Search

Introduction Pod Vaping Devices (PVD) such as JUUL have become extremely popular in the United States although their uptake and use in the United Kingdom remain lower. A key difference between the United States and the United Kingdom is the nicotine strength legally permitted, typically 59 mg/mL in the United States but capped at 20 mg/mL in the United Kingdom and European Union. This may limit the ability of EU vaping devices to deliver satisfactory nicotine levels. The primary aim was to compare the EU- (18 mg/mL nicotine strength) with the U.S.-JUUL (59 mg/mL) on daily smokers’ subjective experiences, craving relief, and blood nicotine levels. Aims and Methods Double-blind, counterbalanced within-participants design with two conditions: 18 mg/mL versus 59 mg/mL. On two separate occasions, UK smokers (N =19, 10 males, 9 females) vaped ad libitum for 60 mins and provided blood samples at baseline 5, 15, 30, and 60 min. Subjective effects (incl. satisfaction) were measured at 10 and 60 min and, craving and withdrawal symptoms (WS) at baseline, 10 and 60 min. Results Satisfaction did not differ between conditions. There was a significant interaction between Time and Nicotine concentration for Nicotine Hit (p = .045). Mean self-report of Nicotine Hit increased under the use of the 59 mg/mL from 10 to 60 min and decreased under the 18 mg/mL. Participants reported higher Throat Hits following use of the 59 mg/mL (p = .017). There were no differences in other subjective effects including craving, WS relief (ps > .05). Liquid consumption was doubled under the 18 versus the 59 mg/mL (p = .001) and nicotine boost was significantly higher in the 59 mg/mL at all time-points (p ≤ .001). Conclusions The results did not support our hypotheses that satisfaction, craving, and withdrawal reduction would be higher with the 59 mg/mL JUUL. This could be because of the doubling of liquid consumption in the 18 mg/mL. Whether satisfaction and craving relief persist over the longer-term outside of the lab remains to be determined. Implications In a 60-min ad-lib vaping session, the EU-JUUL was found to produce comparable satisfaction, craving- and withdrawal relief as the U.S.-JUUL in this sample of UK smokers. These findings could suggest that the higher nicotine concentrations available in PVDs in the United States are not necessary for providing satisfaction and improving craving and WS. However, this was at the expense of a considerable increase in liquid consumption indicative of compensatory puffing.

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.Repeat cross-sectional survey, representative of the adult population in England.Past-year smokers, n = 3338 (aged ≥ 18 years) responding between May 2020 and April 2021.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.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.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.

Introduction It remains unclear whether electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use promotes persistent combustible tobacco use or smoking discontinuation over time. Alcohol use is associated with a greater risk of adverse health effects of tobacco, and higher likelihood of e-cigarette use, making drinkers a high-priority subpopulation. Aims and Methods This study examined longitudinal patterns of combustible tobacco and e-cigarette use over 24 months in young adult binge drinkers. A pooled dataset of 1002 (58.5% female; M age = 22.14) binge drinkers from the United States (60%) and Canada (40%) was used. The primary outcomes were past month combustible tobacco and e-cigarette use. Nicotine dependence was measured using the Fagerström Test of Cigarette Dependence. Alcohol severity was measured using the Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire. Latent transition analysis (LTA) was used to identify patterns of cigarette smoking and e-cigarette use over 24 months. Results The LTA yielded a four-class solution: (1) e-cigarettes-only users (prevalence over time: 7.75%–10.10%), (2) dual-product users (2.61%–9.89%), (3) combustible-only smokers (8.12%–20.70%), and (4) nonusers (61.66%–80.06%). Dual-product users predominantly transitioned to complete abstinence or exclusively e-cigarette use. In combustible-only smokers, the most common transition was to abstinence, followed by persistence of combustible-only status. At 24 months, 63% of e-cigarettes-only users transitioned to abstinence, with 37% continuing e-cigarettes-only use and 0% transitioning to dual or combustible cigarette use. Conclusions Dual-product use in young adult binge drinkers was associated with discontinuation of combustible tobacco over time, and e-cigarette-only use was not associated with subsequent combustible tobacco use. Implications These findings suggest that concurrent or exclusive e-cigarette use is not a risk factor for the persistence or development of combustible tobacco use in this subpopulation, with dual-product use reflecting a transitional pattern away from combustible use, toward discontinuation.

Evidence shows that having a drink of water can improve cognitive performance in schoolchildren. This study investigated whether water consumption would improve a range of tasks requiring both cognitive and fine motor skills. Participants were 85 children (37 boys, 48 girls, mean age 10.1 years, SD = 0.6) attending a primary school in the UK. Children completed finger-tapping, bead threading, and handwriting tasks at baseline and test. They were divided into two groups; one group was offered a 500-ml bottle of water after baseline tasks were completed and the other group was not. The drink group were given 5 min to consume the water and they could choose how much to drink. We also recorded the volume of water consumed in order to consider dose response relationships. Participants in both groups were given a 25-min break, during which they could read quietly, before repeating the tasks at test. Results showed that the participants who were given a drink, regardless of volume, had faster handwriting speed at test than those who did not. Correlations between volume drunk and changes in performance from baseline to test showed there was a positive relationship between volume drunk and improvement in finger-tapping speed. These results show that the simple intervention of giving children a drink of water has a beneficial effect on fine motor skills, and handwriting, which is an integral activity in school.

