scholarly journals Associations between vaping and relapse to smoking: preliminary findings from a longitudinal survey in the UK

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonie S. Brose ◽  
Julia Bowen ◽  
Ann McNeill ◽  
Timea R. Partos

Abstract Background Most smokers attempting to quit relapse. There is little evidence whether the use of e-cigarettes (‘vaping’) increases or decreases relapse. This study aimed to assess 1) whether vaping predicted relapse among ex-smokers, and 2) among ex-smokers who vaped, whether vaping characteristics predicted relapse. Methods Longitudinal web-based survey of smokers, recent ex-smokers and vapers in the UK, baseline in May/June 2016 (n = 3334), follow-up in September 2017 (n = 1720). Those abstinent from smoking ≥ 2 months at baseline and followed up were included. Aim 1: Relapse during follow-up was regressed onto baseline vaping status, age, gender, income, nicotine replacement therapy use and time quit smoking (n = 374). Aim 2: Relapse was regressed onto baseline vaping frequency, device type, nicotine strength and time quit smoking (n = 159). Results Overall, 39.6% relapsed. Compared with never use (35.9%), past/ever (45.9%; adjOR = 1.13; 95% CI, 0.61–2.07) and daily vaping (34.5%; adjOR = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.61–1.89) had similar odds of relapse, for non-daily vaping evidence of increased relapse was inconclusive (65.0%; adjOR = 2.45; 95% CI, 0.85–7.08). Among vapers, non-daily vaping was associated with higher relapse than daily vaping (adjOR = 3.88; 95% CI, 1.10–13.62). Compared with modular devices (18.9% relapse), tank models (45.6%; adjOR = 3.63; 95% CI, 1.33–9.95) were associated with increased relapse; evidence was unclear for disposable/cartridge refillable devices (41.9%; adjOR = 2.83; 95% CI, 0.90–8.95). Nicotine strength had no clear association with relapse. Conclusion Relapse to smoking is likely to be more common among ex-smokers vaping infrequently or using less advanced devices. Research into the effects of vaping on relapse needs to consider vaping characteristics.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaimee L Heffner ◽  
Sheryl L Catz ◽  
Predrag Klasnja ◽  
Brooks Tiffany ◽  
Jennifer B McClure

BACKGROUND The majority of cigarette smokers want to quit someday but are not ready to commit to long-term abstinence. However, available smoking cessation treatments are not well-suited to meet the needs of these ambivalent smokers. Low-cost, high-reach mobile health (mHealth) interventions may be a cost-efficient means of offering assistance to ambivalent smokers, yet there are currently no evidence-based options available for this group. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to develop and preliminarily evaluate the core content for an mHealth program targeting adult smokers who are ambivalent about quitting. The core content consisted of a series of “personal experiments” similar to those tested as part of a counseling intervention in prior work, including brief cognitive or behavioral tasks designed to boost readiness for changing smoking behavior. METHODS We conducted individual user interviews (N=3) to refine program content, and then conducted a one-arm pilot study (N=25) to assess user receptivity and the potential impact of the experiments on motivation and self-efficacy to quit or reduce smoking. RESULTS In user interviews, participants liked the concept of the personal experiments. Participants in the pilot study found a medium-fidelity prototype to be highly acceptable. After watching a brief orientation video that explained how the program works, most participants (80%, 20/25) indicated that it sounded interesting, primarily because it did not require any commitment to quit. All participants (100%, 25/25) completed all 7 experiments, including a 24-hour quit attempt, although not all were able to refrain from smoking for a full day based on qualitative feedback on the experiment. The mean rating of usefulness of the overall program was 4.12 (SD 1.09) out of 5, and the average rating of the difficulty of the experiments was 2.16 (SD 1.18) out of 5. At the last assessment point, 92% (23/25) of the participants indicated that they were more interested in either quitting or cutting back than when they began the program, and 72% (18/25) said that if the program had included a free trial of nicotine replacement therapy, they would have used it to try to quit smoking. CONCLUSIONS This formative work confirmed that ambivalent smokers are willing to use and will remain engaged with an mHealth intervention that employs the novel concept of personal experiments to enhance their motivation for and ability to quit smoking. The addition of action-oriented treatment (self-help and free nicotine replacement therapy, quitline referral) could further support users’ efforts to stop smoking and remain quit.


AIDS Care ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Balfour ◽  
Stephanie A. Wiebe ◽  
William D. Cameron ◽  
Daniella Sandre ◽  
Andrew Pipe ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Beard ◽  
Jamie Brown ◽  
Robert West

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.


2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (54) ◽  
pp. 1-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sue Cooper ◽  
Sarah Lewis ◽  
James G Thornton ◽  
Neil Marlow ◽  
Kim Watts ◽  
...  

