User evaluation and feasibility test of an app designed for smoking cessation in Italian people who smoke: preliminary findings from an uncontrolled pre-test post-test open study.

BACKGROUND: mHealth is a public health practice that exploits the use of mobile devices, including smartphone applications. We will describe an uncontrolled pre-test post-test open pilot study concerning the feasibility evaluation of a smartphone App designed to help in smoking cessation. The aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility of a smartphone app as a tool for smoking cessation. This study is necessary to the literature because smoking is a major public health concern and has been linked to various health issues such as cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, and cancer. While there are several smoking cessation interventions available, the use of mobile devices to aid in smoking cessation is a relatively new and innovative approach that requires further investigation. METHODS: The App "Smoke Free" was configured on the devices of N = 30 participants who smoked combustible cigarette, 13 males and 17 females aged 18 to 55 years, with the indications to use it for 90 days, describe their experience, suggest new features, and report any critical aspect. The study consisted of an initial screening visit to select participants that reflected the inclusion criteria and 4 study visits: a baseline visit, two follow-up visits, and one final visit. We used descriptive stats to summarize results. Repeated measures ANOVA and Wilcoxon test were used to test differences in smoking consumption, self-reported craving, and measured eCO level. Statistical software Jamovi was used for analysis. Interviews were conducted via phone or in-person and analyzed using qualitative description principles. RESULTS: Participants evaluated the app as having good aesthetic appeal and user-friendliness but being moderately useful, despite some quitting or reducing their smoking behavior. To improve it, participants have proposed features such as more notifications, social network integration, and damage caused by smoking to the body over time for future app updates. CONCLUSIONS: The application was moderately useful with good feasibility, with several suggestions for future updates that could improve its effectiveness.

How a sample of English stop smoking services and vape shops adapted during the early COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic in England led to major changes in the delivery of support via stop smoking services (SSS) and to the widespread temporary closure of bricks and mortar e-cigarette retailers (vape shops herein). The impact of disruptions across the smoking cessation support landscape has not been fully documented. The purpose of this study was to capture how SSS and vape shops in England were affected and adapted their 'business as usual' during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHOD: An online cross-sectional survey was conducted between March and July 2020. Surveys were disseminated through online networks, professional forums and contacts. Open-ended qualitative responses were coded using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Responses from 46 SSS and 59 vape shops were included. SSS were able to adapt during this period, e.g. offering a remote service. A high percentage (74.6%) of vape shops had to close and were unable to make changes; 71.2% reported business declining. For both vape shops and SSS qualitative data revealed practical challenges to adapting, but also new pathways to support and co-working. CONCLUSION: The closure of vape shops appears to have most impacted smaller bricks and mortar shops affecting businesses by decline in customers and impacting staff (furlough). For those services that could stay open there may be lessons learned in how to support vulnerable and disadvantaged people who smoke by considering new pathways to support.

UK Research Priorities for Electronic Cigarettes: A James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership.

This study aimed to bring together people who smoke or vape, people who do not smoke and healthcare professionals to identify and agree priorities for electronic cigarette research in the UK. We carried out a priority setting partnership, guided by the methodology developed by the James Lind Alliance involving five key stages: initiation, consultation, collation, prioritisation and dissemination. A total of 765 people submitted 1887 questions that they wanted answered by research. Questions were organised into themes, merged and rewritten as summary questions, with 52 unique questions going forward to the prioritisation survey. Participants then ranked their top 10 questions. Following this ranking exercise, the top 26 were identified by selecting the most frequently prioritised questions adjusting for representative stakeholder group. These were put forward for discussion in the final prioritisation workshop, whereby the top 10 electronic cigarette research questions were agreed. The list of priorities identified will be of interest to researchers and funders of electronic cigarette research and will hopefully direct future research and funding calls. These priorities provide insight into the questions that matter to people who are using or concerned about e-cigarettes, including frontline professionals.

Cost-effectiveness of e-cigarettes compared with nicotine replacement therapy in stop smoking services in England (TEC study): a randomized controlled trial.

