Characterising smoking and nicotine use behaviours among women of reproductive age: a 10-year population study in England.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco smoking affects women's fertility and is associated with substantial risks of adverse pregnancy outcomes. This study explored trends by socioeconomic position in patterns of smoking, use of non-combustible nicotine products, and quitting activity among women of reproductive age in England. METHODS: Data come from a nationally representative monthly cross-sectional survey. Between October 2013 and October 2023, 197,266 adults (≥ 18 years) were surveyed, of whom 44,052 were women of reproductive age (18-45 years). Main outcome measures were current smoking, vaping, and use of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), heated tobacco products (HTPs), and nicotine pouches; mainly/exclusively smoking hand-rolled cigarettes and level of dependence among current smokers; past-year quit attempts among past-year smokers; and success of quit attempts among those who tried to quit. We modelled time trends in these outcomes, overall and by occupational social grade (ABC1 = more advantaged/C2DE = less advantaged). RESULTS: Smoking prevalence among women of reproductive age fell from 28.7% [95%CI = 26.3-31.2%] to 22.4% [19.6-25.5%] in social grades C2DE but there was an uncertain increase from 11.7% [10.2-13.5%] to 14.9% [13.4-16.6%] in ABC1. By contrast, among all adults and among men of the same age, smoking prevalence remained relatively stable in ABC1. Vaping prevalence among women of reproductive age more than tripled, from 5.1% [4.3-6.0%] to 19.7% [18.0-21.5%], with the absolute increase more pronounced among those in social grades C2DE (reaching 26.7%; 23.3-30.3%); these changes were larger than those observed among all adults but similar to those among men of the same age. The proportion of smokers mainly/exclusively smoking hand-rolled cigarettes increased from 40.5% [36.3-44.9%] to 61.4% [56.5-66.1%] among women of reproductive age; smaller increases were observed among all adults and among men of the same age. Patterns on other outcomes were largely similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among women of reproductive age, there appears to have been a rise in smoking prevalence in the more advantaged social grades over the past decade. Across social grades, there have been substantial increases in the proportion of women of reproductive age who vape and shifts from use of manufactured to hand-rolled cigarettes among those who smoke. These changes have been more pronounced than those observed in the general adult population over the same period.

Trends in Exclusive Non-Cigarette Tobacco Smoking in England: A Population Survey 2013-2023.

INTRODUCTION: The UK Government intends to implement a "smokefree generation" policy prohibiting the sale of all tobacco products to people born after 2008. National surveys provide comprehensive data on cigarette smoking, but little is known about patterns of non-cigarette tobacco smoking across key population groups. AIMS AND METHODS: Using data from a nationally representative cross-sectional survey of adults in England, collected monthly between September 2013 and September 2023 (n = 196 721), we estimated time trends in exclusive non-cigarette tobacco (eg, cigar/pipe/shisha) smoking prevalence, overall and by age, gender, occupational social grade, region, ethnicity, and vaping status. Interviews were conducted face-to-face until March 2020 and via telephone thereafter. RESULTS: From September 2013 to September 2023, there was a non-linear increase in exclusive non-cigarette tobacco smoking prevalence (from 0.36% to 1.68%; prevalence ratio = 4.72 [95% CI = 3.43-6.48]). Prevalence was relatively stable up to February 2020 (at an average of 0.46%), then increased sharply at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic (at the same time as survey methods changed), to 0.90% (0.82%-0.99%) in March 2020. This was followed by a steadier rise, peaking at 1.97% in May 2022, before falling slightly to 1.68% by September 2023. In 2022/2023, 1 in 10 smokers (10.8% [9.64%-12.0%]) exclusively used non-cigarette tobacco. The rise in prevalence was observed across all subgroups but was most pronounced among younger adults (eg, reaching 3.21% of 18-year-olds vs. 1.09% of 65-year-olds). Prevalence was consistently higher among men and current vapers. CONCLUSIONS: Although exclusive use of non-cigarette combustible tobacco remains rare among adults in England, it has increased in recent years, particularly among younger ages. As of September 2023, there were approximately 772 800 adult exclusive non-cigarette tobacco smokers in England; around five times more than a decade earlier. IMPLICATIONS: The proportion of adults in England who do not use cigarettes at all but smoke other combustible tobacco products has increased substantially in recent years, with a particularly pronounced rise among young people. The inclusion of non-cigarette combustible tobacco products under the proposed "smokefree generation" policy is therefore likely to be important for achieving the greatest reduction in youth uptake of tobacco smoking, as it would ensure young people who are unable to legally buy cigarettes do not buy other combustible tobacco products that are similarly harmful to health.

