant husbands demonstrated better mental health and life enjoyment than wives of men who were less avoidant. In addition, the perceived sufficiency of the support provided by the wives’ social networks had a stronger bearing on their adjustment than the support provided by their husbands. These findings add to our understanding of the psychological benefits that support providers derive when they communicate support in ways that suit the recipient's style of managing threat. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Aims To assess the incidence of long-term smoking cessation as a function of age, gender, social grade and their interactions. Design and setting Cross-sectional surveys of population representative samples of smokers in England. Participants A total of 24 094 ever smokers (≥21 and ≤60 years of age) participating in household surveys between November 2006 and February 2011. Measurements The ratio of long-term (>1 year) ex-smokers to ever-smokers was calculated for each age. Regression analyses were used to model the association between age and quit ratio, with the change in quit ratio by year of age n years versus all years up to n-1 years, yielding an estimate of the quitting incidence at that age. Analyses were conducted for the entire sample and then for the sample stratified by gender and social grade, and interactions assessed between these variables. Findings A cubic trend was needed to fit the data. The estimated quitting incidence between ages 21 and 30 was 1.5% (95% CI: 1.0%-2.0%), between 31 and 50 it was 0.3% (95% CI: 0.2%-0.5%) and between 51 and 60 it was 1.2% (95% CI: 0.7%-1.7%). Age interacted with gender and social grade: women and smokers from higher social grades had a higher incidence of quitting than men and those from lower social grades specifically in young adulthood. Conclusions The incidence of smoking cessation in England appears to be greater in young and old adults compared with those in middle age. Women and higher social grade smokers show a greater incidence of quitting than men and those from lower social grades specifically in young adulthood. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Smoking is more prevalent in smokers from lower compared with higher socioeconomic (SES) groups, but studies are inconsistent regarding underlying mechanisms. We aimed to assess associations between SES indicators and three distinct aspects of the smoking cessation process: attempting to quit; use of evidence-based cessation treatments; and success.Methods: We analysed data of 12,161 last-year smokers (i.e., current smokers and recent ex-smokers who quit ≤ 12 months) from 20 waves (June/July 2016 to August/September 2019) of the German Study on Tobacco Use (DEBRA) - a representative household survey. Associations between indicators of SES (income and education) and (1) last-year quit attempts; (2) use of evidence-based cessation treatment or electronic cigarettes during the last attempt; and (3) short-term self-reported abstinence were analysed using multivariable logistic regression, adjusted for potential confounders.Results: Of all last-years smokers, 18.6% had attempted to quit, of whom 15.2% had successfully stopped. Higher income (OR 0.82, 95%CI = 0.77-0.88 per 1000€) but low vs. high education (OR 0.83, 95%CI = 0.73-0.95) were associated with lower odds of quit attempts. In smokers with quit attempts, higher income but not education was associated with higher odds of using cessation medication (OR 1.31, 95%CI = 1.08-1.59 per 1000 €). Neither income nor education were associated with using behavioural support or success.Conclusions: In the German healthcare system without free access to evidence-based cessation therapy, low-income smokers are more likely to make a quit attempt but less likely to use cessation medication than high-income smokers. Equitable access to such medication is crucial to reduce SES-related health disparities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

'Social smoking' typically occurs predominantly or exclusively in the presence of others who are smoking. Relatively little is known about changes in the prevalence of 'social smoking identity' over time and its association with other smoking-related correlates. Data were from the Smoking Toolkit Study, a nationally-representative cross-sectional survey in England. Participants were 26,774 adults who currently smoked or had quit in the past year, surveyed between February-2014 and April-2021. We estimated the proportion identifying as having a social smoking identity, changes over time, and associations with smoking in social situations, cigarette dependence, motivation to stop, quit attempts and success. Of adults who currently smoked or had quit in the past year, 34.0% (95% Confidence Interval (CI)=33.5–34.6) identified as having a social smoking identity. There was a near linear increase in this proportion from 31.9% (95%CI=29.7–34.2) in February-2014 to 36.5% (95%CI=34.1–38.9) in April-2021. Adults who currenty smoked identifying as having a social smoking identity were less cigarette dependent (adjusted B=0.34, 95%CI=0.31–0.37) and more motivated to stop (aOR=1.20, 95%CI=1.15–1.26) than those who did not. Adults