Packaging of disposable vaping products and e-liquids in England, Canada and the United States: A content analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Vaping product packaging is varied and often features bright colours and novel designs, particularly among recently marketed disposable vapes. This study provides an overview of attributes found on the packaging of popular disposable vapes and e-liquid bottles in England, Canada and the United States (US) and assesses compliance with local packaging regulations. DESIGN: Content analysis. SETTING: Brick-and-mortar and online shops in England (London), Canada (Ontario) and the US (New Hampshire and South Carolina). CASES: 108 vaping products (including packaging) from 76 brands in a range of flavours and nicotine levels. Specifically, 48 disposable vapes (15 from England, 16 from Canada, 17 from the US) and 60 e-liquid bottles (20 per country). MEASUREMENTS: Textual and graphic branding and marketing elements, independently coded by two researchers and checked by a third. FINDINGS: Compliance with local packaging regulations varied across countries. Health warnings were present on the packaging of all but one nicotine-containing product, although 33% of disposables and 17% of e-liquids featuring the warning did not adhere to formatting requirements. Leaflets were seldom included with e-liquid bottles, even in England (45%) where mandatory, and omitted elsewhere. Labelling of nicotine type and batch numbers was inconsistent. Vaping product packaging featured claims relating to sensory perceptions (41%), most often flavours, and some (32%) featured youth-appealing content. Common graphic elements included stylised brand fonts (80%), brand logos (54%), product representations on the external packaging (47%) and abstract graphic elements (64%). Colours on packaging, disposable vapes and e-liquid bottles were associated with product flavour. CONCLUSIONS: In England, Canada and the United States, popular disposable vapes and e-liquid bottles appear to have varying compliance with local packaging regulations and inconsistent labelling of nicotine and product characteristics. The use of colourful designs, evocative descriptors and appealing graphics to promote flavours underscores the need for comprehensive packaging regulations and enforcement.

Harm perceptions across vaping product features: An on-line cross-sectional survey of adults who smoke and/or vape in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Vaping products are diverse with a wide variety of features, and popular products change rapidly. This study examined the features and types of vaping products that people who smoke and/or vape perceive contribute to the health harms of vaping. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a cross-sectional survey co-designed with adults who smoked/vaped and pre-registered. An on-line survey (November 2022) was used of a convenience sample of adults in the United Kingdom who smoked and/or vaped (n = 494). MEASUREMENTS: As primary outcomes, respondents were asked to select any of 15 vaping product features they perceived might have any effect on the health harms of vaping (for each: selected, not selected). Independent variables were smoking/vaping status (smoke and vape; vape, formerly smoked; vape, never regularly smoked; smoke, do not currently vape); relative vaping harm perceptions [less harmful than smoking (accurate), equally/more harmful than smoking or do not know/refused (other)]. Binary logistic regressions were used to compare outcomes by current vaping/smoking status and relative harm perceptions, adjusting for age and sex. FINDINGS: Most people (54.7%) selected between one and three features. The most frequently selected were nicotine concentration (62.2%) and amount of e-liquid consumed (59.1%), followed by nicotine type (e.g. salt or freebase; 33.0%), source/purchase location (25.3%), flavours (24.7%), temperature to heat e-liquid (21.1%), heat produced by device (20.9%), e-liquid brand (20.9%), amount of emissions (18.6%), device type (e.g. disposable, pod, tank; 17.2%), material of tank (17.0%), power/wattage (13.0%), device brand (8.1%), device size (4.1%) and device weight (2.4%). Higher nicotine concentrations, more e-liquid and salt (versus freebase) nicotine were perceived to confer greater harms. Disposables were perceived as slightly more harmful than reusable devices. There were few differences by current vaping/smoking status and between those with accurate (versus other) harm perceptions of vaping relative to smoking (P > 0.05 for most contrasts, adjusting for age and sex). CONCLUSIONS: Certain features and types of vaping products [higher nicotine concentrations, more e-liquid consumed and salt (versus freebase) nicotine] were perceived to confer greater health harms among a sample of UK adults who smoked and/or vaped. Findings are consistent with pervasive misperceptions that nicotine is a major cause of harm, although e-liquid volume is likely to contribute to harms.