Trends in Daily Cigarette Consumption Among Smokers: A Population Study in England, 2008-2023.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to estimate time trends in cigarette consumption among smokers in England between 2008 and 2023 and to explore differences by key potential moderators. AIMS AND METHODS: We used data from 57 778 adult cigarette smokers participating in a nationally representative monthly cross-sectional survey between January 2008 and September 2023. We estimated monthly time trends in mean daily consumption of (1) any, (2) manufactured, and (3) hand-rolled cigarettes among all smokers and by main type of cigarettes smoked, smoking frequency, age, gender, occupational social grade, region, nicotine replacement therapy use, and vaping status. RESULTS: Overall cigarette consumption fell from 13.6 [95% CI = 13.3 to 13.9] to 10.6 [10.5 to 10.8] per day between January 2008 and October 2019 (a 22% decrease), then remained stable up to September 2023. Over this period, the proportion mainly or exclusively smoking hand-rolled cigarettes increased (from 30.6% [29.1%-32.1%] in 2008 to 52.1% [49.7%-54.5%] in 2023). As a result, manufactured cigarette consumption fell by 47%, from 9.5 [9.2-9.8] per day in January 2008 to 5.0 [4.7-5.3] in September 2023, while hand-rolled cigarette consumption increased by 35%, from 4.2 [3.9-4.4] to 5.6 [5.3-5.9], respectively. The decline in overall cigarette consumption was observed across all subgroups, but was greater among non-daily smokers, younger smokers, and those who vaped. CONCLUSIONS: Over the last 15 years, the average number of cigarettes consumed each day by smokers in England has fallen by almost a quarter, but has plateaued since October 2019. There has been a sharp decline in the number of manufactured cigarettes consumed and an increase in the number of hand-rolled cigarettes consumed, as smokers have increasingly shifted towards using hand-rolled tobacco. IMPLICATIONS: While average cigarette consumption in England has fallen over the past 15 years, this declining trend has stalled (and reversed in some population groups) since 2019. The availability of cheap, hand-rolled tobacco appears to be undermining policies that aim to reduce smoking by raising the price of tobacco (eg, through taxation) and could be targeted to reignite the decline in cigarette consumption.

Are people more likely to vape or smoke indoors? A population survey of adults in England.

BACKGROUND: Increasingly, people smoke cigarettes outdoors and avoid exposing bystanders to harm. People may not have the same motivation to vape outdoors since e-cigarettes, unlike cigarettes, do not create side stream emissions and exhaled aerosol contains fewer toxicants than secondhand smoke. This study aims to estimate the prevalence and correlates of vaping and smoking indoors among adults in England. METHODS: Data came from the Health Survey for England 2019, a cross-sectional household survey. Adults who vape or smoke (N=1,530) were asked whether they had vaped or smoked indoors inside the home, car, or other places within the past seven days. Logistic regression was used to estimate prevalence and key correlates of indoor use, including age, sex, presence of adults/children in home, housing tenure and nicotine dependence. RESULTS: People who exclusively vaped were much more likely to use their product indoors than those who exclusively smoked (87.0% versus 52.0%; odds ratio [OR]=6.16, 95% confidence interval [CI]=4.09-9.28). Similarly, people who dual used had higher odds of vaping than smoking indoors (62.1% versus 44.3%; within-person OR=3.76, 95%CI=2.06-6.84). The preference for vaping over smoking indoors was found across different locations, including at home and in cars. Those who were older, highly dependent on nicotine, and lived alone were most prone to use any product indoors. While housing tenure was not strongly associated with vaping indoors, those living in social housing were much more likely to smoke indoors than homeowners. CONCLUSIONS: Adults in England are much more likely to vape than smoke indoors. Age, nicotine dependence, and living alone are strongly associated with both behaviours. IMPLICATIONS: Our results show that people have a strong preference for vaping over smoking indoors, including in the home. Given the high prevalence of vaping indoors, policymakers, landlords and businesses must weigh up the ethics, benefits, and harms of extending smoke-free laws to include e-cigarettes.

'Stopping the start': support for proposed tobacco control policies - a population-based survey in Great Britain 2021-2023.

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed public support for four proposed tobacco control policies in Great Britain: (1) Raising the sales age of tobacco by 1 year every year (Smokefree Generation); (2) Raising the sales age of tobacco from 18 years to 21 years; (3) Providing prescription e-cigarettes as smoking cessation aids to adults who smoke; (4) Restricting e-cigarette advertising to prevent youth uptake. DESIGN: Repeat cross-sectional population-based survey weighted to match the population of Great Britain. SETTING: The survey was conducted in England, Scotland and Wales in September 2021, October 2022 and October 2023. PARTICIPANTS: 6541 adults living in Great Britain. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Support for each policy and year and prevalence ratios (PRs) comparing support between years and subgroups. RESULTS: The most popular policy each year was restricting e-cigarette advertising (74%/79%/85%), followed by raising the sales age to 21 years (50%/58%/64%), providing prescription e-cigarettes (45%/44%/47%) and Smokefree Generation (34%/44%/49%). The largest increases were for policies about the age of sale (Smokefree Generation: 2021/2022 PR=1.28, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.40, 2022/2023 PR=1.12, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.20; raising the age to 21 years: 2021/2022 PR=1.16, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.23, 2022/2023 PR=1.11, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.17). Only 30% opposed Smokefree Generation in 2023 down from 41% in 2021. CONCLUSIONS: Support for each policy increased each year, except for providing prescription e-cigarettes. Restricting e-cigarette advertising was the most popular policy, while support for age of sale policies, in particular for a Smokefree Generation, grew most. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study protocol was published on the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/46z2c/) prior to starting the analysis.