who currently smoked or had quit in the past year identifying as having a social smoking identity reported more smoking in social situations (aOR=6.45, 95%CI=6.13–6.80) and past-year quit attempts (aOR=1.22, 95%CI=1.14–1.30) than those who did not. Quit success was not associated with having a social smoking identity among adults who currently smoked or had quit in the past year and who had attempted to quit (aOR=0.90, 95%CI=0.79–1.02). An increasing proportion, over a third, of adults who currently smoked or had quit in the past year in England identify as having a social smoking identity. Despite being associated with lower dependence, greater motivation to quit and more quit attempts, social smoking identity is not associated with greater quit success, suggesting a complex interplay between identity and smoking-related behaviours. • An increasing proportion, over a third, of adults who currently smoked or had quit in the past year in England identify as having a social smoking identity. • Social smoking identity was positively and very strongly associated with smoking in social situations. • Social smoking identity was associated with lower dependence, greater motivation to quit and more quit attempts. • Social smoking identity was not associated with greater quit success. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Commentary to: A framework for evaluating the public health impact of e-cigarettes and other vaporized nicotine products [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: January 2016 saw the publication of proposed revisions to the UK's lower risk drinking guidelines but no sustained promotional activity. This paper aims to explore the impact of publishing guidelines without sustained promotional activity on reported guideline exposure and determinants of behaviour (capability, opportunity and motivation) proposed by the COM-B model.Methods: Data were collected by a monthly repeat cross-sectional survey of adults (18+) resident in England over 15 months between November 2015 and January 2017 from a total of 16,779 drinkers, as part of the Alcohol Toolkit Study. Trends and associated 95% confidence intervals were described in the proportion of reported exposure to guidelines in the past month and measures of the capability, opportunity and motivation to consume alcohol within drinking guidelines.Results: There was a rise in reported exposure to drinking guidelines in January 2016 (57.6-80.6%) which did not reoccur in January 2017. Following the increase in January 2016, reported exposure reduced slowly but remained significantly higher than in December 2015. In February 2016, there was an increase in measures of capability (31.1% reported tracking units of alcohol consumption and 87.8% considered it easier to drink safely) and opportunity (84.0% perceived their lifestyle as conducive to drinking within guidelines). This change was not maintained in subsequent months. Other measures showed marginal changes between January and February 2016 with no evidence of change in subsequent months.Conclusions: Following the publication of revised drinking guideline in January 2016, there was a transient increase in exposure to guidelines, and capability and opportunity to drink within the guidelines that diminished over time. The transience and size of the changes indicate that behaviour change is unlikely. Well-designed, theory-based promotional campaigns may be required for drinking guidelines to be an effective public health intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The UK government is consulting on banning disposable e-cigarettes. This study aimed to describe trends in disposable e-cigarette use among adults in Great Britain since 2021 and establish who would currently be affected by a ban on disposables. Nationally-representative monthly cross-sectional survey. We analysed data from 69,973 adults surveyed between January 2021 and August 2023. We estimated monthly time trends in the weighted prevalence of current disposable e-cigarette use among adults and by sociodemographic characteristics and smoking status. From January 2021 to August 2023, the prevalence of disposable e-cigarette use grew from 0.1 % to 4.9 %. This rise was observed across all population subgroups but was most pronounced among younger adults (e.g. reaching 15.9 % of 18-year-olds compared with 1.3 % of 65-year-olds), those who currently smoke (16.3 %), and those who stopped smoking in the past year (18.2 %). Use among never smokers remained relatively rare (1.5 %), except among 18- to 24-year-olds (7.1 %). Use was significantly higher in England than Wales or Scotland (5.3 % vs. 2.0 % and 2.8 %) and among less (vs. more) advantaged social grades (6.1 % vs. 4.0 %), those with (vs. without) children (6.4 % vs. 4.4 %), and those with (vs. without) a history of mental health conditions (9.3 % vs. 3.1 %). A ban on disposable e-cigarettes would currently affect one in 20 adults in Great Britain (approximately 2.6 million people). The proportion who would be affected would be greatest among young people, including the 316,000 18-24 year-olds who currently use disposables but who have never regularly smoked tobacco, which may discourage