The case of young people who use e-cigarettes infrequently: Who is this population? What becomes of them?

BACKGROUND: Emerging data indicate that many adolescents and young adults ("youth") engage in infrequent, or occasional, e-cigarette use. However, little is known about this population as they are often subsumed into the broader "any past-30-day use" category used to define youth "current use." This study aimed to focus on infrequent e-cigarette use by youth, examining its correlates and transitional outcomes. METHODS: Participants were from a prospective cohort study of youth (aged 15-24 at baseline). Among youth who had used e-cigarettes, we classified "infrequent use" as using e-cigarettes ≤5 days in the last 30 days (n=273) and "frequent use" as using e-cigarettes ≥6 days in the last 30 days (n=278). Descriptive statistics, Markov modeling, and logistic regression were utilized. RESULTS: By the 12-month follow-up, 76.8% of those using infrequently at baseline remained in the "infrequent use" category, 6.3% reported no recent use, and 16.8% had escalated to the "frequent use" category. Among the youth using infrequently at baseline, those who did (vs. did not) escalate to frequent use by follow-up had higher baseline nicotine dependence and were more likely to have family members who used tobacco. CONCLUSIONS: Infrequent e-cigarette use is extremely common, and often fairly stable, among young people. Prevention efforts must certainly attempt to reduce escalation and attend to both individual and interpersonal factors (e.g., nicotine dependence, family use). Yet prevention efforts must additionally attend to the case of continued infrequent use, given the high prevalence of people in this category and their regular exposure to e-cigarette harms.

Nicotine information disclosed online by e-cigarette brands popular with young people.

INTRODUCTION: E-cigarette use is most prevalent among adolescents and young adults - and there are often misperceptions about product risk. The purpose of this study was to determine what nicotine information is provided on e-cigarette brand websites. METHODS: Based on national and local surveys, we identified 44 e-cigarette brands commonly used in the US by adolescents and young adults. For each of these brands, their associated websites were analyzed for disclosed nicotine information. Specifically, for each brand's website, we coded whether there was information on nicotine concentration (recorded if a numerical value was provided such as '5% nicotine'), nicotine form (free-base, nicotine salts, or not stated), and nicotine type (tobacco-derived, synthetically derived, or not stated). Coding allowed for both lay (e.g. 'nic salts') as well as scientific (e.g. 'isomers') terms. RESULTS: Of the 44 brands examined, all provided basic information on nicotine concentration (e.g. '5% nicotine'). However, 23% of brands did not disclose information on nicotine form (i.e. nicotine salt vs free-base), and 66% of brands did not disclose information on nicotine type (i.e. synthetic vs tobacco-derived). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, these results suggest that the e-cigarette industry is not fully informing its consumers about the nicotine in their products. Given that nicotine form and type have implications for e-cigarette addiction potential, these findings highlight a public health concern. There is a need for more comprehensive national regulations for mandating product constituents and emissions disclosures.

Demographic and Behavioral Differences Between Adolescents and Young Adults Who Use E-Cigarettes at Low and High Frequency.

BACKGROUND: Among adolescents and young adults (AYAs), "current use" of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) is commonly defined as any use in the past 30 days. However, few studies have examined differences among those within this broad category. This study examined characteristics of AYAs who used e-cigarettes at a low frequency (within the last 3 months but <6 days out of the past 30 days) and those who used e-cigarettes at a high frequency (6+ days out of the past 30 days). METHODS: We conducted cross-sectional analyses among 551 Ohio AYAs (15- to 24-year-olds) who reported using an e-cigarette to vape nicotine in the past 3 months. We used descriptive statistics and logistic regression to characterize those using e-cigarettes at a low frequency and a high frequency. RESULTS: Among our sample of AYAs who reported past 3-month e-cigarette use, about half (50.8%) reported using an e-cigarette 6 or more days out of the past 30 days (ie, high frequency). In the multivariable analysis, reported nicotine dependence (Odds Ratio [OR]: 7.0, 95% CI: 4.8, 10.3) and current other tobacco product use (OR: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.1, 2.9) were associated with high-frequency e-cigarette use. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that frequency of use is an important characteristic in understanding AYA e-cigarette use. Any use in the past 30 days may not be sensitive enough to understand dependence and tobacco-use behaviors. Further characterizing "current" e-cigarette use by frequency of use may provide meaningful information for public health professionals to better target intervention and cessation efforts to AYAs.