Impact of Standardised Packaging of Tobacco Products Regulations on cigarette consumption and youth smoking in England: interrupted time-series analysis.

BACKGROUND: In the UK in May 2016, standardised packaging of tobacco products was implemented, including minimum pack sizes of 20 sticks or 30 g loose tobacco. The change was intended to reduce uptake by increasing upfront costs to young people, but there was concern it may unintentionally increase consumption among people smoking. This study aimed to assess whether the introduction of the policy was associated with changes in (1) mean daily factory-made (FM)/roll-your-own (RYO) cigarettes consumption among people smoking predominantly (a) FM and (b) RYO cigarettes; and (2) current smoking prevalence among 16-24-year-olds. METHODS: Data (N=257 929) were from a representative monthly cross-sectional survey of adults (≥16 years) in England, collected between November 2007 and January 2020. Outcome measures were mean daily (FM/RYO) cigarette consumption among those smoking FM/RYO cigarettes, and prevalence of current smoking among 16-24-year-olds. Time-series analyses were conducted using Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average with Exogenous variables (ARIMAX) regression models including a gradual level change starting in June 2017 and ending in May 2018 for cigarette consumption and a step change in June 2016 for prevalence of current smoking. RESULTS: The ARIMAX model was not able to detect a change in mean daily cigarette consumption-for FM (Badj=-0.543, 95% CI -1.381 to 0.296) or RYO (Badj=0.002, 95% CI -0.518 to 0.522) following the implementation of standardised packaging. The unadjusted analysis suggested the implementation of standardised packaging was associated with a small (3%) decrease in smoking prevalence among 16-24-year-olds (Bunadj=-0.031, 95% CI -0.062 to 0.000), but this association was attenuated after adjustment for covariates (Badj=-0.010, 95% CI -0.039 to 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of standardised packaging of tobacco products was not associated with a meaningful change in the mean number of FM or RYO cigarettes consumed by people smoking in England, suggesting the larger pack size has not had an unintended consequence of substantially increasing cigarette consumption. However, there was also little evidence that the policy substantially reduced smoking among 16-24-year-olds.

Smoking prevalence and purchasing of menthol cigarettes since the menthol flavour ban in Great Britain: a population-based survey between 2020 and 2023.

BACKGROUND: Menthol cigarettes have been banned in Great Britain (GB) since May 2020. Still, menthol accessories and unlabelled cigarettes perceived as mentholated are available, and people can buy menthol cigarettes overseas or illicitly. This study assessed: trends in smoking menthol cigarettes among all adults and 18-24-year-olds in GB between October 2020 and March 2023; trends in and differences between England, Scotland and Wales during the same period and purchase sources among people smoking menthol versus non-flavoured cigarettes. METHODS: Population-weighted data were from a monthly cross-sectional survey of adults in GB. Among people smoking cigarettes, we calculated the proportion smoking menthol cigarettes across all adults and 18-24-year-olds, and prevalence ratios (PR) between the first and last quarter. We also calculated the proportions of people smoking menthol/non-flavoured cigarettes by purchase source (including illicit sources). RESULTS: In the first quarter, 16.2% of adults smoking cigarettes reported menthol cigarette smoking with little to no decline throughout the study (PR 0.85, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.01), while it declined among 18-24-year-olds (PR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.89). The prevalence of menthol cigarette smoking fell by two-thirds in Wales (PR 0.36, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.62) but remained relatively stable in England (PR 0.88, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.06) and Scotland (PR 0.94, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.53). The main purchasing sources were licit (93.9%), 14.8% reported illicit sources and 11.5% cross-border purchases, without notable differences from people smoking non-flavoured cigarettes. CONCLUSIONS: Roughly one million adults in GB still smoke menthol cigarettes and, with the exception of Wales and young people, there were no noteworthy changes in the post-ban period. There was no indication that the overall persistence of menthol smoking was driven by illicit purchases.

Brief interventions for smoking and alcohol associated with the COVID-19 pandemic: a population survey in England.