Background and aims\udSmoking is extremely common among adults experiencing homelessness, but there is lack of evidence for treatment efficacy. E-cigarettes are an effective quitting aid, but they have not been widely tested in smokers with complex health and social needs. Here we build upon our cluster feasibility trial and evaluate the offer of an e-cigarette or usual care to smokers accessing a homeless centre.\ud\udDesign, Setting and Participants\udMulti-centre two-arm cluster-randomized controlled trial with mixed-method embedded process and economic evaluation in homeless centres in England, Scotland and Wales. Adult smokers (18+ years; n = 480) accessing homeless centres and who are known to centre staff and willing to consent.\ud\udIntervention and Comparator\udClusters (n = 32) will be randomized to either an e-cigarette starter pack with weekly allocations of nicotine containing e-liquid for 4 weeks [choice of flavours (menthol, fruit and tobacco) and strengths 12 mg/ml and 18 mg/ml] or the usual care intervention, which comprises very brief advice and a leaflet signposting to the local stop smoking service.\ud\udMeasurements\udThe primary outcome is 24-week sustained carbon monoxide-validated smoking cessation (Russell Standard defined, intention-to-treat analysis). Secondary outcomes: (i) 50% smoking reduction (cigarettes per day) from baseline to 24 weeks; (ii) 7-day point prevalence quit rates at 4-, 12- and 24-week follow-up; (iii) changes in risky smoking practices (e.g. sharing cigarettes, smoking discarded cigarettes) from baseline to 4, 12 and 24 weeks; (iv) cost-effectiveness of the intervention; and (v) fidelity of intervention implementation; mechanisms of change; contextual influences and sustainability.\ud\udConclusions\udThis is the first study, to our knowledge, to randomly assign smokers experiencing homelessness to an e-cigarette and usual care intervention to measure smoking abstinence with embedded process and economic evaluations. If effective, its results will be used to inform the larger-scale implementation of offering e-cigarettes throughout homeless centres to aid smoking cessation.

Background Smoking prevalence is extremely high in adults experiencing homelessness, and there is little evidence regarding which cessation interventions work best. This study explored the feasibility of providing free electronic cigarette starter kits to smokers accessing homeless centres in the UK. Objectives Seven key objectives were examined to inform a future trial: (1) assess willingness of smokers to participate in the study to estimate recruitment rates; (2) assess participant retention in the intervention and control arms; (3) examine the perceived value of the intervention, facilitators of and barriers to engagement, and influence of local context; (4) assess service providers’ capacity to support the study and the type of information and training required; (5) assess the potential efficacy of supplying free electronic cigarette starter kits; (6) explore the feasibility of collecting data on contacts with health-care services as an input to a main economic evaluation; and (7) estimate the cost of providing the intervention and usual care. Design A prospective cohort four-centre pragmatic cluster feasibility study with embedded qualitative process evaluation. Setting Four homeless centres. Two residential units in London, England. One day centre in Northampton, England. One day centre in Edinburgh, Scotland. Intervention In the intervention arm, a single refillable electronic cigarette was provided together with e-liquid, which was provided once per week for 4 weeks (choice of three flavours: fruit, menthol or tobacco; two nicotine strengths: 12 or 18 mg/ml). There was written information on electronic cigarette use and support. In the usual-care arm, written information on quitting smoking (adapted from NHS Choices) and signposting to the local stop smoking service were provided. Results Fifty-two per cent of eligible participants invited to take part in the study were successfully recruited (56% in the electronic cigarette arm; 50.5% in the usual-care arm; total n = 80). Retention rates were 75%, 63% and 59% at 4, 12 and 24 weeks, respectively. The qualitative component found that perceived value of the intervention was high. Barriers were participants’ personal difficulties and cannabis use. Facilitators were participants’ desire to change, free electronic cigarettes and social dynamics. Staff capacity to support the study was generally good. Carbon monoxide-validated sustained abstinence rates at 24 weeks were 6.25% (3/48) in the electronic cigarette arm compared with 0% (0/32) in the usual-care arm (intention to treat). Almost all participants present at follow-up visits completed measures needed for input into an economic evaluation, although information about staff time to support usual care could not be gathered. The cost of providing the electronic cigarette intervention was estimated at £114.42 per person. An estimated cost could not be calculated for usual care. Limitations Clusters could not be fully randomised because of a lack of centre readiness. The originally specified recruitment target was not achieved and recruitment was particularly difficult in residential centres. Blinding was not possible for the measurement of outcomes. Staff time supporting usual care could not be collected. Conclusions The study was associated with reasonable recruitment and retention rates and promising acceptability in the electronic cigarette arm. Data required for full cost-effectiveness evaluation in the electronic cigarette arm could be collected, but some data were not available in the usual-care arm. Future work Future research should focus on several key issues to help design optimal studies and interventions with this population, including which types of centres the intervention works best in, how best to retain participants in the study, how to help staff to deliver the intervention, and how best to record staff treatment time given the demands on their time. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14140672; the protocol was registered as researchregistry4346. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 9, No. 7. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

AimsTo systematically review the literature on (1) whether and how various risk messages about nicotine vaping products (NVPs) alter harm perception and behavioural intentions of smokers and non‐smokers and (2) how trust in sources of NVP risk communication affects message reception and behavioural intentions.MethodsSeven electronic databases and reference lists of relevant articles were searched for articles published up to April 2020. Experimental and quasi‐experimental studies on message effects and cross‐sectional studies on source credibility were included. The Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale and the Evidence Project Risk of Bias Tool were employed to assess the quality of observational and intervention studies, respectively. For each outcome variable, we indicated whether there was an effect (as a ‘yes or ‘no’) and employed effect direction plots to display information on the direction of effects.ResultsNicotine addiction messages resulted in greater health and addiction risk perceptions, relative risk messages comparing the health risks of NVPs to cigarette smoking increased the perception that NVPs are less harmful than combustible cigarettes, and a nicotine fact sheet corrected misperceptions of nicotine and NVPs. Smokers’ intention to purchase, try or switch to NVPs was higher when exposed to a relative risk message and lower when exposed to nicotine addiction warnings. Trust in NVP risk information from public health agencies was associated with lower odds of: i) NVP use and ii) perceiving NVPs as less harmful, whereas those who trusted information from NVP companies were more likely to perceive NVPs as less harmful than combustible cigarettes.ConclusionsRelative risk messages may help improve the accuracy of harm perceptions of nicotine vaping products and increase smokers’ intentions to quit smoking and/or to switch to vaping, although the literature is nascent.