Nicotine dependence among undergraduates who use nicotine salt-based e-cigarettes.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the relationship between use patterns of a popular e-cigarette brand using nicotine salts, JUUL, and symptoms of nicotine dependence in a college cohort. PARTICIPANTS: Data for this study came from a prospective cohort of undergraduate students at a large Midwestern university from 2018 to 2019. METHODS: Among participants who had ever tried a JUUL (N = 411), univariate and multivariable logistic regression were used to test the associations between use frequency (past 30-day use) and quantity (time to finish a pod) and nicotine dependence at follow up. RESULTS: In the multivariable models, both frequency of use and quantity of use were associated with subsequent nicotine dependence, based on most indicators of dependence. CONCLUSIONS: As salt-based nicotine is now present in the most popular e-cigarette brands used by young people, such findings inform our contemporary understanding of e-cigarettes' addictive potential and can help inform campus-based interventions.

What do young people know about the nicotine in their e-cigarettes?

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, the nicotine in e-cigarettes has been available in either a 'free-base' (unprotonated) or 'nicotine salt' (protonated) form. Additionally, e-cigarette nicotine can be either 'synthetic' or 'tobacco-derived'. These dimensions of nicotine have implications for nicotine absorption, bioavailability and sensory experiences. However, it is unclear if the young people using e-cigarettes are aware of these nicotine dimensions. METHODS: Data came from a cohort of Ohio youth (aged 15-24) who reported using an e-cigarette in the past 4 months (N=271). Participants were enrolled and provided background information in 2021; their 12-month follow-up survey asked about the presence, form and type of nicotine in their usual e-cigarette. Individuals who reported that they could distinguish between tobacco-derived and synthetic nicotine were additionally asked to describe the difference. RESULTS: Of the 247 youth who reported that there was nicotine in their usual e-cigarette, 71.7% did not know whether it was free-base or nicotine salt and 75.7% did not know whether it was synthetic or tobacco-derived. Awareness was higher among youth who were using e-cigarettes at a greater frequency and quantity. The majority reported that they could not detect a difference between the experience of using synthetic vs tobacco-derived nicotine. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate the generally limited awareness about nicotine among youth who used e-cigarettes. Improvements in health communications and requirements for e-cigarette industry disclosures are necessary to ensure that consumers are better informed about the dimensions-and the risks-of the nicotine they are consuming.

Perceptions of oral nicotine pouches & their marketing among Ohio Appalachia smokers and smokeless tobacco users.

BACKGROUND: Oral nicotine pouches (ONPs) are novel products, gaining popularity and marketed as "tobacco-free" alternatives to cigarettes and smokeless tobacco (SLT), but their public health impact is unknown. This study qualitatively examined ONP appeal and perceptions among cigarette smokers and SLT users from Ohio Appalachia. METHODS: In 2022, we conducted 10 virtual focus groups with smokers (n = 19) and smokeless tobacco users (n = 18) from Appalachia Ohio aged ≥21 to examine perceptions of risks and benefits, substitutability for cigarettes and SLT, and ONP marketing. We transcribed focus groups verbatim, thematically coded transcripts, and analyzed coded data for prominent themes. RESULTS: Participants perceived ONPs to have similar or less risk than cigarettes/SLT but prominently discussed gastrointestinal and cardiovascular risks. Addiction risk was thought to be comparable to cigarettes/SLT, citing "nicotine is nicotine." Participants viewed ONPs to be situational rather than complete substitutes for cigarettes/SLT, viewing them as "cleaner," more socially acceptable, and discrete. Despite appealing features of ONP marketing, participants surmised ads would appeal to youth, new users, tobacco users seeking to cut down/quit, or to "high class," "white-collar" demographics. CONCLUSIONS: Participants' perceptions of ONPs and their marketing suggest ONPs are more likely to be used as situational versus complete substitutes for cigarettes and SLT. While situational substitution could exacerbate disparities in Appalachia by facilitating more frequent tobacco/nicotine use, complete substitution could reduce disparities. Research is needed to understand how perceptions, the appeal of ONP marketing, and novel product features translate to patterns of use to understand ONPs' potential impact.