Support for banning sale of smoked tobacco products among adults who smoke: findings from the International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys (2018-2022).

BACKGROUND: Many people continue to smoke despite strong policies to deter use, thus stronger regulatory measures may be required. In four high-income countries, we examined whether people who smoke would support a total ban on smoked tobacco products under two differing policy scenarios. METHODS: Data were from 14 363 adults (≥18) who smoked cigarettes (≥monthly) and participated in at least one of the 2018, 2020 or 2022 International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys in Australia, Canada, England and the USA. In 2018, respondents were asked whether they would support a law that totally bans smoked tobacco if the government provides smoking cessation assistance (Cessation Assistance scenario). In 2020 and 2022, respondents were asked a slightly different question as to whether they would support a law that totally bans smoked tobacco if the government encourages people who smoke to use alternative nicotine products like vaping products and nicotine replacement products instead (substitution scenario). Responses (support vs oppose/don't know) were estimated on weighted data. RESULTS: Support was greater for the cessation assistance scenario (2018, 36.6%) than the nicotine substitution scenario (2020, 26.9%; 2022, 26.3%, both p<0.0001). In the longitudinal analysis, there was a significant scenario by country interaction effect with lower support in Canada, the USA and Australia under the substitution scenario than in the cessation scenario, but equivalent levels in England under both scenarios. The strongest correlates of support under both scenarios were planning to quit smoking within 6 months, wanting to quit smoking 'a lot' and recent use of nicotine replacement therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Opposition to banning smoked tobacco predominates among people who smoke, but less with a cessation assistance scenario than one encouraging nicotine substitution. Wanting to quit a lot was the strongest indicator of support.

Associations between vaping and self-reported respiratory symptoms in young people in Canada, England and the US.

BACKGROUND: Prevalence of youth nicotine vaping has increased, heightening concerns around negative health effects. This study aimed to compare self-reported respiratory symptoms among youth by vaping behaviours. METHODS: Participants (n = 39,214) aged 16-19 from the 2020 and 2021 International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project (ITC) Youth Tobacco and Vaping Surveys (Canada, England, US). Weighted multivariable logistic regression assessed associations between reporting any of five respiratory symptoms in the past week (shortness of breath, wheezing, chest pain, phlegm, cough) and: past 30-day smoking and/or vaping; lifetime/current vaping. Among past-30-day vapers (n = 4644), we assessed associations between symptoms and vaping frequency, use of nicotine salts, usual flavour and device type(s). RESULTS: Overall, 27.8% reported experiencing any of the five respiratory symptoms. Compared with youth who had only vaped, those who had only smoked had similar odds of symptoms [adjusted odds ratio, OR (95% confidence interval, CI): 0.97 (0.85-1.10)], those who both smoked and vaped had higher odds [1.26 (1.12-1.42)], and those who had done neither, lower odds [0.67 (0.61-0.72)]. Compared with those who had never vaped, past use, experimentation and current regular or occasional use were all associated with higher odds. Reporting usually using nicotine salts was associated with higher odds of symptoms [1.43 (1.22-1.68)] than non-salt but was often uncertain. Compared with tobacco flavour (including with menthol), menthol/mint and sweets flavours were associated with similar odds; fruit [1.44 (1.07-1.93)], multiple [1.76 (1.30-2.39)] and 'other' [2.14 (1.45-3.16)] flavours with higher odds. All device types were associated with similar odds. CONCLUSIONS: Among youth, vaping was associated with increased reporting of past-week respiratory symptoms. Among those who vaped, some flavour types and potentially nicotine salts were associated with respiratory symptoms.