BackgroundTo date, there has been no review of the research evidence examining smoking cessation among homeless adults. The current review aimed to: (i) estimate smoking prevalence in homeless populations; (ii) explore the efficacy of smoking cessation and smoking reduction interventions for homeless individuals; and (iii) describe the barriers and facilitators to smoking cessation and smoking reduction.MethodSystematic review of peer-reviewed research. Data sources included electronic academic databases. Search terms: ‘smoking’ AND ‘homeless’ AND ‘tobacco’, including adult (18+ years) smokers accessing homeless support services.ResultsFifty-three studies met the inclusion criteria (n = 46 USA). Data could not be meta-analysed due to large methodological inconsistencies and the lack of randomised controlled trials. Smoking prevalence ranged from 57% to 82%. Although there was no clear evidence on which cessation methods work best, layered approaches with additions to usual care seemed to offer modest enhancements in quit rates. Key barriers to cessation exist around the priority of smoking, beliefs around negative impact on mental health and substance use, and environmental influences.ConclusionsHomeless smokers will benefit from layered interventions which support many of their competing needs. To best understand what works, future recommendations include the need for consensus on the reporting of cessation outcomes.

Aim To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation aid used in routine stop smoking service. Design Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the National Health Service (NHS) and Personal Social Services (PSS) perspective for 12 months period and lifetime. Costs, including that of both treatments, other smoking cessation help and healthcare services, and health benefits, estimated from EQ-5D-5L and measured in Quality-adjusted Life years (QALYs), for the 12-month analysis came from a randomised controlled trial. Lifetime analysis was model-based with input from both trial data and published secondary data sources. Cost-effectiveness was measured by an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Setting Three English Stop-Smoking Service sites in England Participants Adult smokers who sought help to quit in the participating sites Intervention and comparator An e-cigarette (EC) starter kit versus provision of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for up to three months, both with standard behavioural support. A total of 886 participants were randomised (439 in EC arm, 447 in NRT arm). Excluding one death in each arm, the one-year quit rate was 18.0% and 9.9%, respectively. Measurements Cost of treatments was estimated from treatment log. Costs of other smoking cessation help and healthcare services, and EQ-5D-5L were collected at baseline, six- and 12-month follow-ups. Incremental costs and incremental QALYs were estimated using regression adjusting for baseline covariates and their respective baseline values. Findings The ICER was £1,100 per QALY gained at the 12 months after quit date (87% - 90% probability of cost-effective between £20,000/QALY and £30,000/QALY). Markov model estimated the lifetime ICER of EC to be £65 per QALY (around 85% probability of cost-effective between £20,000/QALY and £30,000/QALY). Conclusion Using e-cigarette as a smoking cessation aid with standard behavioural support in an English Stop-Smoking Service is more cost-effective than using nicotine replacement therapy in the same setting.

Background and aims: Vapes (E-cigarettes) are the most popular consumer choice for support with smoking cessation in countries where use is permitted. However, there are concerns that long-term nicotine vaping may sustain concurrent tobacco smoking or ultimately lead to smoking relapse. In this article we explore longitudinal vaping trajectories, establishing user perspectives on continued vaping in relation to smoking relapse or abstinence. Design: Qualitative longitudinal study collecting detailed subjective data at baseline and approximately 12 months. Participants (n=37) self-reported that they had used vaping to stop smoking at baseline. Thematic analysis of transcripts and a mapping approach of individual pathways enabled exploration of self-reported experiences, motives, resources and environmental and social influences on vaping and any concurrent tobacco smoking. Findings: The data show three key pathways: ‘maintainer’ (vaping and not smoking), ‘abstainer’ (neither smoking nor vaping), and ‘relapser’ (dual-using, or relapsed back to tobacco smoking only). In each pathway, individual experiences with vaping nicotine are critical, being heavily influenced by social and cultural factors. A context supportive of vaping was important, for the maintainers, as was belief in the need to overcome nicotine addiction for the abstainers, and dislike of the ‘vaping culture’ expressed by some in the relapser group. Dual-users held beliefs about dependence on tobacco. There is a need to offer alternative strategies for triggers such as stress. Information about changing nicotine strengths in order to prevent cravings and cope with stressors would be beneficial. Conclusions: Supporting continued vaping may decrease vulnerability to tobacco smoking relapse, through maintaining use of nicotine. Vapers require frequently updated evidence-based advice on safety to support harm reduction beliefs. Those who struggle to find a satisfying and effective vaping set-up need greater support. Those who wish to quit vaping need evidence-based information about effective ways to do this, without increasing vulnerability to tobacco relapse.

E-cigarettes are now the most popular quit aid chosen by smokers in England. Mobile phone text messages have been shown to be a useful tool in facilitating smoking cessation attempts by providing behaviour change support. To date, no published examples of text messages exist specifically aimed at smokers attempting to quit with e-cigarettes (vaping). As part of a parent study, we led an online call to vapers asking what advice and information they would give, in the form of a text message, to smokers wishing to quit smoking by vaping. We received 102 initial suggestions. Alongside behaviour change and smoking cessation experts, we checked the messages for readability and scientific accuracy, removed inappropriate messages, refined and edited others, and added additional messages. Messages were also grouped by theme and relevance to the stage of quitting. 95 messages were taken forward for further evaluation by 376 smokers, ex-smokers and vapers. Here we present the full set of 95 messages along with a final set of 78 that were selected and ordered for our parent study by two members of the research team along with four vapers. We encourage engagement with this resource and further validation from researchers interested in smoking cessation with e-cigarettes.