Examining trends in health care access measures among low-income adult smokers in Ohio: 2012-2019.

Smokers are more likely to be low-income with limited access to health services. Although Medicaid expansion under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act improved access to care for low-income adults, long-term trends in health care access among low-income smokers remain uncharacterized. The study evaluated changes in five access measures among low-income nonelderly (19-64) adults (N = 28976) across smoking status using pooled data from a statewide survey in Ohio covering pre- (i.e., 2012) and post-Medicaid expansion periods (2015, 2017, and 2019) guided by a comprehensive framework of health care access. We found improvements in some, but not all, health care access measures among low-income smokers in the post-Medicaid-expansion period compared to the pre-expansion period. Compared to 2012, the odds for unmet dental care needs declined in 2015 (aOR = 0.67, 95 % CI = 0.45-1.01), 2017 (aOR = 0.53, 95 % CI = 0.35-0.81), and 2019 (aOR = 0.65, 95 % CI = 0.40-1.05) (p trend < 0.001). Similarly, the odds for unmet other health care needs (i.e., medical exams and supplies) were lower in 2015 (aOR = 0.64, 95 % CI = 0.39-1.06), 2017 (aOR = 0.56, 95 % CI = 0.34-0.93), and 2019 (aOR = 0.47, 95 % CI = 0.27-0.83) (p trend < 0.001). Difficulty paying medical bills was also significantly lower in 2015 (aOR = 0.62, 95 % CI = 0.43-0.89), 2017 (aOR = 0.57, 95 % CI = 0.39-0.83) and 2019 (aOR = 0.57, 95 % CI = 0.37-0.87) (p trend < 0.001). While there was notable progress in measures of affordability (i.e., paying medical bills) as well as care availability and accommodation (i.e., unmet needs), there were no meaningful changes in the approachability of care (i.e., having a usual source of care).

The Effects of Oral Nicotine Pouch Packaging Features on Adult Tobacco Users' and Non-Users' Product Perceptions.

BACKGROUND: Oral nicotine pouches (ONPs) are novel products that are marketed as "tobacco-free" alternatives to cigarettes and smokeless tobacco (ST). This study examined the effects of ONP packaging features on adult tobacco users' and non-users' product perceptions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adult tobacco users (cigarettes, ST, and dual cigarette/ST) and non-users (total N = 301) viewed ONP pack images in a 4 × 3 × 2 between-subject experiment testing the effects of the displayed flavor (cool mint, coffee, dark frost, and smooth), nicotine concentration (none displayed on the package, 3 mg, and 6 mg), and addiction warning label (yes or no). The outcomes were perceived substitutability of ONPs for cigarettes and ST and perceived risks. We modeled the effects of tobacco user status and the experimental factors on these outcomes. RESULTS: All tobacco user groups perceived ONPs to be significantly less harmful and less addictive than non-users. There were significant effects of nicotine concentration on perceived risks. Compared to packages that did not display nicotine concentration, packages displaying 6 mg nicotine concentration produced significantly lower perceived harm (ß = -0.23, 95% CI -0.44, -0.02), perceived addictiveness (ß = -0.28, 95% CI -0.51, -0.05), risk appraisals of harm (ß = -0.50, 95% CI -0.88, -0.12) and risk appraisals of addictiveness (ß = -0.53, 95% CI -0.95, -0.11). CONCLUSIONS: The study findings demonstrate that the nicotine concentration displayed on ONP packaging can affect adults' perceptions of ONPs. Further research on the effects of ONP packaging features emphasizing nicotine (e.g., "tobacco free" nicotine claims) on tobacco users and non-users is needed to assess their potential public health impact.

