Search

Background: The use of e-cigarettes has been increasing, especially since the introduction of 'pod' devices to the marketplace since 2018. Most adults who vape report interest in quitting. The present study examined level of interest in e-cigarette cessation between users with varying cigarette smoking histories and device types., Methods: Data obtained from wave 5 (2018-2019) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health study (n=34 309). Analyses were conducted on adult current established e-cigarette users, categorised on cigarette smoking history (current, former or never) and device type (disposable, cartridge/pod, tank or mod). Participants reported if they planned to ever quit e-cigarettes, attempted to quit in the past year and attempted to quit by cutting back in the past year., Results: Of the 2922 established e-cigarette users, 68.21% reported plans to quit vaping; 17.27% reported attempting to quit e-cigarettes in the past year; and 29.28% reported attempting to quit by cutting back in the past year. Cartridge users had higher odds of interest in quitting than tank and mod users. Disposable and cartridge users had higher odds of reporting a past year quit attempt than tank and mod users. Individuals with no smoking history had higher odds of reporting a past year quit attempt or cutting back relative to those reporting dual use (of both e-cigarettes and cigarettes) and former smoking., Conclusions: Tobacco control should consider the type of e-cigarette device that is being used, alongside users' cigarette smoking history, when developing interventions and other resources for vaping cessation., Competing Interests: Competing interests: In the past 3 years, BT has testified on behalf of plaintiffs who have filed litigation against the tobacco industry., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background and Aims: Electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) can help people to quit smoking combusted tobacco products (CTPs), but most current and former smokers who use ENDS also intend to quit ENDS. This analysis measured whether ENDS cessation among current and former CTP smokers is associated with changes in CTP smoking or abstinence., Design: Regression analysis of a nationally representative cohort from waves 4 (W4) and 5 (W5) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study (December 2016-November 2019)., Setting: United States., Participants: Adults (n = 1525) who reported W4 current or former use of ≥ 1 CTP and either currently using ENDS or quitting ENDS in the past year were included., Measurements: Logistic regressions were performed separately among W4 current and former CTP smokers, controlling for demographic and tobacco use characteristics. First, we analyzed proximal outcomes by testing the association between ENDS quit status and CTP abstinence, both occurring during W5. Next, we analyzed long-term outcomes by testing W4 ENDS quit status as a predictor of CTP abstinence at W5, approximately 1 year later., Findings: Among W4 current CTP smokers, there was no evidence that CTP smoking abstinence differed between those quitting or continuing using ENDS, both in our proximal [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.90, 2.10] and long-term (aOR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.52, 1.53) analyses. Among former CTP smokers, quitting ENDS was associated with less CTP abstinence in our proximal analysis (aOR = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.20, 0.89), but there was no evidence that CTP smoking abstinence differed between those quitting or continuing using ENDS in our long-term analysis (aOR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.44, 1.67)., Conclusions: There is no evidence that ENDS cessation is associated with CTP abstinence among current smokers, although mixed findings among former smokers indicate a possible risk for relapse to smoking associated with quitting ENDS., (© 2023 The Authors. Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction.)

Because tobacco use remains one of the leading causes of disease, disability, and mortality, tobacco treatment programs should be integrated into medical systems such as hospitals and outpatient centers. Medical providers have a unique, high-impact opportunity to initiate smoking cessation treatment with patients. However, there are several barriers that may hinder the development and implementation of these programs. The purpose of this review was to address such barriers by illustrating several examples of successful tobacco treatment programs in US health-care systems that were contributed by the authors. This includes describing treatment models, billing procedures, and implementation considerations. Using an illustrative review of vignettes from existing programs, various models are outlined, emphasizing commonalities and unique features, strengths and limitations, resources necessary, and other relevant considerations. In addition, clinical research and dissemination trials from each program are described to provide evidence of feasibility and efficacy from these programs. This overview of example treatment models designed for hospitals and outpatient centers provides guidelines for any emerging tobacco cessation services within these contexts. For existing treatment programs, this review provides additional insight and ideas about improving these programs within their respective medical systems., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Chest Physicians. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Although some smokers switch to exclusive use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), others become dual users of combustible cigarettes and e-cigarettes. Little is known about how the onset of vaping affects the use of and dependence on combustible cigarettes or total nicotine use and dependence, which may influence health-related and cessation outcomes. Using self-report data of current combustible and e-cigarette use and retrospective recall of pre-vaping smoking in a sample of dual users, the aims of this study were (1) to compare pre- and post-vaping number of cigarettes per day and combustible cigarette dependence; (2) to compare pre- and post-vaping total nicotine use frequency (number of vaping sessions and cigarettes smoked per day), and total nicotine dependence; and (3) to examine predictors of nicotine dependence., Methods: We used baseline data from a smoking cessation trial with 2896 dual users. Nicotine use frequency and the Heaviness of Smoking Index were used as measures of nicotine use and dependence, respectively., Results: Participants decreased cigarettes/day from pre- (M = 19.24, SD = 9.01) to post-vaping (M = 11.15, SD = 8.02, p < .0001) and combustible cigarette dependence declined from pre- (M = 3.55, SD = 1.51) to post-vaping (M = 2.11, SD = 1.60, p < .0001). Total daily nicotine use frequency increased after initiating vaping (M = 19.25, SD = 9.01 vs. M = 29.46, SD = 8.61; p < .0001), as did total nicotine dependence (M = 3.55, SD = 1.51 vs. M = 4.68, SD = 1.38; p < .0001). Hierarchical regression analyses indicated that variables associated with greater overall nicotine dependence included: younger age, lower education, more years smoking, higher pre-vaping nicotine dependence, using e-cigarettes more days per month, more puffs per vaping session, higher e-liquid nicotine concentration, and longer vaping history., Conclusions: Dual use leads to a reduction in the number of combustible cigarettes, but total nicotine use and dependence increases., Implications: In dual users, a reduction in smoking following onset of vaping may offer some harm reduction via reduction in cigarette intake. However, the increase in total nicotine use and dependence could affect the ability to quit either or both products., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Direct-acting antiviral therapy is safe and cost-effective for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. However, variability in drug payment rules represents a barrier to treatment that may disproportionately affect certain populations. We conducted a retrospective cohort study among HIV/HCV coinfected and HCV monoinfected patients using Kaplan-Meier and Fisher's exact test to analyze the time from the prescription of a direct-acting antiviral agent to delivery to the patient. Variables with significance p < .20 in univariate analysis were included in a Cox regression model. Factors associated with faster treatment were Infectious Diseases office setting (p = .01), public insurance payer (p = .01), and initial approval of requested regimen (p = .01). The presence of other liver disease was associated with delay in treatment (p = .05). Unrestrictive Medicare and Medicaid regulations resulted in more rapid delivery of medication compared to private payers. Fibrosis level, Child-Pugh class and HIV status did not significantly change time to treatment.