AIM: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation aid used in routine stop smoking services in England. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the National Health Service (NHS) and Personal Social Services (PSS) perspective for 12-month periods and life-time. Costs, including that of both treatments, other smoking cessation help and health-care 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 randomized controlled trial. Life-time 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 stop-smoking service sites in England. PARTICIPANTS: Adult smokers (n = 886) 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 3 months, both with standard behavioural support. A total of 886 participants were randomized (439 in the EC arm, 447 in the NRT arm). Excluding one death in each arm, the 1-year quit rate was 18.0 and 9.9%, respectively. MEASUREMENTS: Cost of treatments was estimated from the treatment log. Costs of other smoking cessation help and health-care services and EQ-5D-5 L were collected at baseline, 6- 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 £1100 per QALY gained at the 12 months after quit date (87% probability below £20 000/QALY). Markov model estimated the life-time ICER of EC to be £65 per QALY (85% probability below £20 000/QALY). CONCLUSION: Using e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation aid with standard behavioural support in stop-smoking services in England is likely to be more cost-effective than using nicotine replacement therapy in the same setting.

E-cigarettes compared with nicotine replacement therapy within the UK Stop Smoking Services: the TEC RCT.

BACKGROUND: Over 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. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare the efficacy of refillable e-cigarettes and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) products, when accompanied by weekly behavioural support. DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial comparing e-cigarettes and NRT. SETTING: Three sites that provide local SSSs. PARTICIPANTS: The 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. INTERVENTIONS: The 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 MEASURES: The 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. RESULTS: The 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 < 0.001). The e-cigarette arm had significantly higher validated quit rates at all time points. Participants in the e-cigarette arm showed significantly better adherence and experienced fewer urges to smoke throughout the initial 4 weeks of their quit attempt than those in the NRT arm, and gave their allocated product more favourable ratings. They were also more likely to be still using their allocated product at 1 year (39.5% vs. 4.3%, χ2 = 161.4; p < 0.001). Participants assigned to e-cigarettes reported significantly less coughing and phlegm at 1 year than those assigned to NRT (controlling for smoking status). A detailed economic analysis confirmed that, because e-cigarettes incur lower NHS costs than NRT and generate a higher quit rate, e-cigarette use is more cost-effective. LIMITATIONS: The results may not be generalisable to other types of smokers or settings, or to cartridge-based e-cigarettes. CONCLUSIONS: Within 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 WORK: The 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 REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN60477608. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health 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).

Alarge number of smokers in the UK have stopped smoking with the help of e-cigarettes, but it is not known if e-cigarettes are as helpful as stop smoking medications that are provided by the UK Stop Smoking Services (SSSs). This information is needed to decide whether or not SSSs should include e-cigarettes among their treatment options. A total of 886 smokers who were seeking help with quitting and did not mind whether they would use nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), such as nicotine patches, or e-cigarettes were recruited at three SSSs. The smokers were randomly allocated (by chance) to receive weekly behavioural support and either a NRT of their choice (a single NRT product or product combinations) (n = 447) or a starter pack of e-cigarettes (n = 439). The trial ran from May 2015 to February 2018. The participants were followed up for 1 year to see how many stopped smoking in each group. Smokers using e-cigarettes suffered less cigarette withdrawal discomfort early on and had higher quit rates at all time points. At 1 year, 10% of participants in the NRT trial arm had been abstinent for the whole year, compared with 18% in the e-cigarette arm; regarding abstinence for at least 6 months, the figures were 12% in the NRT arm and 21% in the e-cigarette arm. Of interest, coughs and phlegm production also reduced more in people quitting with e-cigarettes than those quitting with NRT. This supports previous reports suggesting that an ingredient in e-cigarettes (i.e. propylene glycol) may protect vapers from airborne infections. E-cigarette starter packs cost much less than NRT and so, if SSSs provide them, their use is likely to boost the success rates and reduce the costs of SSSs.

Stop Smoking Practitioners' understanding of e-cigarettes' use and efficacy with particular reference to vapers' socioeconomic status.