Tobacco 21's Impact Amid the E-Cigarette Surge.

OBJECTIVES: Nationwide implementation of Tobacco 21 (raising the legal sales age for all tobacco products to 21) is occurring against the backdrop of an electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) epidemic among young people, which makes Tobacco 21 evaluation difficult. To address this issue, we examined young adult use of e-cigarettes separately from use of other tobacco products. Our objective was to determine whether use changed after Tobacco 21 implementation and whether those changes differed by product. METHODS: In Columbus, Ohio, which began enforcing Tobacco 21 in 2017, we surveyed incoming first-year undergraduates at a large, public university in 2016 (Cohort 1; n = 529) and re-contacted them in 2018. We surveyed a new sample of incoming first-year students in 2018 (Cohort 2; n = 611). Survey items assessed tobacco use, sources for obtaining tobacco, and attitudes surrounding Tobacco 21. RESULTS: Both cross-sectional (Cohort 1 vs Cohort 2) and prospective (pre-post Tobacco 21 in Cohort 1) analyses indicated a slight decline in most tobacco use from 2016 to 2018, but e-cigarette use more than doubled during the same period. Students enrolled throughout the transition to Tobacco 21 (Cohort 1) perceived little effect of Tobacco 21 on peer use. The largest proportions (35.3%-43.5%) of combustible tobacco were obtained outside Columbus; 61.8% of e-cigarette users reported obtaining e-cigarettes through borrowing. CONCLUSIONS: Tobacco 21 was associated with reductions in combustible and smokeless tobacco use, but its impact was not sufficient to curb the surge in e-cigarette use. Tobacco 21 should be contextualized as part of a broader network of tobacco control efforts, including additional youth-access regulations, that may be needed to address e-cigarette use among young people.

Adherence to COVID-19 Protective Measures in a Longitudinal Sample of Male Youth.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to COVID-19 protective measures is lowest for young people and males. The current study investigated characteristics associated with adherence to COVID-19 protective measures among male youth during the early months of the pandemic. METHOD: The study used data from a prospective cohort study among male youth with baseline assessment in 2015/2016 and follow-up measurements in 2019 and summer 2020. Attrition-weighted multivariable ordinal logistic and log-binomial regression models were used to assess factors associated with adherence to overall and specific adherence measures, respectively. RESULTS: Among 571 male youth (mean age 18.5), overall adherence was higher for those who were older (OR: 1.15; 95% CI: 1.03-1.30), non-White (OR: 1.96; 95% CI: 1.20-3.32), and residing in an urban area (OR: 2.06; 95% CI: 1.46-3.01). Overall adherence was lower for those who had a history of being drunk (OR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.42-0.99). For outdoor mask-wearing, adherence was higher for youth with attention-deficit disorder or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (RR: 1.58; 95% CI: 1.16-1.97) and lower for youth who currently used tobacco products (RR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.21-0.70). Before a statewide mask mandate was issued, non-White youth were more likely to report wearing masks in outdoor spaces than their non-Hispanic White peers (RR: 2.34; 95% CI: 1.75-3.23). CONCLUSION: The study identified demographic, psychosocial, and behavioral factors associated with adherence to COVID-19 protective behaviors among male youth. The findings illustrate characteristics that could be leveraged for targeted preventive efforts during the ongoing pandemic and future outbreaks in a low-compliance group.