Introduction This study aimed to document changes in puffing topography and, the effects of device type and nicotine concentration on puffing topography, subjective effects and smoking behaviour over two weeks of e-cigarette (EC) use. Methods EC naive smokers (N = 50; 64% female) were randomly allocated to a cigalike (18 mg/mL) or tank containing either 18 (Tank18) or 6 mg/mL nicotine concentrations (Tank6). In 3 separate sessions (Baseline, 1 and 2 weeks post-baseline), participants vaped 20 min ad-libitum. Puff duration, puff number, inter-puff intervals (IPI), exhaled carbon monoxide (CO), cigarettes per day (CPD), cigarette dependence, craving, withdrawal, and subjective effects were recorded. Results Two weeks post-baseline, puff duration and IPI significantly increased whilst puff number decreased. Cigalikes were associated with greater puff number and shorter IPI compared to Tanks; there was no difference between Tank18 and Tank6. CPD, CO and cigarette dependence reduced significantly from baseline to week1 but did not differ between conditions. During each session, there was a significant reduction in craving, whilst withdrawal symptoms were only alleviated in week1 and 2; there was no difference between conditions. Tank18 consistently rated highest on positive effects including satisfaction; satisfaction scores for Cigalikes and Tank6 declined overtime. Conclusions Cigalikes and tanks were both effective for reducing craving, withdrawal symptoms and CPD although for the former, this may only be achieved through more frequent puffing. That the Tank18 yielded greater satisfaction suggests tank devices and higher nicotine concentrations may be more suitable in the early stage of a smoking cessation attempt.

Smoking rates in the UK are at an all-time low but this masks considerable inequalities; prevalence amongst adults who are homeless remains four times higher than the national average. The objective of this trial was to assess the feasibility of supplying free e-cigarette starter kits to smokers accessing homeless centres and to estimate parameters to inform a possible future larger trial. In this feasibility cluster trial, four homeless centres in Great Britain were non-randomly allocated to either a Usual Care (UC) or E-Cigarette (EC) arm. Smokers attending the centres were recruited by staff. UC arm participants (N = 32) received advice to quit and signposting to the local Stop Smoking Service. EC arm participants (N = 48) received an EC starter kit and 4-weeks supply of e-liquid. Outcome measures were recruitment and retention rates, use of ECs, smoking cessation/reduction and completion of measures required for economic evaluation. Eighty (mean age 43 years; 65% male) of the 153 eligible participants who were invited to participate, were successfully recruited (52%) within a five-month period, and 47 (59%) of these were retained at 24 weeks. The EC intervention was well received with minimal negative effects and very few unintended consequences (e.g. lost, theft, adding illicit substances). In both study arm, depression and anxiety scores declined over the duration of the study. Substance dependence scores remained constant. Assuming those with missing follow up data were smoking, CO validated sustained abstinence at 24 weeks was 3/48 (6.25%) and 0/32 (0%) respectively for the EC and UC arms. Almost all participants present at follow-up visits completed data collection for healthcare service and health-related quality of life measures. Providing an e-cigarette starter kit to smokers experiencing homelessness was associated with reasonable recruitment and retention rates and promising evidence of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

Background There is widespread concern about youth uptake of electronic cigarettes. Regulation and education campaigns exist which aim to protect children from initiating use, yet it is likely that children will be primarily influenced by the vaping/smoking behaviour of people in their immediate environment. This is the first known study exploring e-cigarette users’ views and reported experiences of vaping around children. Methods Following informed consent, semi-structured qualitative interviews with adults recruited from England, who had attempted to give up smoking by vaping, were conducted as part of a wider study into e-cigarette use trajectories and smoking relapse (ECtra study). Data relating to vaping around children were extracted from 28 interviews and thematically analysed taking a secondary data analysis approach. Results Analysis indicated that vaping behaviour in the presence of children in public appeared to be governed by replicating smoking norms, whilst vaping in the home appeared to be determined by caregivers’ need to reconcile vaping behaviour so that it was congruent with parental identity as responsible caregiver. Participant perspectives reflected existing diametrically opposed moral discourses applied to e-cigarette use of ‘harm reduction for smokers’ and ‘potential for youth harm’. Conclusion Vaping is being role modelled within the community and home, despite attempts to hide the behaviour by many e-cigarette users. The ambivalent contextualisation of e-cigarettes means that e-cigarette users may lack a clear narrative to draw on when discussing vaping with children. Public Health guidance for vaping around children, including discussing vaping in the context of smoking cessation, could be helpful.

Background: Smoking rates in the UK are at an all-time low but this masks considerable inequalities; prevalence amongst adults who are homeless remains four times higher than the national average. The objective of this trial was to assess the feasibility and effects of supplying free e-cigarette starter kits to smokers accessing homeless centres to inform a possible future larger trial. Methods: In this feasibility cluster trial, four homeless centres in Great Britain were pragmatically allocated to either a Usual Care (UC) or E-Cigarette (EC) arm. Smokers attending the centres were recruited by staff. UC arm participants (N=48) received advice to quit and signposting to the local Stop Smoking Service. EC arm participants (N=32) received an EC starter kit and 4-weeks supply of e-liquid. Outcome measures were recruitment and retention rates, use of ECs, smoking cessation/reduction and completion of measures required for economic evaluation. Results: Eighty (mean age 43 years; 65% male) of the 153 eligible participants who were invited to participate, were successfully recruited (52%) within a five-month period, and 47 (59%) of these were retained at 24 weeks. The EC intervention was well received with minimal negative effects and very few unintended consequences (e.g. lost, theft, adding illicit substances). In both study arm, depression and anxiety scores declined over the duration of the study. Substance dependence scores remained constant. Assuming those with missing follow up data were smoking, CO validated sustained abstinence at 24 weeks was 3/48 (6.25%) and 0/32 (0%) respectively for the EC and UC arms. Almost all participants present at follow-up visits completed data collection for healthcare service and health-related quality of life measures. Conclusions: Providing an e-cigarette starter kit to smokers experiencing homelessness was associated with reasonable recruitment and retention rates and promising evidence of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