BACKGROUND: Following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, in March 2020 health care delivery underwent considerable changes. It is unclear how this may have affected the delivery of Brief Interventions (BIs) for smoking and alcohol. We examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the receipt of BIs for smoking and alcohol in primary care in England and whether certain priority groups (e.g., less advantaged socioeconomic positions, or a history of a mental health condition) were differentially affected. METHODS: We used nationally representative data from a monthly cross-sectional survey in England between 03/2014 and 06/2022. Monthly trends in the receipt of BIs for smoking and alcohol were examined using generalised additive models among adults who smoked in the past-year (weighted N = 31,390) and those using alcohol at increasing and higher risk levels (AUDIT score 38, weighted N = 22,386), respectively. Interactions were tested between social grade and the change in slope after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and results reported stratified by social grade. Further logistic regression models assessed whether changes in the of receipt of BIs for smoking and alcohol, respectively, from 12/2016 to 01/2017 and 10/2020 to 06/2022 (or 03/2022 in the case of BIs for alcohol), depended on history of a mental health condition. RESULTS: The receipt of smoking BIs declined from an average prevalence of 31.8% (95%CI 29.4-35.0) pre-March 2020 to 24.4% (95%CI 23.5-25.4) post-March 2020. The best-fitting model found that after March 2020 there was a 12-month decline before stabilising by June 2022 in social grade ABC1 at a lower level (~ 20%) and rebounding among social grade C2DE (~ 27%). Receipt of BIs for alcohol was low (overall: 4.1%, 95%CI 3.9-4.4) and the prevalence was similar pre- and post-March 2020. CONCLUSIONS: The receipt of BIs for smoking declined following March 2020 but rebounded among priority socioeconomic groups of people who smoked. BIs for alcohol among those who use alcohol at increasing and higher risk levels were low and there was no appreciable change over time. Maintaining higher BI delivery among socioeconomic and mental health priority groups of smokers and increasing and higher risk alcohol users is important to support reductions in smoking and alcohol related inequalities.

Who would be affected by a ban on disposable vapes? A population study in Great Britain.

OBJECTIVES: 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. STUDY DESIGN: Nationally-representative monthly cross-sectional survey. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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 %). CONCLUSIONS: 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.

Have there been sustained impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on trends in smoking prevalence, uptake, quitting, use of treatment, and relapse? A monthly population study in England, 2017-2022.

BACKGROUND: Studies conducted during the early stages of the pandemic documented mixed changes in smoking behaviour: more smokers quitting successfully but little change in prevalence. This study aimed to examine whether there have been sustained impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on smoking patterns in England. METHODS: Data were from 101,960 adults (≥ 18 years) participating in the Smoking Toolkit Study, a monthly representative household survey, between June 2017 and August 2022. Interviews were conducted face-to-face until March 2020 and via telephone thereafter. Generalised additive models estimated associations of the pandemic onset (March 2020) with current smoking, uptake, cessation, quit attempts, and use of support. Models adjusted for seasonality, sociodemographic characteristics, and (where relevant) dependence and tobacco control mass-media expenditure. RESULTS: Before the COVID-19 pandemic, smoking prevalence fell by 5.2% per year; this rate of decline slowed to 0.3% per year during the pandemic (RRΔtrend = 1.06, 95% CI = 1.02, 1.09). This slowing was evident in more but not less advantaged social grades (RRΔtrend = 1.15, 1.08, 1.21; RRΔtrend = 1.00, 0.96, 1.05). There were sustained step-level changes in different age groups: a 34.9% (95% CI = 17.7, 54.7%) increase in smoking prevalence among 18-24-year-olds, indicating a potential rise in uptake, in contrast to a 13.6% (95% CI = 4.4, 21.9%) decrease among 45-65-year-olds. In both age groups, these step-level changes were followed by the pre-pandemic declines stopping, and prevalence remaining flat. There were sustained increases in quitting among past-year smokers, with a 120.4% (95% CI = 79.4, 170.9%) step-level increase in cessation and a 41.7% (95% CI = 29.7, 54.7%) increase in quit attempts. The main limitation was the change in modality of data collection when the pandemic started; while this may have contributed to the step-level changes we observed, it is unlikely to explain changes in the slope of trends. CONCLUSIONS: In England, the rate of decline in adult smoking prevalence stagnated during the COVID-19 pandemic through to 2022. At the start of the pandemic, a potential reduction in smoking prevalence among middle-aged adults and increases in quitting among smokers may have been offset by an increase in smoking among young adults. The slowing in the rate of decline was pronounced in more advantaged social grades.

How has Expenditure on Nicotine Products Changed in a Fast-Evolving Marketplace? A Representative Population Survey in England, 2018-2022.