uptake of vaping in this group. However, a ban would also affect 1.2 million people who currently smoke and a further 744,000 who previously smoked. It would also have a disproportionate impact on disadvantaged groups that have higher rates of smoking and typically find it harder to quit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: In seeking to provide more accurate models of population quit attempt rates, this study assessed whether a single self-report measure of consistent motivation to stop smoking adds useful explanatory power over and above an established measure of current motivation to stop.Method: Data from 16,657 current smokers in England were collected between October 2012 and June 2017 using cross-sectional household surveys. Smokers were asked whether they had made a serious quit attempt in the past year and they answered two questions on motivation to stop (current motivation and consistent motivation to stop smoking). Having made at least one quit attempt in the past year was regressed in logistic models onto current motivation to stop and consistent motivation to stop individually and then together, with both models adjusting for sociodemographic variables and a measure of nicotine dependence.Results: The addition of consistent motivation to stop smoking added substantially to the fit of the model over and above the established measure of current motivation to quit (χ2(1, N = 16,657) = 901.7, p < 0.001) with an adjusted odds ratio of 4.1 (95% CI = 3.7-4.5, p < 0.001).Conclusion: Consistent motivation to stop smoking substantially improves the modelling of recent smoking cessation attempts over and above current motivation to stop. The consistency of smokers' motivation to quit may be a useful explanatory and target variable in future intervention studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: An accurate and up-to-date estimate of the potential reach of Internet-based smoking cessation interventions (ISCIs) would improve calculations of impact while an understanding of the characteristics of potential users would facilitate the design of interventions. Objective: This study reports the prevalence and the sociodemographic, smoking, and Internet-use characteristics of smokers interested in using ISCIs in a nationally representative sample. Methods: Data were collected using cross-sectional household surveys of representative samples of adults in England. Interest in trying an Internet site or "app" that was proven to help with stopping smoking was assessed in 1128 adult smokers in addition to sociodemographic characteristics, dependence, motivation to quit, previous attempts to quit smoking, Internet and handheld computer access, and recent types of information searched online. Results: Of a representative sample of current smokers, 46.6% (95% CI 43.5%-49.6%) were interested in using an Internet-based smoking cessation intervention. In contrast, only 0.3% (95% CI 0%-0.7%) of smokers reported having used such an intervention to support their most recent quit attempt within the past year. After adjusting for all other background characteristics, interested smokers were younger (OR=0.98, 95% CI 0.97-0.99), reported stronger urges (OR=1.29, 95% CI 1.10-1.51), were more motivated to quit within 3 months (OR=2.16, 95% CI 1.54-3.02), and were more likely to have made a quit attempt in the past year (OR=1.76, 95% CI 1.30-2.37), access the Internet at least weekly (OR=2.17, 95% CI 1.40-3.36), have handheld computer access (OR=1.65, 95% CI 1.22-2.24), and have used the Internet to search for online smoking cessation information or support in past 3 months (OR=2.82, 95% CI 1.20-6.62). There was no association with social grade. Conclusions: Almost half of all smokers in England are interested in using online smoking cessation interventions, yet fewer than 1% have used them to support a quit attempt in the past year. Interest is not associated with social grade but is associated with being younger, more highly motivated, more cigarette dependent, having attempted to quit recently, having regular Internet and handheld computer access, and having recently searched for online smoking cessation information and support. (J Med Internet Res 2013;15(3):e50) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To assess the prevalence of ever-drinking and hazardous drinking among adults in Germany, and investigate the factors associated with level of alcohol consumption.Methods: Cross-sectional population survey of a representative sample of 11,331 adults in Germany (2018 to 2019). The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C) was used to define ever-drinking (AUDIT-C>=1), hazardous drinking (AUDIT-C>=5) and an overall AUDIT-C (alcohol consumption) score (from 0 to 12). Regression models were used to examine sociodemographic and health-related characteristics associated with AUDIT-C score.Results: The prevalence of ever-drinking and hazardous drinking was 84.7% (95% CI = 84.1-85.4) and 19.4% (95% CI = 18.6-20.1), respectively. The mean AUDIT-C score was 2.8 (SD = 2.16). AUDIT-C scores were independently positively associated with having medium (Badj = 0.12, 95% CI = 0.02-0.21) and high (Badj = 0.11, 95% CI = 