Background: Electronic cigarette regulations included in the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD), Article 20, implemented in Europe by May 2017, aimed to improve safety for e-cigarette consumers, and prevent uptake among non-smokers, particularly young people. Before implementation, there were significant concerns from consumers, industry, and some in the scientific community about the potential negative impact of the TPD on people using e-cigarettes to remain abstinent from smoking. To date, there is limited evidence on how the TPD has affected consumers. This study aimed to add insight into how consumers perceived and experienced the regulations. Methods: Qualitative data, collected between March 2018 and March 2019, relating to participant views of the TPD were extracted from 160 interviews/extended surveys of e-cigarette consumers as part of a wider study into e-cigarette use trajectories (ECtra study). Data were thematically analysed. Results: Awareness of the TPD among consumers was not universal. Participants’ smoking behaviour did not appear to be influenced by the legislation. Participants were reassured by manufacturing regulations and requirements for ingredients labels. Participants responded negatively to changes perceived to cause inconvenience and extra plastic waste. The product restrictions prompted some participants to purchase non-compliant products illegally, potentially putting their safety at risk. Conclusions: E-cigarette regulation should focus on ensuring product safety. Raising awareness of the TPD among consumers and smokers could be beneficial.

Recent evidence suggests that e-cigarette users tend to change their puffing behaviors when using e-liquids with reduced nicotine concentrations by taking longer and more frequent puffs. Using puffing regimens modelled on puffing topography data from 19 experienced e-cigarette users who switched between 18 and 6 mg/mL e-liquids with and without power adjustments, differences in daily exposure to carbonyl compounds and estimated changes in cancer risk were assessed by production of aerosols generated using a smoking machine and analyzed using gas and liquid chromatography. Significant differences across conditions were found for formaldehyde and acetaldehyde (p

Background E-cigarettes are the most popular aid to smoking cessation attempts in England and the USA. This research examined associations between e-cigarette device characteristics and patterns of use, tobacco-smoking relapse, and smoking abstinence. Methods A convenience sample of 371 participants with experience of vaping, and tobacco-smoking abstinence and/or relapse completed an online cross-sectional survey about e-cigarettes. Factors associated with smoking relapse were examined using multiple linear and logistic regression models. Results Most participants were self-reported long-term abstinent smokers (86.3%) intending to continue vaping. Most initiated e-cigarette use with a vape pen (45.8%) or cig-a-like (38.7%) before moving onto a tank device (89%). Due to missing data, managed through pairwise deletion, only around 70 participants were included in some of the main analyses. Those using a tank or vape pen appeared less likely to relapse than those using a cig-a-like (tank vs. cig-a-like OR = 0.06, 95% CI 0.01–0.64, p = 0.019). There was an inverse association between starting self-reported e-cigarette liquid nicotine concentration and relapse, interacting with device type (OR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.63–0.99, p = 0.047), suggesting that risk of relapse may have been greater if starting with a low e-cigarette liquid nicotine concentration and/or cig-a-like device. Participants reported moving from tobacco-flavored cig-a-likes to fruit/sweet/food flavors with tank devices. Conclusions Knowledge of how people have successfully maintained tobacco-smoking abstinence using vaping could help other tobacco smokers wishing to quit tobacco smoking through vaping.

BackgroundSmoking is the largest single contributor to poor physical health and increased mortality in people with serious mental illnesses. The aim of the study was to investigate the utility of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) as a harm reduction intervention in this population.MethodFifty tobacco smokers with a psychotic disorder were enrolled onto a 24-week pilot study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02212041) investigating the efficacy of a 6-week free e-cigarette intervention to reduce smoking. Cigarette and e-cigarette use was self-reported at weekly visits, and verified using carbon monoxide tests. Psychopathology, e-cigarette acceptability and adverse effects were assessed using standardised scales.ResultsThere was a significant (⩾50%) reduction in cigarettes consumed per day between baseline and week 6 [F(2.596,116.800) = 25.878, p < 0.001], and e-cigarette use was stable during this period [F(2.932,46.504) = 2.023, p = 0.115]. These changes were verified by significant carbon monoxide reductions between these time points [F(3.335,126.633) = 5.063, p = 0.002].ConclusionsThe provision of e-cigarettes is a potentially useful harm reduction intervention in smokers with a psychotic disorder.

Aims: To analyse predictors of heroin abstinence in opiate substitution therapy (OST) based on frequency of crack use and its interactions with other predictors in a clinical non-experimental setting. Design: Retrospective study. Setting: A community drug service in London, UK. Participants: 325 clients starting OST between 2010 and 2014 (197 methadone and 128 buprenorphine). Measurements: Logistic regression models (a general model and separate models for methadone and buprenorphine) assessed demographic and clinical data as predictors of heroin abstinence at one year after treatment start (or at the date of transfer to another service). Findings: For the general model participants choosing methadone were more likely to use heroin at follow up (OR=2.36, 95% CI: 1.40–3.17) as were daily crack users on methadone (OR=2.62, 95% CI: 0.96 – 7.16). For the methadone model only daily crack use predicted heroin use at follow up (OR = 2.62, 95% CI: 0.96 – 7.16). For buprenorphine, higher amounts of baseline heroin use, lower buprenorphine dose and daily drinking predicted heroin use at follow up (OR=0.85, 95% CI: 0.75–0.95; OR=1.31, 95% CI: 1.06–1.60 and OR=6.04, 95% CI: 1.26–28.92). Both use of cannabis and depression increased likelihood of heroin abstinence for clients not using crack compared to occasional (OR=6.68, 95% CI: 0.37–119.59; OR=106.31, 95% CI: 3.41–3313.30) and daily (OR=57.49 (95% CI: 2.37–1396.46; OR=170.99 (95% CI: 4.61–6339.47) users. Conclusions: Most of the predictors in the general model were found significant only in the buprenorphine but not in the methadone model, suggesting that a general model has little predictive value. Crack use was a significant predictor of heroin abstinence at follow up in all models, however for buprenorphine only when depression or cannabis use was present. Further research is needed to assess effective treatment approaches for the growing population of dual users.

