Increasing Effectiveness of Messages about Chemicals in Cigarette Smoke.

OBJECTIVES: Federal law requires informing the public on toxic chemicals in cigarette smoke. We sought the public's advice about communicating information about these chemicals. METHODS: Adolescents, young adults, and adults (N = 59), including smokers and non-smokers, participated in 9 focus groups that discussed inclusion of messages about toxic chemicals on cigarette packs, in media campaigns, and on a website. We transcribed, coded, and analyzed focus group audio-recordings. RESULTS: Participants had 3 suggestions for message content to increase the impact of messages about cigarette smoke chemicals. First, they wanted to see messages rotated more frequently to increase message novelty. Second, they recommended using stories and pictures to help connect people to the abstract idea of chemicals in smoke. Third, they cautioned against making messages that might seem overblown and could appeal to the rebellious nature of adolescents. Some participants mentioned that chemical information on a website might discourage people from smoking; others mentioned that people might use it to choose which brand to smoke. CONCLUSIONS: Legislation provides the impetus to design new chemical disclosure messages for cigarette packs and other media. Our findings can help increase the impact of these messages.

E-cigarettes, Hookah Pens and Vapes: Adolescent and Young Adult Perceptions of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems.

INTRODUCTION: Most studies have assessed use of "e-cigarettes" or "electronic cigarettes," potentially excluding new electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), such as e-hookahs and vape pens. Little is known about how adolescents and young adults perceive ENDS and if their perceptions vary by sub-type. We explored ENDS perceptions among these populations. METHODS: Ten focus groups with 77 adolescents and young adults, ages 13-25, were conducted in spring 2014. Participants were users or susceptible nonusers of novel tobacco products. Focus group transcripts were coded for emergent themes. RESULTS: Participants reported positive ENDS attributes, including flavor variety; user control of nicotine content; and smoke trick facilitation. Negative attributes included different feel compared to combustible cigarettes, nicotine addiction potential, and no cue to stop use. Participants perceived less harm from ENDS compared to combustible cigarettes, perhaps due to marketing and lack of product regulation, but noted the uncertainty of ingredients in ENDS. Numerous terms were used to describe ENDS, including "e-cigarette," "e-hookah," "hookah pens," "tanks," and "vapes." Although no clear classification system emerged, participants used product characteristics like nicotine content and chargeability to attempt classification. Perceptions differed by product used. E-hookah users were perceived as young and trendy while e-cigarette users were perceived as old and addicted to nicotine. CONCLUSIONS: Young adults and adolescents report distinct ENDS sub-types with varying characteristics and social perceptions of users. Although they had more positive than negative perceptions of ENDS, prevention efforts should consider highlighting negative attributes as they may discourage use and product trial among young nonusers. IMPLICATIONS: Our study underscores the need for a standardized measurement system for ENDS sub-types and additional research on how ENDS sub-types are perceived among adolescents and young adults. In addition, our findings highlight negative product attributes reported by participants that may be useful in prevention and regulatory efforts to offset favorable marketing messages.

Adolescents' and Young Adults' Knowledge and Beliefs About Constituents in Novel Tobacco Products.

INTRODUCTION: Novel tobacco products, such as little cigars, cigarillos, hookah, and e-cigarettes, and their smoke or aerosol contain chemicals which the FDA has determined to be Harmful or Potentially Harmful Constituents. We explored adolescents' and young adults' knowledge and beliefs about constituents in novel tobacco products and their smoke or aerosol, in order to inform risk communication messages. METHODS: Seventy-seven adolescents and young adults (ages 13-25) participated in 10 focus groups, including 47 novel tobacco product users and 30 susceptible nonusers. Participants were asked to discuss 10 pre-selected constituents found in novel tobacco products and their smoke or aerosol. The first author analyzed the discussion for emergent themes. RESULTS: Participants were generally familiar with arsenic, carbon monoxide, formaldehyde, and nicotine, but unfamiliar with acetaldehyde, acrolein, 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanon (NNK), and N-nitrosonornicotine (NNN). All participants had negative beliefs about most constituents, although users had positive beliefs about nicotine. "Unfamiliar" constituents were associated with similarly-sounding words (eg, acetaldehyde sounds like acetaminophen), and some participants recognized words in the chemical names of NNK/NNN (eg, "nitro"). "Familiar" constituents were associated with negative health effects and other common products the constituents are found in. All participants wanted more information about the constituents' health effects, toxicity, and other common products. Most participants were unaware the constituents discussed are in novel tobacco products and their smoke or aerosol. CONCLUSIONS: Risk communication messages could capitalize on negative associations with familiar constituents, or attempt to educate about unfamiliar constituents, to discourage novel tobacco product use among adolescents and young adults. IMPLICATIONS: The results of this study have implications for how the FDA and other agencies can communicate about the risks of novel tobacco products to the general public, which will be particularly important once the Deeming Rule is finalized. Our findings suggest it may be effective to capitalize on the public's negative beliefs about and associations with familiar constituents, or to educate about unfamiliar constituents and their health effects, their concentration and toxicity in novel tobacco products and their smoke or aerosol, and other products they are found in.