Introduction: We have undertaken four online surveys of Stop Smoking Service (SSS) practitioners in England, between 2011 and 2016, in order to enhance our understanding of e-cigarettes: a fast moving new phenomenon. It is important to understand whether e-cigarettes can ameliorate or exacerbate health inequalities given that smoking is one of the most serious causes of excessive mortality and morbidity among disadvantaged groups globally. Aims: To update findings of previous surveys and examine socioeconomic status differences in e-cigarette use and efficacy. Methods: Analysis was undertaken of electronic surveys, particularly, the most recent 2016 survey (n = 514) and 2015/16 SSS client routine monitoring data. Results: SSS practitioners were becoming more positive about e-cigarettes: 42% agreed that e-cigarettes were a good thing compared with 15% in 2011. Reported use of e-cigarettes among SSS clients was low (about 3%) despite higher quit rates (63% of clients reported being quit at four week follow-up, compared with 51% overall). Where socioeconomic differences in e-cigarettes' efficacy for quitting were identified, affluent and working smokers were advantaged. Conclusions: Low use of e-cigarettes by clients and practitioner opinions suggest that further education of SSS staff is needed if they are to adopt the current service recommendations about e-cigarettes.

A Randomized Trial of E-Cigarettes versus Nicotine-Replacement Therapy.

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<0.001). Among participants with 1-year abstinence, those in the e-cigarette group were more likely than those in the nicotine-replacement group to use their assigned product at 52 weeks (80% [63 of 79 participants] vs. 9% [4 of 44 participants]). Overall, throat or mouth irritation was reported more frequently in the e-cigarette group (65.3%, vs. 51.2% in the nicotine-replacement group) and nausea more frequently in the nicotine-replacement group (37.9%, vs. 31.3% in the e-cigarette group). The e-cigarette group reported greater declines in the incidence of cough and phlegm production from baseline to 52 weeks than did the nicotine-replacement group (relative risk for cough, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9; relative risk for phlegm, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9). There were no significant between-group differences in the incidence of wheezing or shortness of breath. CONCLUSIONS: E-cigarettes were more effective for smoking cessation than nicotine-replacement therapy, when both products were accompanied by behavioral support. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research and Cancer Research UK; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN60477608 .).

Views from the Coalface: What Do English Stop Smoking Service Personnel Think about E-Cigarettes?

The UK Stop Smoking Services (SSS) are a source of information and advice on e-cigarettes for smokers and thus it is important to understand the knowledge of, and attitudes towards, e-cigarettes held by stop smoking practitioners. The datasets were English SSS quarterly monitoring returns (n = 207,883) and an online survey of English SSS practitioners, managers, and commissioners between 26th November and 15th December 2014 (n = 1801). SSS monitoring data suggested 2% of clients were using e-cigarettes to quit with SSS and that clients using e-cigarettes had similar quit rates to clients using Varenicline. Most SSS personnel are waiting for licenced e-cigarettes to become available before they will recommend them to clients. However, less than a quarter view e-cigarettes as "a good thing". Managers and commissioners were more positive than practitioners. SSS personnel working for the NHS (hospitals and GP surgeries) were less positive about e-cigarettes than those employed elsewhere. E-cigarettes were cited as the most important reason for the recent decline in service footfall. Thus dissemination of information about e-cigarettes needs to be examined and services should address their stance on e-cigarettes with some urgency.

Left ventricular hypertrophy and endothelial dysfunction in chronic kidney disease.

UNLABELLED: Aim Mortality, predominantly due to cardiovascular events, is high in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is a strong risk factor. Vascular endothelial dysfunction (ED) is common in CKD, but its potential contribution to LVH in non-dialysis CKD is unknown. This study investigated the association of ED with LVH in non-dialysis CKD patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We studied 30 CKD patients (17 pre-dialysis and 13 renal transplant recipients) and 29 age-gender-matched controls. In both groups, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels, systemic ED (brachial artery flow-mediated dilatation, FMD), and LVH using two-dimensional echocardiography were measured. LV mass index (LVMI) was calculated using Penn formula and indexed by height. CKD patients had higher CRP levels (3.9 ± 2.8 vs. 1.0 ± 0.7 mg/L; P < 0.001), reduced FMD (3.2 ± 2.1 vs. 6.1 ± 1.9%; P < 0.001), and increased LVMI (146.1 ± 40.2 vs. 105.3 ± 26.2 g/m; P < 0.001), compared with controls. In CKD patients, LVMI increased with decreasing FMD (r = -0.371; P = 0.043) and FMD decreased with increasing CRP (r = -0.741; P < 0.001). Patients with low FMD <2.3% had higher CRP and LVMI (161.9 ± 48.9 vs. 130.4 ± 20.7 g/m; P = 0.033), compared with CKD patients with FMD ≥2.3%. There was no significant difference in age, blood pressure, cholesterol, FMD, and LVMI between pre-dialysis and post-renal transplant CKD patients. In multivariate regression, the relationship between LVMI and FMD remained significant after adjusting for age, diabetes, and smoking (adjacent beta = -0.396; P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: This pilot study demonstrates for the first time a relationship of ED with LVH in non-dialysis CKD patients; suggesting but not proving a cause-effect relationship.