INTRODUCTION: In the last 5 years, there has been a dramatic shift in the types of nicotine products being purchased. This study aimed to estimate how much users spend on types of cigarettes and alternative nicotine products (e-cigarettes, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), heated tobacco, and nicotine pouches) and describe changes between 2018 and 2022. AIMS AND METHODS: Monthly representative cross-sectional survey in England. 10 323 adults who smoked cigarettes or used alternative nicotine reported their average weekly expenditure on these products, adjusted for inflation. RESULTS: Smokers spent £20.49 [95% CI = 20.09-20.91] on cigarettes each week (£27.66 [26.84-28.50] and £15.96 [15.49-16.28] among those who mainly smoked manufactured and hand-rolled cigarettes, respectively), e-cigarette users spent £6.30 [5.99-6.55] (£8.41 [7.17-9.78], £6.42 [5.58-7.39], and £5.93 [5.64-6.30] among those who mainly used disposable, pod, and refillable devices, respectively), NRT users £6.11 [5.53-6.69], and heated tobacco users £13.87 [9.58-20.09]. Expenditure on cigarettes grew by 10% from September 2018 to July 2020, then fell by 10% from July 2020 to June 2022. These changes coincided with a 13% reduction in cigarette consumption and a 14% increase in the proportion mainly smoking hand-rolled cigarettes. Expenditure on e-cigarettes was stable between 2018 and late 2020, then rose by 31% up to mid-2022. Expenditure on NRT increased slowly in 2018-2020 (+4%) and more quickly thereafter (+20%). CONCLUSIONS: Inflation-adjusted expenditure on cigarettes has fallen since 2020, such that the average smoker in England currently spends the same on cigarettes each week as in 2018. This has been achieved by smoking fewer cigarettes and switching to cheaper hand-rolled cigarettes. Expenditure on alternative nicotine has increased above inflation; users spent around a third more on these products in 2022 than between 2018-2020. IMPLICATIONS: People in England continue to spend substantially more on smoking cigarettes than using alternative nicotine products. The average smoker in England spends around £13 a week (~£670 a year) more than people using only e-cigarettes or NRT. The average expenditure on manufactured cigarettes is double that of hand-rolled cigarettes.

E-cigarettes to Augment Stop Smoking In-person Support and Treatment With Varenicline (E-ASSIST): A Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.

AIM: To examine whether, in adults receiving behavioral support, offering e-cigarettes together with varenicline helps more people stop smoking cigarettes than varenicline alone. METHODS: A two-group, parallel arm, pragmatic randomized controlled trial was conducted in six English stop smoking services from 2019-2020. Adults enrolled onto a 12-week programme of in-person one-to-one behavioral smoking cessation support (N  =  92) were randomized to receive either (1) a nicotine e-cigarette starter kit alongside varenicline or (2) varenicline alone. The primary outcome was biochemically verified abstinence from cigarette smoking between weeks 9-to-12 post quit date, with those lost to follow-up considered not abstinent. The trial was stopped early due to COVID-19 restrictions and a varenicline recall (92/1266 participants used). RESULTS: Nine-to-12-week smoking abstinence rates were 47.9% (23/48) in the e-cigarette-varenicline group compared with 31.8% (14/44) in the varenicline-only group, a 51% increase in abstinence among those offered e-cigarettes; however, the confidence interval (CI) was wide, including the possibility of no difference (risk ratio [RR] = 1.51, 95% CI = 0.91-2.64). The e-cigarette-varenicline group had 43% lower hazards of relapse from continuous abstinence than the varenicline-only group (hazards ratio [HR] = 0.57, 95% CI =  0.34-0.96). Attendance for 12 weeks was higher in the e-cigarette-varenicline than varenicline-only group (54.2% vs. 36.4%; RR = 1.49, 95% CI = 0.95-2.47), but similar proportions of participants in both groups used varenicline daily for ≥8 weeks after quitting (22.9% versus 22.7%; RR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.47-2.20). Estimates were too imprecise to determine how adverse events differed by group. CONCLUSION: Tentative evidence suggests that offering e-cigarettes alongside varenicline to people receiving behavioral support may be more effective for smoking cessation than varenicline alone. IMPLICATIONS: Offering e-cigarettes to people quitting smoking with varenicline may help them remain abstinent from cigarettes, but the evidence is tentative because our sample size was smaller than planned-caused by Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) restrictions and a manufacturing recall. This meant our effect estimates were imprecise, and additional evidence is needed to confirm that providing e-cigarettes and varenicline together helps more people remain abstinent than varenicline alone.

Promoting and Maintaining Changes in Smoking Behavior for Patients Following Discharge from a Smoke-free Mental Health Inpatient Stay: Development of a Complex Intervention Using the Behavior Change Wheel.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence suggests that smokers can successfully quit, remain abstinent or reduce smoking during a smoke-free mental health inpatient stay, provided behavioral/pharmacological support are offered. However, few evidence-based strategies to prevent the return to prehospital smoking behaviors post-discharge exist. AIMS AND METHODS: We report the development of an intervention designed to support smoking-related behavior change following discharge from a smoke-free mental health stay. We followed the Behavior Change Wheel (BCW) intervention development process. The target behavior was supporting patients to change their smoking behaviors following discharge from a smoke-free mental health stay. Using systematic reviews, we identified the barriers and enablers, classified according to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Potential intervention functions to address key influences were identified by consulting the BCW and Behavior Change Technique (BCT) taxonomy. Another systematic review identified effectiveness of BCTs in this context. Stakeholder consultations were conducted to prioritize and refine intervention content. RESULTS: Barriers and enablers to supporting smoking cessation were identified within the domains of environmental context and resources (lack of staff time); knowledge (ill-informed interactions about smoking); social influences, and intentions (lack of intention to deliver support). Potential strategies to address these influences included goal setting, problem-solving, feedback, social support, and information on health consequences. A strategy for operationalizing these techniques into intervention components was agreed upon: Pre-discharge evaluation sessions, a personalized resource folder, tailored behavioral and text message support post-discharge, and a peer interaction group, delivered by a trained mental health worker. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention includes targeted resources to support smoking-related behavior change in patients following discharge from a smoke-free mental health setting. IMPLICATIONS: Using the BCW and TDF supported a theoretically and empirically informed process to define and develop a tailored intervention that acknowledges barriers and enablers to supporting smoking cessation in mental health settings. The result is a novel complex theory- and evidence-based intervention that will be formally tested in a randomized controlled feasibility study.