"My First Thought was Croutons": Perceptions of Cigarettes and Cigarette Smoke Constituents Among Adult Smokers and Nonsmokers.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding what people think about harmful and potentially harmful constituents in cigarettes and cigarette smoke has new urgency given legislation requiring US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to disclose constituent information. Our study sought to obtain qualitative information on what people think about these constituents and the language they use to talk about them. METHODS: We conducted six focus groups in 2014 with 40 adults in North Carolina. Open-ended questions focused on cigarette and cigarette smoke constituents in general and on the 18 constituents on the FDA's abbreviated list. We coded the transcripts for emergent themes, and all four coders discussed themes until we reached consensus. RESULTS: Participants knew that cigarette smoke contains chemicals but did not know how many chemicals nor what those chemicals are, beyond tar and nicotine. Dangers of constituents mentioned included "chemicals," physical disease, and addiction. Participants incorrectly believed harmful constituents came primarily from tobacco companies' additives. For unfamiliar constituents, people tried to make associations based on similar-sounding words. Recognizable constituents that participants associated with health harms most discouraged them from wanting to smoke. Most participants wanted to know health harms associated with constituents and what else the chemicals were in. CONCLUSIONS: Participants showed enthusiasm for learning more information about constituents, and also showed substantial misunderstandings about the source of harmful constituents. Our findings contribute to the limited body of research on adults' knowledge and perceptions of cigarette smoke constituents and can aid the FDA as it plans to disclose constituent information to the public. IMPLICATIONS: Our study provides information about adults' understanding of cigarette smoke constituents and what adults would like to know about these constituents. This information can help communication campaigns describe cigarette smoke constituents in a way that discourages people from wanting to smoke.

Adolescents' and adults' perceptions of 'natural', 'organic' and 'additive-free' cigarettes, and the required disclaimers.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to investigate adolescents' and adults' perceptions of an American Spirit advertisement with 'natural', 'organic' and 'additive-free' descriptors and related disclaimers. METHODS: We conducted nine focus group discussions in the Southern USA, with 59 participants aged 13-64 years (30 male, 29 female), stratified by age, smoking status and susceptibility to smoking. We conducted thematic content analysis of the transcripts. RESULTS: Many participants were sceptical or confused about the 'natural', 'organic' and 'additive-free' descriptors. Many participants viewed American Spirit cigarettes as being less, or possibly less harmful than other cigarettes, even though the ad contained disclaimers explicitly stating that these cigarettes are not safer. Some participants said that people tend to ignore disclaimers, a few expressed doubt that the disclaimers were fully true, and others did not notice the disclaimers. A few smokers said they smoke American Spirit cigarettes because they think they are not as bad for them as other cigarettes. CONCLUSIONS: Disclaimers intended to prevent consumers from attributing a health benefit to cigarettes labelled as 'natural', 'additive-free', or 'organic' may be insufficient. A ban on these descriptors may be a more appropriate remedy than disclaimers.

Process evaluation of an intervention to increase provision of adolescent vaccines at school health centers.

BACKGROUND: Vaccination programs in school health centers (SHCs) may improve adolescent vaccine coverage. We conducted a process evaluation of an intervention to increase SHC-located vaccination to better understand the feasibility and challenges of such interventions. METHOD: Four SHCs participated in an intervention to increase provision of recommended vaccines to 2,975 adolescents. We reviewed program materials and SHC staff reports, and interviewed parents to assess implementation fidelity and reactions to materials. RESULTS: Ten percent of parents returned forms with consent to at least one vaccine. Of these, 79% checked the box consenting for "all recommended" vaccines, rather than indicating individual vaccines. SHCs sent supplemental mailings to some parents that clarified (a) vaccination costs or (b) human papillomavirus vaccine recommendation for boys and required parents to reconsent. This process resulted in loss of initial consent, primarily due to nonresponse. In interviews, parents who consented to vaccination indicated that intervention materials were clear and persuasive, but needed greater detail about costs and clinic processes. CONCLUSIONS: With limited additional investment, it appears feasible for SHCs to achieve a modest increase in the number of vaccinated adolescents. Providing a checkbox to indicate global consent for all recommended vaccinations, and close collaboration among individuals involved in intervention development, may facilitate vaccination efforts.

Asking about intimate partner violence: advice from female survivors to health care providers.

Understanding the perspectives of women who have experienced IPV will allow us to identify specific techniques of addressing IPV that increase patient comfort and willingness to disclose and/or seek help. Our study objective was to identify what advice women who had experienced IPV would give health providers regarding how to ask about and discuss the issue of IPV. The women in our study advised that providers (1) give a reason for why they are asking about IPV to reduce women's suspicions and minimize stigma, (2) create an atmosphere of safety and support, (3) provide information, support and access to resources regardless of whether the woman discloses IPV. They emphasized that a provider's asking about IPV is an opportunity to raise patient awareness of IPV, communicate compassion and provide information and not merely a screening test to diagnose a pathologic condition.

Physically abused pregnant women's perceptions about the quality of their relationships with their male partners.

OBJECTIVES: Most studies of pregnant victims of intimate partner violence have focused on the violent behaviors, without examining other potentially important dimensions of the relationships. This research studies pregnant abuse victims to examine the frequency of violent behaviors occurring during pregnancy, how women characterize the quality of their relationships, and the association between violence frequency and women's perceptions concerning the overall quality of their relationships. METHODS: Eighty-one women who were physically abused by intimate partners during pregnancy were interviewed. Information was collected concerning the women's: experiences of partner violence during pregnancy; perceptions of other aspects of the quality of their relationships; and sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: The most frequent type of violent behavior occurring during pregnancy was verbal aggression, followed by minor violence, and then severe violence. Men perpetrated each type of violent behavior at significantly higher rates than did their female partners. In general, the women were quite negative in their characterizations of many dimensions of their relationships, as well as in their perceptions concerning the overall quality of their relationships, with women who had been victims of more frequent violence being significantly more likely to characterize their relationships as being of lower overall quality (OR = 3.5, 95% CI = 1.4-8.7). CONCLUSIONS: Prenatal care providers are encouraged to screen their patients for intimate partner violence, and to work with others in their community to assure that women in abusive situations are offered appropriate services/interventions including safe and feasible alternatives to staying in unsatisfactory relationships with abusive partners.