Smokeless tobacco cessation in South Asian communities: a multi-centre prospective cohort study.

AIM: To evaluate smokeless tobacco cessation in communities of South Asian origin. DESIGN: Multi-centre prospective cohort study. SETTING: Three tobacco cessation services offering specialist smokeless tobacco cessation outreach clinic support to South Asians (Bangladeshi, Indian and Pakistani) resident in England. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 239 South Asian participants seeking to stop smokeless tobacco use between November 2010 and December 2011. MEASUREMENTS: Socio-demographics, tobacco use and dependence, self-reported abstinence at 4 weeks and satisfaction measures. FINDINGS: Participants' mean age was 45 [standard deviation (SD) = 13] years, were predominantly female (76%), of Bangladeshi origin (74%), either home carers (53%) or not working (29%). Sixty-three per cent were recruited from community locations, 21% through a clinical contact and 16% through friends and family. Mean daily number of smokeless tobacco intakes was 10 (SD = 7) and the mean dependence score was 4.5 (SD = 1.9). Sixty-three per cent of participants achieved continuous abstinence 4 weeks after quitting. Using nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) versus not using it [OR = 3.47, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.25, 9.62] and below median (≤ 8) daily smokeless tobacco intakes (OR = 1.91, 95% CI: 1.07, 3.40) predicted successful abstinence. CONCLUSION: South Asian smokeless tobacco users resident in England accessing services to help them stop appear to have short-term success rates comparable with smokers attending stop-smoking services, with higher success rates being reported by those using nicotine replacement therapy.

Consequences of prenatal toxin exposure for mental health in children and adolescents: a systematic review.

Drug use during pregnancy is common and the developing foetus may be exposed to a range of environmental toxins that have long-term consequences for neurodevelopment. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to explore the results of longitudinal cohort studies that have examined this question. Out of 2,977 abstracts identified, 7 previous systematic reviews and 95 original articles met further selection criteria. These mostly addressed the neurodevelopmental effects of exposure to lead, polychlorinated biphenyls, mercury, cocaine, alcohol, marijuana, cigarettes and antidepressants. Radiation, opiates, steroids, amphetamines and caffeine have received much less attention. Findings are difficult to interpret because risk factors tend to cluster together and interact. However, some findings are consistent. Lead and PCB's have a general effect on brain development, whilst marijuana and alcohol appear to have long-term effects specifically on attentional skills. The effects of alcohol increase with maternal age and binge drinking is more important than average intake. The effects of cocaine diminish with age and are largely mediated through psychosocial factors, whilst the relation between smoking and later delinquency is largely mediated by genetically inherited factors. Exposure to toxins during pregnancy may constitute an important but relatively unacknowledged cause of child psychiatric morbidity.

Calmodulin-dependent protein kinase kinase-beta is an alternative upstream kinase for AMP-activated protein kinase.

The AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) is a critical regulator of energy balance at both the cellular and whole-body levels. Two upstream kinases have been reported to activate AMPK in cell-free assays, i.e., the tumor suppressor LKB1 and calmodulin-dependent protein kinase kinase. However, evidence that this is physiologically relevant currently only exists for LKB1. We now report that there is a significant basal activity and phosphorylation of AMPK in LKB1-deficient cells that can be stimulated by Ca2+ ionophores, and studies using the CaMKK inhibitor STO-609 and isoform-specific siRNAs show that CaMKKbeta is required for this effect. CaMKKbeta also activates AMPK much more rapidly than CaMKKalpha in cell-free assays. K(+)-induced depolarization in rat cerebrocortical slices, which increases intracellular Ca2+ without disturbing cellular adenine nucleotide levels, activates AMPK, and this is blocked by STO-609. Our results suggest a potential Ca(2+)-dependent neuroprotective pathway involving phosphorylation and activation of AMPK by CaMKKbeta.