BACKGROUND: Smoking is a key contributor to health and social inequalities and homeless smoking prevalence rates are 4 times higher than the general population. Research on homelessness and smoking to date has been concentrated predominantly in the US and Australia. This study aimed to describe smoking and quitting behaviour in homeless adult smokers in Great Britain. Data on perceptions of, and willingness to try, e-cigarettes were also gathered.METHODS: Cross sectional survey of 283 adult smokers accessing homeless support services in Kent, the Midlands, London and Edinburgh. Participants answered a four-part survey: i) demographics; ii) current smoking behaviour and dependence (including the Fagerström Test of Cigarette Dependence [FTCD]); iii) previous quit attempts; and iv) e-cigarettes perceptions.RESULTS: High levels of cigarette dependence were observed (FTCD: M = 7.78, sd ± 0.98). Although desire to quit was high, most had made fewer than 5 quit attempts and 90% of these lasted less than 24 h. 91.5% reported that others around them also smoked. Previous quit methods used included cold turkey (29.7%), NRT (24.7%), varenicline (22.3%) and bupropion (14.5%). 34% were willing or able to spend £20 or more for an e-cigarette and 82% had tried one in the past although 54% reported that they preferred smoking.CONCLUSION: We observed high nicotine dependence, few long-term quit attempts, strong desire to quit and amenability to both traditional cessation methods and e-cigarettes. Community embedded and non-routine approaches to cessation may be promising avenues promoting engagement with the homeless community. Likely barriers to uptake include low affordability, preference for cigarettes and high numbers of smoking acquaintances.

BackgroundOver the past few years, a large number of smokers in the UK have stopped smoking with the help of e-cigarettes. So far, UK Stop Smoking Services (SSSs) have been reluctant to include e-cigarettes among their treatment options because data on their efficacy compared with the licensed medications are lacking.ObjectiveThe objective was to compare the efficacy of refillable e-cigarettes and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) products, when accompanied by weekly behavioural support.DesignA randomised controlled trial comparing e-cigarettes and NRT.SettingThree sites that provide local SSSs.ParticipantsThe participants were 886 smokers seeking help to quit smoking, aged ≥ 18 years, not pregnant or breastfeeding, with no strong preference to use or not to use NRT or e-cigarettes in their quit attempt, and currently not using NRT or e-cigarettes. A total of 886 participants were randomised but two died during the study (one in each study arm) and were not included in the analysis.InterventionsThe NRT arm (n = 446) received NRT of their choice (single or combination), provided for up to 12 weeks. The e-cigarette arm (n = 438) received an e-cigarette starter pack and were encouraged to buy addtional e-liquids and e-cigarette products of their choice. Both arms received the same standard behavioural support. Participants attended weekly sessions at their SSS and provided outcome data at 4 weeks. They were then followed up by telephone at 6 and 12 months. Participants reporting abstinence or at least 50% reduction in cigarette consumption at 12 months were invited to attend for carbon monoxide (CO) validation. Participants/researchers could not be blinded to the intervention.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was CO-validated sustained abstinence rates at 52 weeks. Participants lost to follow-up or not providing biochemical validation were included as non-abstainers. Secondary outcomes included abstinence at other time points, reduction in smoke intake, treatment adherence and ratings, elicited adverse reactions, and changes in self-reported respiratory health. A cost-efficacy analysis of the intervention was also conducted.ResultsThe 1-year quit rate was 9.9% in the NRT arm and 18.0% in the e-cigarette arm (risk ratio 1.83, 95% confidence interval 1.30 to 2.58;p 2 = 161.4;p LimitationsThe results may not be generalisable to other types of smokers or settings, or to cartridge-based e-cigarettes.ConclusionsWithin the context of multisession treatment for smokers seeking help, e-cigarettes were significantly more effective than NRT. If SSSs provide e-cigarette starter packs, it is likely to boost their success rates and improve their cost-efficacy.Future workThe efficacy of e-cigarettes provided with different levels of support will show whether smokers should be encouraged to switch to vaping within support services or whether e-cigarettes can be recommended with less intensive or no support.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN60477608.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 43. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The trial was supported by the Cancer Research UK Prevention Trials Unit (grant A16893).

E-cigarettes (EC) are now the most popular quit aid in England but their effectiveness for cessation if offered at a pharmacy has not been tested. Here we test the effectiveness of offering an e-cigarette with and without nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) on 4–6-week quit rates in adult smokers seeking support from a community pharmacy. A between subject, six-week, prospective, cohort design. 115 smokers (female = 74; M age = 46.37, SD = 13.56) chose either an EC, EC + NRT or NRT alone, alongside standard behavioural support. Smokers opting for an EC alone or an EC + NRT were more likely to report complete abstinence from smoking at 4–6 weeks (62.2% and 61.5% respectively) compared to NRT alone (34.8%). An EC intervention was significantly more effective for smoking cessation than NRT in this community pharmacy. The results for e-cigarettes appear positive but with the caveat that participants chose their own products which may have introduced bias., Highlights • The effectiveness of offering e-cigarettes within a pharmacy setting was investigated. • Smokers opted for either an e-cigarette either with or without nicotine replacement therapy. • Smokers opting for an e-cigarette were more likely to have reported complete abstinence from smoking at 4–6 weeks.