Guidance on the use of complex systems models for economic evaluations of public health interventions.

To help health economic modelers respond to demands for greater use of complex systems models in public health. To propose identifiable features of such models and support researchers to plan public health modeling projects using these models. A working group of experts in complex systems modeling and economic evaluation was brought together to develop and jointly write guidance for the use of complex systems models for health economic analysis. The content of workshops was informed by a scoping review. A public health complex systems model for economic evaluation is defined as a quantitative, dynamic, non-linear model that incorporates feedback and interactions among model elements, in order to capture emergent outcomes and estimate health, economic and potentially other consequences to inform public policies. The guidance covers: when complex systems modeling is needed; principles for designing a complex systems model; and how to choose an appropriate modeling technique. This paper provides a definition to identify and characterize complex systems models for economic evaluations and proposes guidance on key aspects of the process for health economics analysis. This document will support the development of complex systems models, with impact on public health systems policy and decision making.

Profile of menthol cigarette smokers in the months following the removal of these products from the market: a cross-sectional population survey in England.

INTRODUCTION: In May 2020, the EU Tobacco Products Directive ban on the sale of menthol cigarettes was implemented in England. This study examined the prevalence of menthol cigarette smoking after the ban, according to sociodemographic and smoking characteristics. METHODS: Cross-sectional data came from a representative survey of current smokers (18+) in England (unweighted n=2681) between July 2020 and June 2021. The weighted prevalence of menthol cigarette smoking as a proportion of total cigarette smoking was calculated, log-binomial regression explored trends over time, and χ2 statistics assessed the relationship between menthol smoking, sociodemographic and smoking characteristics. Sources of purchase of menthol cigarettes were explored. RESULTS: Between July 2020 and June 2021, 15.7% (95% CI 14.5 to 17.1) of smokers reported smoking menthol cigarettes. The fitted non-linear trend supported no initial change followed by a possible reduction across April-June 2021 and fit the data better than linear and null (no change) models (χ2(2)=2519.7, p=0.06; χ2(3)=2519.7, p=0.006). Menthol cigarette smoking was more common among younger groups (16-24=25.2%; 25-34=19.9%) and women (19.4%). Menthol cigarette smokers showed lower cigarette dependence compared with other smokers. Past-6-month purchases of menthol cigarettes from any illicit or cross-border source declined from 30.1% in the last 6 months of 2020 to 17.5% in the first 6 months of 2021. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial minority of current smokers in England reported menthol cigarette smoking between July 2020 and June 2021, despite the ban, possibly reflecting mitigation of restrictions by a variety of licit means, such as legal menthol accessories. The reduction in menthol smoking across April-June 2021 warrants further monitoring.

Inequalities in Smoking and Quitting-Related Outcomes Among Adults With and Without Children in the Household 2013-2019: A Population Survey in England.

INTRODUCTION: Smoking among those who live with children is an important influence on smoking initiation among children. This study assessed socioeconomic inequalities in smoking and quitting-related outcomes among all adults with and without children in the household. AIMS AND METHODS: Monthly repeat cross-sectional household survey of adults (16+) from 2013-2019 in England (N = 138 583). We assessed the association between cigarette smoking and quitting-related outcomes and having children in the household, and whether these relationships were moderated by occupational social grade (categories AB-E from most to least advantaged). Trends in smoking prevalence among adults with and without children in the household were explored. RESULTS: In adjusted analysis, the association of having children in the household with smoking prevalence depended on social grade: smoking prevalence was between 0.71 (95% confidence interval 0.66-0.77) and 0.93 (0.88-0.98) times lower among social grades AB-D with children in the household relative to those without. Conversely, it was 1.11 (1.05-1.16) times higher among social grade E. Yearly prevalence declined similarly among those with and without children (both prevalence ratio: 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.97-0.99). Motivation to stop smoking was higher among those with children than those without, but lower among disadvantaged than more advantaged groups. Social grades D-E had greater heavy smoking, but higher prevalence of past-month quit attempts. CONCLUSIONS: Among the most disadvantaged social grade in England, smoking prevalence was higher in those with children in the household than without. To attenuate future smoking-related inequalities, there is an urgent need to target support and address barriers to quitting and promote longer-term quit success. IMPLICATIONS: In the most disadvantaged occupational social grade, having children in the household was associated with higher smoking prevalence compared with not having children. This contrasts with all other social grades in which there was lower comparative smoking prevalence among those with than without children in the household. Without attention this disparity could exacerbate existing and future health inequalities related to smoking.