Geographic Differences in JUUL Use and Risk Perceptions.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare prevalence of JUUL use and JUUL risk perceptions between adolescents living in an urban area versus Appalachian areas of the U.S. METHODS: Data were drawn from a prospective cohort study of adolescent males (the Buckeye Teen Health Study, or BTHS); our cross-sectional analysis used data from one timepoint, collected between January and December 2019 (N = 873). Chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression compared JUUL use prevalence and risk perceptions between participants in an urban Ohio county and nine predominantly rural Appalachian Ohio counties. RESULTS: Over a quarter of the sample (29.2%) had ever used JUUL. In the unadjusted model, prevalence of JUUL use was similar between regions but Appalachian participants perceived JUUL as more harmful (p < .001) and more addictive (p = .04) than urban participants. In the adjusted model, region was not significantly related to current JUUL use (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.77, 1.87) or ever JUUL use (OR: 1.15, 95% CI: 0.83, 1.60). CONCLUSIONS: JUUL use was similar between urban and Appalachian participants despite regional differences in risk perceptions. Interventions that only target risk perceptions may not be sufficient to prevent adolescent e-cigarette use, particularly in rural communities.

Variations in Tobacco Retailer Type Across Community Characteristics: Place Matters.

INTRODUCTION: The density of tobacco retailers varies by community characteristics such as poverty levels or racial and ethnic composition. However, few studies have investigated how specific types of tobacco retailers vary by community characteristics. Our objective was to assess how the types of tobacco retailers in Ohio varied by the characteristics of the communities in which they were located. RESULTS: For all US Census tracts, convenience stores were the most common type of retailer selling tobacco. Yet, the prevalence of convenience stores was higher in high-poverty urban tracts than in low-poverty urban tracts. Discount stores were the second-most common type of tobacco retailer and were most prevalent in rural tracts and high-racial and ethnic minority urban tracts. Grocery stores, pharmacies, and vape or hookah shops typically had the highest prevalence in more advantaged tracts. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that the distribution of specific retailer types varies by community characteristics. The distribution of these retailer types has implications for product availability and price, which may subsequently affect tobacco use and cessation. To create equitable outcomes, policies should focus on retailers such as convenience and discount stores, which are heavily located in communities experiencing tobacco-related health disparities.

Testing if attitudes mediate the association between advertising exposure and adolescent tobacco use.

INTRODUCTION: A growing body of evidence indicates that exposure to tobacco advertising among adolescents increases the likelihood of subsequent tobacco use. It is important to understand the process by which this occurs, in order to appropriately target factors for intervention. The objective of this study was to test whether attitudes towards tobacco advertising mediates the impact of advertising exposure on tobacco use. METHODS: From an ongoing prospective cohort study of male adolescents (aged 11-16 at baseline), we recruited a subset of tobacco users and non-users to participate in an additional ecological momentary assessment (EMA) project (N = 164). Adolescents completed smartphone-based surveys 2-3 times/day over a 10-day period with items assessing their exposures and attitudes towards tobacco-related advertising. If participants reported exposure to tobacco advertising, they were asked about their attitudes toward it (how much they enjoyed it, liked it, and found it appealing). RESULTS: Adolescents who reported a greater amount of advertising exposure during the EMA period were more likely to report past-30-day tobacco use at their next cohort follow-up (6-12 months later). Moreover, the impact of advertising exposure on subsequent use was mediated by attitudes toward the tobacco advertisements, as reported during the EMA. This effect remained after controlling for baseline tobacco use. CONCLUSIONS: By pairing EMA with long-term follow-up, we identified attitudes as a mediator between adolescent advertising exposure and subsequent tobacco use. Interventions to lessen adolescents' positive attitudes toward tobacco advertisements may help disrupt this impact.

Factors Associated with Quit Interest and Quit Attempts among Young Adult JUUL Users.