BACKGROUND: E-cigarettes are commonly used in attempts to stop smoking, but evidence is limited regarding their effectiveness as compared with that of nicotine products approved as smoking-cessation treatments. METHODS: We randomly assigned adults attending U.K. National Health Service stop-smoking services to either nicotine-replacement products of their choice, including product combinations, provided for up to 3 months, or an e-cigarette starter pack (a second-generation refillable e-cigarette with one bottle of nicotine e-liquid [18 mg per milliliter]), with a recommendation to purchase further e-liquids of the flavor and strength of their choice. Treatment included weekly behavioral support for at least 4 weeks. The primary outcome was sustained abstinence for 1 year, which was validated biochemically at the final visit. Participants who were lost to follow-up or did not provide biochemical validation were considered to not be abstinent. Secondary outcomes included participant-reported treatment usage and respiratory symptoms. RESULTS: A total of 886 participants underwent randomization. The 1-year abstinence rate was 18.0% in the e-cigarette group, as compared with 9.9% in the nicotine-replacement group (relative risk, 1.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30 to 2.58; P

Background E-liquids are commercially available and manufactured, however some users of e-cigarettes prefer to prepare them at home (Do-it-Yourself; DIY) using individual ingredients. To date there is a paucity of research on how and why users make their own e-liquids. Methods Forty-one European and US based exclusive users of e-cigarettes (ex-smokers) were individually interviewed. Structured interviews focused on motivations for home-mixing, practices, buying habits and broader themes around reasons for long-term vaping. We also measured nicotine and solvent concentrations and analysed 33 DIY e-liquids collected from 16 participants for nicotine, solvents, flavourings, and potentially harmful chemicals. Results There were four main reasons for DIY: 1) economical (financial savings), 2) self-control over manufacturing process, 3) novelty, fun and 4) higher nicotine concentrations. Twelve out of 16 participants achieved nicotine concentration within 20% of their intended limit. Samples from five participants were above the EU Tobacco Products Directive's (TPD) 20 mg/ml nicotine concentration upper limit. Most samples contained more vegetable glycerine (VG) than propylene glycol (PG) and the most commonly used flavourings were dessert, e.g., vanilla and caramel. Chemical analysis also revealed presence of several potentially harmful chemicals and respiratory irritants, including cinnamaldehyde, benzaldehyde, and acetoin. Conclusion DIY may offer users of e-cigarettes a long-term affordable practical method of vaping. Recommended safety advice needs to reflect actual and fast moving user behaviour., Highlights • First study investigating motivations and practices of DIY e-liquid mixing • First known chemical analysis of e-cigarette DIY liquid • Majority achieved nicotine concentration within 20% of the intended limit • There is a need for research to track actual real-life user behaviour

Background: Intentional consumption of alcohol based hand gels has been reported especially amongst non-UK national, alcohol dependent, homeless individuals in London. Whilst alcohol misuse is known to be associated with impaired cognitive functioning and mental health problems, the effects of additional ingestion of alcohol gel are unknown. Objectives: To explore cognitive and psychological functioning in users who intentionally ingest alcohol gel compared with ethyl-alcohol only misusers and controls. Methods: Male, Central and Eastern European alcohol only misusers, (n=14; mean age 39 years), alcohol gel users (n=14; mean age 43 years) and controls (n=12; mean age 31 years) were recruited from a London Homeless Service during 2013/14. Alcohol misusers, alcohol gel users and controls were compared on the Forwards and Backwards Digit Span Test; Block Design test; Retrospective and Prospective Memory Questionnaire (PRMQ) and the Hospital and Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS). Results: Alcohol gel users performed significantly worse on the Block Design task (p

Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use is becoming increasing popular among smokers, and there is a plethora of devices available. Nicotine delivery is clearly important for reducing tobacco craving and withdrawal symptoms, but other sensorimotor aspects of e-cigarettes (such as visual appearance) may contribute to this effect. This study explored whether it is important for an e-cigarette to visually resemble a tobacco cigarette in order to reduce craving and withdrawal symptoms. Sixty-three cigarette smokers (40% female, aged 18-65 years) who were not current e-cigarette users were randomly allocated to take ten 3-s puffs from either a white or a red first-generation e-cigarette following overnight abstinence. Current craving (urge to smoke) and nicotine withdrawal symptoms (using the Mood and Physical Symptoms Scale [MPSS]) were measured before and 10 min after use. Linear regression revealed higher craving and withdrawal symptoms in the red condition versus the white condition, but only among those who were e-cigarette naive (craving: B = .76, p = .009; withdrawal symptoms: B = 2.18, p = .009), not among those with e-cigarette experience (craving: B = -.08, p = .89; withdrawal symptoms: B = .24, p = .81), and these effects differed between groups (p = .04 and 0.01 for craving and withdrawal symptoms, respectively). In conclusion, cigarette-like appearance was associated with lower craving and withdrawal symptoms, but only for those with no prior e-cigarette experience. This effect, putatively mediated via classical conditioning or expectancies, may aid understanding of smokers' initial preferences for "cigalike" e-cigarette devices.

Introduction This study investigated the effects of the European Union Tobacco Products Directive [EU-TPD] Article 20 E-cigarette (EC) health warnings (“This product contains nicotine which is a highly addictive substance. [It is not recommended for non-smokers.]”) and a comparative harm message (“Use of this product is much less harmful than smoking” [COMP]) on smokers’ and non-smokers’ perceptions and behavioural intentions. Methods 2495 UK residents (1283 smokers and 1212 non-smokers) self-reported perceived harm, addictiveness, EC effectiveness, social acceptability, and intentions to purchase and use EC, and in smokers, intentions to quit and intentions to use EC in future quit attempts. These were measured before and after exposure to EC images containing either the TPD, COMP, TPD + COMP or no message. Results Non-smokers had higher harm, addictiveness and lower social acceptability perceptions. TPD presence increased, whilst COMP decreased, harm and addictiveness perceptions in both groups. For smokers only, harm perceptions were lower following exposure to COMP alone vs. no message. For non-smokers the TPD increased harm perceptions vs. no message. There were no effects on social acceptability, EC effectiveness or use intentions. In smokers only, purchase and quit intentions were higher following exposure to the COMP alone. Conclusion TPD messages may be effective smoking prevention tools, although the COMP message was more effective in reducing harm perceptions and increasing use intentions in smokers. That COMP did not increase use intentions in non-smokers suggest that such exposures may potentially act as an effective harm reduction tool without resulting in increased uptake among non-smokers.