Potential Explanations for Conflicting Findings on Abrupt Versus Gradual Smoking Cessation: A Population Study in England.

INTRODUCTION: Observational and trial evidence conflict on the efficacy of two contrasting behavioral approaches to quitting smoking-gradual and abrupt. Observational data suggest an abrupt approach to quitting is superior to a gradual approach, whilst trials show no difference. One potential explanation is self-selection in observational data, whereby people can choose their quit approach, and those who find it harder to quit may be more likely to choose a gradual quit approach. This study aims to investigate potential explanations for these conflicting findings. AIMS AND METHODS: This study aims to investigate potential explanations for these conflicting findings. We used observational data from a nationally representative sample of adults in England from November 2006 to February 2020 who reported smoking and had made at least one quit attempt in the past year (n = 21 542). We used logistic regression models to assess the association between abrupt versus gradual quit attempts and quit success, adjusting for sociodemographic, smoking, and quit attempt characteristics. FINDINGS: Abrupt, versus gradual, attempts were associated with improved quit success in an unadjusted model (odds ratio = 2.02, 95% CI = 1.86 to 2.19). This association remained after adjusting for a broad range of relevant confounders (odds ratio = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.59 to 1.93). CONCLUSIONS: Among a representative sample of adults who had smoked and made a quit attempt in the past year, there was evidence of an association between abrupt attempts and quit success before and after adjusting for relevant confounders. This suggests that the differences in quit success seen between abrupt and gradual quit attempt types are not completely driven by self-selection in observational data. IMPLICATIONS: We investigated explanations for conflicting findings on the efficacy of gradual versus abrupt approaches to quitting smoking between trial and observational data. Despite adjusting observational data for sociodemographic, smoking, and quit attempt characteristics, an association between abrupt quitting and quit success remained. Therefore, differences in quit success were not completely driven by the self-selection of a gradual approach by people who found it especially difficult to quit or differences in the use of quitting aids. However, characteristics adjusted for were limited by the data available, and future research should continue to investigate the difference in findings across study types to inform cessation support.

Assessing the profile of support for potential tobacco control policies targeting availability in Great Britain: a cross-sectional population survey.

AIM: To examine the level of support for tobacco availability policies across Great Britain (GB) and associations between support for policy and sociodemographic, smoking and quitting characteristics. METHODS: A cross-sectional representative survey (the Smoking Toolkit Study) of adults in GB (n=2197) during September 2021. Logistic regressions estimated the associations between support for each policy and sociodemographic and smoking characteristics. FINDINGS: There was majority support for requiring retailers to have a license which can be removed if they sell to those under-age (89.6%) and for restrictions on the sale of cigarettes and tobacco near schools (69.9%). More supported than opposed raising the legal age of sale of cigarettes and tobacco to 21 (49.2% supported; 30.7% opposed; 20.1% unsure) and reducing the number of retailers selling tobacco in neighbourhoods with a high density of tobacco retailers (46.5% supported; 23.3% opposed; 30.2% unsure). More opposed than supported a ban on the sale of cigarettes and tobacco to everyone born after a certain year from 2030 onward (a 'tobacco-free generation') (41.3% opposed; 34.5% supported; 24.2% unsure). Age was positively associated with support for raising the age of sale and inversely associated with requiring tobacco retailer licenses. Women were more likely to support raising the age of sale and reducing the number of retailers. CONCLUSIONS: Requiring tobacco retailer licensing and restrictions on sales near schools received majority support. Other tobacco availability policies received substantial support despite considerable opposition.

Heated tobacco products for smoking cessation and reducing smoking prevalence.