0.01-0.21) educational qualifications (compared with low), monthly income (Badj = 0.31 per €1,000, 95% CI = 0.26-0.36), being a current smoker (Badj = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.86-1.02), anxiety (Badj = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.02-0.50), and living in North East (Badj = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.29-0.58), North West (Badj = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.39-0.55) and South East (Badj = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.64-0.93) Germany (compared with South West), and negatively associated with age (Badj = -0.17, 95% CI = -0.21- -0.13), being female (Badj = -1.21, 95% CI = -1.28- -1.14) and depression (Badj = -0.22, 95% CI = -0.43- -0.02).Conclusion: In a large, representative sample of adults in Germany, the majority were ever-drinkers and one fifth were hazardous drinkers. Higher alcohol consumption scores were associated with being younger, male, current smoker, of high socioeconomic position, anxiety, and not living in South West Germany, and lower scores were associated with depression. These groups may benefit from targeted alcohol reduction policies and support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Dry January is a national multimedia campaign in the UK that encourages people to abstain from drinking alcohol during the month of January. The population-level campaign makes extensive use of email and social media to support participants and has reported a substantial increase in participation since 2015. This study aimed to assess whether the increase in participation in Dry January between 2015 and 2018 was associated with reduced alcohol consumption in England.Design: Repeat cross-sectional design.Setting: England, March 2014 to January 2018.Participants: A total of 37,142 respondents to the Alcohol Toolkit Study, a monthly in-home survey of alcohol consumption among representative cross-sectional samples of people aged 16+ years in England.Measures: Outcomes included i) percentage of adults reporting drinking monthly or less frequently in the last 6 months and ii) mean weekly alcohol consumption among drinkers derived from the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test questions on typical frequency and quantity in the last 6 months.Analyses: For each outcome, regression models were fitted for month: January (2015 and 2018) vs March-December (2014 and 2017) and for year: 2014/15 vs 2017/18. Interaction terms were included in the models to examine whether the difference between January and the preceding months on each outcome measure depended upon the year (2014/15 vs 2017/18). For non-significant interactions, Bayes factors were calculated to assess the relative strength of evidence for large effects (OR = 1.80 on monthly drinking and β=-1.0 on mean consumption) compared with the null.Results: Differences between January and other months were similar in 2014/15 and 2017/18 for adults reporting drinking monthly or less frequently and the mean consumption among drinkers (OR = 0.91, 95 %CI 0.79-1.05, BF = 0.05; β = 0.55, 95 %CI=-0.14 to 1.25, BF = 0.13 respectively).Conclusions: The increase in participation in Dry January between 2015 and 2018 was not associated with large corresponding changes in people drinking monthly or less frequently over the last 6 months, or in mean weekly consumption among drinkers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research indicates that ex- and current smokers report increased levels of bodily pain compared with never smokers. This could be secondary to smoking-related disease or psychological characteristics of smokers, or it could be a neurological or vascular effect of a period of regular smoking.Aims: We compared self-reported levels of bodily pain in daily, never daily and former daily smokers stratified by age group and adjusting for a wider range of covariates than has been undertaken to-date, including health status, neuroticism, anxiety and depression.Method: 223,537 UK respondents aged 16+ years were surveyed between 2009 and 2013 in the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) Lab UK Study. Respondents provided information on bodily pain, smoking status and a range of sociodemographic, health, behavioural and psychological characteristics.Results: After adjusting for all covariates, in 16-34-year-olds, reported levels of bodily pain in former daily smokers (Badj = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.30, 1.15, p < .001) and daily smokers (Badj = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.18, 0.82, p < .01) were higher than in never daily smokers. Reported levels of bodily pain were also higher in former daily smokers than in never daily smokers in those aged 35-64 (Badj = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.69, 1.38, p < .001) and 65 + years (Badj = 1.65, 95% CI = 0.07, 3.24, p < .05).Conclusions: After adjusting for key characteristics, former daily smokers reported higher levels of bodily pain compared with never daily smokers at all ages. This raises the possibility that a period of smoking may have lasting effects on pain experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]