BackgroundSmoking during pregnancy causes many adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes. Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is effective for cessation outside pregnancy but efficacy and safety in pregnancy are unknown. We hypothesised that NRT would increase smoking cessation in pregnancy without adversely affecting infants.ObjectivesTo compare (1) at delivery, the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness for achieving biochemically validated smoking cessation of NRT patches with placebo patches in pregnancy and (2) in infants at 2 years of age, the effects of maternal NRT patch use with placebo patch use in pregnancy on behaviour, development and disability.DesignRandomised, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial and economic evaluation with follow-up at 4 weeks after randomisation, delivery and until infants were 2 years old. Randomisation was stratified by centre and a computer-generated sequence was used to allocate participants using a 1 : 1 ratio. Participants, site pharmacies and all study staff were blind to treatment allocation.SettingSeven antenatal hospitals in the Midlands and north-west England.ParticipantsWomen between 12 and 24 weeks’ gestation who smoked ≥ 10 cigarettes a day before and ≥ 5 during pregnancy, with an exhaled carbon monoxide (CO) reading of ≥ 8 parts per million (p.p.m.).InterventionsNRT patches (15 mg per 16 hours) or matched placebo as an 8-week course issued in two equal batches. A second batch was dispensed at 4 weeks to those abstinent from smoking.Main outcome measuresParticipants: self-reported, prolonged abstinence from smoking between a quit date and childbirth, validated at delivery by CO measurement and/or salivary cotinine (COT) (primary outcome). Infants, at 2 years: absence of impairment, defined as no disability or problems with behaviour and development. Economic: cost per ‘quitter’.ResultsOne thousand and fifty women enrolled (521 NRT, 529 placebo). There were 1010 live singleton births and 12 participants had live twins, while there were 14 fetal deaths and no birth data for 14 participants. Numbers of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes were similar in trial groups, except for a greater number of caesarean deliveries in the NRT group. Smoking: all participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses; those lost to follow-up (7% for primary outcome) were assumed to be smoking. At 1 month after randomisation, the validated cessation rate was higher in the NRT group {21.3% vs. 11.7%, odds ratio [OR], [95% confidence interval (CI)] for cessation with NRT, 2.05 [1.46 to 2.88]}. At delivery, there was no difference between groups’ smoking cessation rates: 9.4% in the NRT and 7.6% in the placebo group [OR (95% CI), 1.26 (0.82 to 1.96)]. Infants: at 2 years, analyses were based on data from 888 out of 1010 (87.9%) singleton infants (including four postnatal infant deaths) [445/503 (88.5%) NRT, 443/507 (87.4%) placebo] and used multiple imputation. In the NRT group, 72.6% (323/445) had no impairment compared with 65.5% (290/443) in placebo (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.86). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for NRT use was £4156 per quitter (£4926 including twins), but there was substantial uncertainty around these estimates.ConclusionsNicotine replacement therapy patches had no enduring, significant effect on smoking in pregnancy; however, 2-year-olds born to women who used NRT were more likely to have survived without any developmental impairment. Further studies should investigate the clinical effectiveness and safety of higher doses of NRT.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN07249128.FundingThis project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 54. See the NIHR Journals Library programme website for further project information.


Author(s):  
Grace Lewis ◽  
Neneh Rowa-Dewar ◽  
Rachel O’Donnell

Evidence and campaigns highlighting smoking and second-hand smoke risks have significantly reduced smoking prevalence and denormalised smoking in the home in Scotland. However, smoking prevalence remains disproportionally high in socioeconomically disadvantaged groups. Using stigma as a theoretical lens, this article presents a thematic analysis of parents’ accounts of attempting to abstain from smoking at home, using nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), in disadvantaged areas of Edinburgh and the Lothians. Smoking stigma, particularly self-stigma, underpinned accounts, with two overarching themes: interplaying barriers and enablers for creation of a smoke-free home and reconceptualisation of the study as an opportunity to quit smoking. Personal motivation to abstain or stop smoking empowered participants to reduce or quit smoking to resist stigma. For those struggling to believe in their ability to stop smoking, stigma led to negative self-labelling. Previously hidden smoking in the home gradually emerged in accounts, suggesting that parents may fear disclosure of smoking in the home in societies where smoking stigma exists. This study suggests that stigma may act both as an enabler and barrier in this group. Reductions in smoking in the home were dependent on self-efficacy and motivations to abstain, and stigma was entwined in these beliefs.


2012 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
SJ Bondy ◽  
LM Diemert ◽  
JC Victor ◽  
PW McDonald ◽  
JE Cohen

Introduction Access to Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) is a key public health intervention to reduce smoking. We assessed prevalence and correlates of use of NRT in Ontario, where NRT is available without prescription. Methods Participants were a representative sample of 2262 adult smokers in the Ontario Tobacco Survey cohort. Prospectively measured use of NRT over a 6-month period was reported in relation to smoking behaviour and history, attempts to quit, receipt of other supports for cessation supports and attitudes toward NRT. Results Overall, 11% of smokers used NRT over the six-month follow-up period. Conclusion With increasing accessibility of NRT, further surveillance and research are warranted to determine the impact of the reach and benefits of NRT, considering both the general and targeted smoking populations.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document