BACKGROUND: Heated tobacco products (HTPs) are designed to heat tobacco to a high enough temperature to release aerosol, without burning it or producing smoke. They differ from e-cigarettes because they heat tobacco leaf/sheet rather than a liquid. Companies who make HTPs claim they produce fewer harmful chemicals than conventional cigarettes. Some people report stopping smoking cigarettes entirely by switching to using HTPs, so clinicians need to know whether they are effective for this purpose and relatively safe. Also, to regulate HTPs appropriately, policymakers should understand their impact on health and on cigarette smoking prevalence. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of HTPs for smoking cessation and the impact of HTPs on smoking prevalence.  SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and six other databases for relevant records to January 2021, together with reference-checking and contact with study authors and relevant groups. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which people who smoked cigarettes were randomised to switch to exclusive HTP use or a control condition. Eligible outcomes were smoking cessation, adverse events, and selected biomarkers.  RCTs conducted in clinic or in an ambulatory setting were deemed eligible when assessing safety, including those randomising participants to exclusively use HTPs, smoke cigarettes, or attempt abstinence from all tobacco. Time-series studies were also eligible for inclusion if they examined the population-level impact of heated tobacco on smoking prevalence or cigarette sales as an indirect measure. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methods for screening and data extraction. Our primary outcome measures were abstinence from smoking at the longest follow-up point available, adverse events, serious adverse events, and changes in smoking prevalence or cigarette sales. Other outcomes included biomarkers of harm and exposure to toxicants/carcinogens (e.g. NNAL and carboxyhaemoglobin (COHb)). We used a random-effects Mantel-Haenszel model to calculate risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes. For continuous outcomes, we calculated mean differences on the log-transformed scale (LMD) with 95% CIs. We pooled data across studies using meta-analysis where possible. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 completed studies, of which 11 were RCTs assessing safety (2666 participants) and two were time-series studies. We judged eight RCTs to be at unclear risk of bias and three at high risk. All RCTs were funded by tobacco companies. Median length of follow-up was 13 weeks. No studies reported smoking cessation outcomes.  There was insufficient evidence for a difference in risk of adverse events between smokers randomised to switch to heated tobacco or continue smoking cigarettes, limited by imprecision and risk of bias (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.15; I2 = 0%; 6 studies, 1713 participants). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether risk of serious adverse events differed between groups due to very serious imprecision and risk of bias (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.94; I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 1472 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence for lower NNAL and COHb at follow-up in heated tobacco than cigarette smoking groups, limited by risk of bias (NNAL: LMD -0.81, 95% CI -1.07 to -0.55; I2 = 92%; 10 studies, 1959 participants; COHb: LMD -0.74, 95% CI -0.92 to -0.52; I2 = 96%; 9 studies, 1807 participants). Evidence for additional biomarkers of exposure are reported in the main body of the review. There was insufficient evidence for a difference in risk of adverse events in smokers randomised to switch to heated tobacco or attempt abstinence from all tobacco, limited by risk of bias and imprecision (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.46; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 237 participants). Five studies reported that no serious adverse events occurred in either group (533 participants). There was moderate-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias, that urine concentrations of NNAL at follow-up were higher in the heated tobacco use compared with abstinence group (LMD 0.50, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.66; I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 382 participants). In addition, there was very low-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision, for higher COHb in the heated tobacco use compared with abstinence group for intention-to-treat analyses (LMD 0.69, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.31; 3 studies, 212 participants), but lower COHb in per-protocol analyses (LMD -0.32, 95% CI -1.04 to 0.39; 2 studies, 170 participants). Evidence concerning additional biomarkers is reported in the main body of the review. Data from two time-series studies showed that the rate of decline in cigarette sales accelerated following the introduction of heated tobacco to market in Japan. This evidence was of very low-certainty as there was risk of bias, including possible confounding, and cigarette sales are an indirect measure of smoking prevalence. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No studies reported on cigarette smoking cessation, so the effectiveness of heated tobacco for this purpose remains uncertain. There was insufficient evidence for differences in risk of adverse or serious adverse events between people randomised to switch to heated tobacco, smoke cigarettes, or attempt tobacco abstinence in the short-term. There was moderate-certainty evidence that heated tobacco users have lower exposure to toxicants/carcinogens than cigarette smokers and very low- to moderate-certainty evidence of higher exposure than those attempting abstinence from  all tobacco. Independently funded research on the effectiveness and safety of HTPs is needed.  The rate of decline in cigarette sales accelerated after the introduction of heated tobacco to market in Japan but, as data were observational, it is possible other factors caused these changes. Moreover, falls in cigarette sales may not translate to declining smoking prevalence, and changes in Japan may not generalise elsewhere. To clarify the impact of rising heated tobacco use on smoking prevalence, there is a need for time-series studies that examine this association.

Patterns and predictors of adherence to health-protective measures during COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: cross-sectional and longitudinal findings from the HEBECO study.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to health-protective behaviours (regularly washing hands, wearing masks indoors, maintaining physical distancing, carrying disinfectant) remains paramount for the successful control of COVID-19 at population level. It is therefore important to monitor adherence and to identify factors associated with it. This study assessed: 1) rates of adherence, to key COVID-19 health-protective behaviours and 2) the socio-demographic, health and COVID-19-related factors associated with adherence. METHODS: Data were collected on a sample of UK-based adults during August-September 2020 (n = 1,969; lockdown restrictions were eased in the UK; period 1) and November 2020- January 2021 (n = 1944; second UK lockdown; period 2). RESULTS: Adherence ranged between 50-95%, with higher adherence during the period of stricter measures. Highest adherence was observed for wearing masks indoors (period 1: 80.2%, 95%CI 78.4%-82.0%, period 2: 92.4%, 95%CI 91.1%-93.6%) and lowest for carrying own disinfectant (period 1: 48.4%, 95%CI 46.2%-50.7%, period 2: 50.7%, 95%CI 48.4%-53.0%). Generalized estimating equation models indicated that key factors of greater odds of adherence included being female, older age, having higher income, residing in England, living with vulnerable individuals and perceived high risk of COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted messages to different demographic groups may enhance adherence to health-protective behaviours, which is paramount for the control of airborne respiratory diseases. PROTOCOL AND ANALYSIS PLAN REGISTRATION: The analysis plan was pre-registered, and it is available at https://osf.io/6tnc9/ .