Background: Research indicates that, over time, exclusive e-cigarette users (vapers) gradually reduce the nicotine concentration in their e-liquid and transition to more sophisticated devices. Alongside this, consumption of e-liquid increases and constant cotinine levels are maintained. Aims: We aimed to confirm these observations in 27 experienced vapers tested at baseline and 12 months later, by measuring nicotine absorption (via salivary levels of the nicotine metabolite cotinine; ng/ml), nicotine concentrations in e-liquid (mg/mL), volume of e-liquid consumed (mL per day), device types and flavours used, both at baseline and 12 months. Results: Vapers reduced both their nicotine concentrations in e-liquid over 12 months (from 13.83 mg/mL at baseline to 9.91 at follow up) but significantly increased their e-liquid consumption (from 4.44 to 6.84 mL). No significant changes in salivary cotinine concentrations (370.88 ng/mL at baseline and 415.78 ng/mL at follow up) were observed. There was an increase in sub-ohming (using an atomiser coil with resistance of < 1 ohm with increased power) at 12 months, and in the use of fruit flavoured e-liquids. Conclusions: Our sample of experienced vapers reduced the concentration of nicotine in their e-liquid over time, but maintained their nicotine intake possibly through self-titration via more intensive puffing. Findings suggest there may be little benefit in reducing nicotine e-liquid concentration since this appears to result in higher e-liquid consumption which may incur both a financial and health cost. Gaining an understanding of underlying reasons for lowering e-liquid concentration would be a useful line of empirical enquiry.

Aims: To 1) estimate predictors of first vs. second generation electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) choice; 2) determine whether a second generation device was i) superior for reducing urge to smoke and withdrawal symptoms (WS) and ii) associated with enhanced positive subjective effects. Design: Mixed effects experimental design. Phase 1: reason for e-cigarette choice was assessed via questionnaire. Phase 2: participants were randomly allocated to first or second generation e-cigarette condition. Urge to smoke and WS were measured before, and 10mins after, taking 10 e-cigarette puffs. Setting: University of East London, UK. Participants: 97 smokers (mean age 26; SD 8.7; 54% female) Measurements: Single item urge to smoke scale to assess craving; Mood and Physical Symptoms Scale (MPSS) to assess WS. Subjective effects included: satisfaction, hit, ‘felt like smoking’ and ‘would use to stop smoking’ (Yes vs. No response). Findings: Equal numbers chose each device but none of the predictor variables (gender, age, tobacco dependence, previous e-cigarette use) accounted for choice. Only baseline urge to smoke/WS predicted urge to smoke/WS 10 minutes after use (B=0.38; P

Introduction: Article 20 of the European Tobacco Products Directive (EU-TPD) specifies that e-liquids should not contain nicotine in excess of 20 mg/mL, thus many vapers may be compelled to switch to lower concentrations and in so doing, may engage in more intensive puffing. This study aimed to establish whether more intensive puffing produces higher levels of carbonyl compounds in e-cigarette aerosols. Methods: Using the HPLC-UV diode array method, four carbonyl compounds (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acetone, and acrolein) were measured in liquids and aerosols from nicotine solutions of 24 and 6 mg/mL. Aerosols were generated using a smoking machine configured to replicate puffing topography data previously obtained from 12 experienced e-cigarette users. Results: Carbonyl levels in aerosols from the puffing regimen of 6 mg/mL were significantly higher (p < .05 using independent samples t tests) compared with those of 24 mg/mL nicotine. For the 6 and 24 mg/mL nicotine aerosols respectively, means ± SD for formaldehyde levels were 3.41 ± 0.94, and 1.49 ± 0.30 μg per hour (μg/h) of e-cigarette use. Means ± SD for acetaldehyde levels were 2.17 ± 0.36 and 1.04 ± 0.13 μg/h. Means ± SD for acetone levels were 0.73 ± 0.20 and 0.28 ± 0.14 μg/h. Acrolein was not detected. Conclusions: Higher levels of carbonyls associated with more intensive puffing suggest that vapers switching to lower nicotine concentrations (either due to the EU-TPD implementation or personal choice), may increase their exposure to these compounds. Based on real human puffing topography data, this study suggests that limiting nicotine concentrations to 20 mg/mL may not result in the desired harm minimalization effect. Implications: More intensive puffing regimens associated with the use of low nicotine concentration e-liquids can lead to higher levels of carbonyl generation in the aerosol. Although in need of replication in a larger sample outside a laboratory, this study provides pragmatic empirical data on the potential risks of compensatory puffing behaviors in vapers, and can help to inform future regulatory decisions on nicotine e-liquid concentrations. The cap on nicotine concentration at 20 mg/mL set by the EU-TPD may therefore have the unintended consequence of encouraging use of lower nicotine concentration e-liquid, in turn increasing exposure to carbonyl compounds through compensatory puffing.

Adult electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use is increasing globally, and early studies have suggested that similar trends may be observed among the adolescent population, albeit at lower levels. The current literature review presents data collected since 2014 from 21 cross-sectional studies and one cohort study that were all published in English. In particular, it focuses on awareness, ever use, past 30-day use, and regular use of e-cigarettes. The article suggests that adolescents are nearing complete awareness of e-cigarettes. Furthermore, in relation to ever use and past 30-day use, higher prevalence rates continue to be reported across time, especially in the United States. Nonetheless, reported regular use of e-cigarettes remains much lower than past 30-day use, although conclusions are limited due to inconsistencies with measurement and consequent lack of cross-cultural applicability. The majority of studies do not report whether adolescents use non-nicotine e-cigarettes. There is a current absence of longitudinal studies that explore any association between e-cigarettes and tobacco use and little qualitative data that may illuminate how and why adolescents use e-cigarettes. Through addressing these methodological limitations, future research will be able to inform health care and policy more effectively.