Despite reports suggesting young people are interested in quitting e-cigarettes, little work has examined predictors of quit outcomes. This study aimed to identify factors associated with quit outcomes among JUUL e-cigarette users in a longitudinal sample of young adults. We assessed undergraduate past-30-day JUUL users during autumn 2018 (N = 225); Our outcomes included short-term quit attempts and interest (spring 2019), and long-term quit attempts (spring 2020). We used logistic regression to examine the associations between our outcomes and JUUL use characteristics, other tobacco use, and sociodemographic factors. Findings indicated 76% of users were interested in quitting JUUL, and more than 40% reported a quit attempt. Quit outcomes were not related to sociodemographics. Short-term quit outcomes were more likely among freshmen and less likely among recent cigarillo users. Heavy JUUL users were more likely to report short- and long-term quit attempts, but JUUL device owners were less likely to report short- and long-term quit attempts. Higher nicotine dependence reduced the likelihood of a long-term quit attempt. There is a need for policy level actions that address tobacco control among this population. Findings suggest a range of unique factors that can inform such policies and programs to curb young adult e-cigarette use.

Juul and the upsurge of e-cigarette use among college undergraduates.

OBJECTIVE: Examine trends in e-cigarette use, and Juul use specifically, among U.S. college students. PARTICIPANTS: In 2016, we established a cohort of 529 incoming first-year students to a large Midwestern University. In 2018, these students (now third-years) were re-contacted, and a new sample of 611 incoming first-year students was enrolled. METHODS: First-year students in 2016 completed a survey assessing their e-cigarette use; in 2018, first- and second-year students reported on e-cigarette use, and use of Juul specifically. RESULTS: From 2016 to 2018, past 30-day e-cigarette use rose from 5.9% to 27.7%. In 2018, for Juul alone, ever use was above 35% and past 30-day use was above 20% for both cohorts. Juul use did not differ by gender, but was associated with higher socioeconomic status (SES) and being White. CONCLUSIONS: Findings present disturbing possibilities for long-term nicotine addiction among the next generation, and underscore the need for a rapid public health response.

Associations between disparities in tobacco retailer density and disparities in tobacco use.

Research has separately established that there are disparities in tobacco use, that greater tobacco retailer density (TRD) is positively associated with tobacco use, and that TRD is greater in high poverty and high racial/ethnic minority neighborhoods. Connecting these topics, this study examined the association between disparities in TRD and disparities in the prevalence of tobacco use among adults and youth. We obtained Ohio data on tobacco use from two statewide adult surveys and two sub-state regional youth surveys (2017-2019). Licensed tobacco retailers in Ohio were geocoded within census tracts. Disparity in TRD within regions across the state was defined as the ratio of TRD in high vs. low poverty (and in high vs. low racial/ethnic minority) census tracts per region. Disparity in cigarette smoking (adults) and any tobacco use (youth) was defined as the ratio of use prevalence among socioeconomically disadvantaged vs. non-disadvantaged (and racial/ethnic minority vs. non-minority) individuals. We estimated Pearson correlation coefficients to assess the linear relationship between the TRD disparity ratios and tobacco use disparity ratios. Poverty-based and race/ethnicity-based TRD disparities were positively associated with smoking disparities among adults. Negative associations between TRD disparities and tobacco use disparities were found among youth. To our knowledge, this is the first analysis directly linking TRD disparities and tobacco use disparities. Different adult and youth findings may be due to trends by age and product preferences. For adults in particular, this analysis suggests a detrimental effect of the tobacco retail environment on disadvantaged populations.

Dual Use of E-cigarettes and Cannabis among Young People in America: A New Public Health Hurdle?

In this commentary, we discuss the concerning prevalence of cannabis use among young people who use e-cigarettes. National data in the U.S., as well as our own local data, indicate that dual use (i.e., nicotine e-cigarette use and cannabis use) is more common than e-cigarette use alone. Our commentary discusses why this dual use is a major concern for public health. We argue that continuing to examine e-cigarettes in isolation is not only impractical but also problematic, as it misses out on opportunities to understand additive and multiplicative health impacts, to share cross-knowledge, and to inform prevention and treatment. This commentary calls for more attention to dual use and concerted, equity-enhancing efforts from funders and researchers.