Use of 'Elf Bar' among youth and young adults who currently vape in England: cross-sectional associations with demographics, dependence indicators and reasons for use.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Elf Bar is currently the leading e-cigarette (vape) brand in Great Britain. This study examined youth and young adults' use of Elf Bar, socio-demographic characteristics and dependence indicators and reasons for use over other brands. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Online 2022 International Tobacco Control Project Youth Tobacco and Vaping Survey (N = 1355 16-29-year-olds in England who had vaped in the past 30 days). MEASUREMENTS: Currently using Elf Bar most often (versus other brands) and associations with: socio-demographics, owning a vaping device, dependence indicators and reasons for brand choice. Logistic regressions were used. FINDINGS: Among 16-29-year-olds who vaped in the past 30 days, 48.4% (n = 732) reported Elf Bar as the brand they used most often. Among 16-17-year-olds, 40.7% used Elf Bar over other brands; this was lower than among 18-19-year-olds (60.1%) and 20-29-year-olds (47.4%) (P ≤ 0.002). Using Elf Bar over other brands was higher among those who were female (55.2 versus 41.5% male), identified as White (53.1 versus 30.9% other/mixed), a student (54.5 versus 44.3% not), did not own a vape (66.7 versus 44.4% who did) and typically vaped 5-8 hours after waking (62.7 versus 36.8% within 5 min) (P ≤ 0.044). Most who vaped but had never smoked used Elf Bar (64.3%), although use did not significantly differ from those who currently (45.4%), formerly (42.3%) or experimentally (48.7%) smoked (all P ≥ 0.060). Popular reasons for choosing Elf Bar over other brands were better flavour/taste (47.5%), less expensive (28.7%), easier to get (26.1%), smoother to inhale (24.0%) and popularity (23.1%). 'Better for quitting smoking' (10.1%) was least frequently selected reason for choosing Elf Bar over other brands. CONCLUSIONS: Elf Bar brand e-cigarettes were used by approximately half of 16-29-year-olds who vaped in England in 2022 and was mainly chosen over other brands for subjective responses (e.g. flavour/taste), rather than for quitting smoking.

Evaluation of a hospital-initiated tobacco dependence treatment service: uptake, smoking cessation, readmission and mortality.

BACKGROUND: The National Health Service in England aims to implement tobacco dependency treatment services in all hospitals by 2024. We aimed to assess the uptake of a new service, adapted from the Ottawa Model of Smoking Cessation, and its impact on 6-month quit rates and readmission or death at 1-year follow-up. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic service evaluation of a tobacco dependency service implemented among 2067 patients who smoked who were admitted to 2 acute hospitals in London, England, over a 12-month period from July 2020. The intervention consisted of the systematic identification of smoking status, automatic referral to tobacco dependence specialists, provision of pharmacotherapy and behavioural support throughout the hospital stay, and telephone support for 6 months after discharge. The outcomes were (i) patient acceptance of the intervention during admission, (ii) quit success at 6 months after discharge, (iii) death, or (iv) readmission up to 1 year following discharge. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the impact of a range of clinical and demographic variables on these outcomes. RESULTS: The majority (79.4%) of patients accepted support at the first assessment. Six months after discharge, 35.1% of successfully contacted patients reported having quit smoking. After adjustment, odds of accepting support were 51-61% higher among patients of all non-White ethnicity groups, relative to White patients, but patients of Mixed, Asian, or Other ethnicities had decreased odds of quit success (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 0.32, 95%CI = 0.15-0.66). Decreased odds of accepting support were associated with a diagnosis of cardiovascular disease or diabetes; however, diabetes was associated with increased odds of quit success (AOR = 1.88, 95%CI = 1.17-3.04). Intention to make a quit attempt was associated with a threefold increase in odds of quit success, and 60% lower odds of death, compared to patients who did not intend to quit. A mental health diagnosis was associated with an 84% increase in the odds of dying within 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The overall quit rates were similar to results from Ottawa models implemented elsewhere, although outcomes varied by site. Outcomes also varied according to patient demographics and diagnoses, suggesting personalised and culturally tailored interventions may be needed to optimise quit success.

Noticing education campaigns or public health messages about vaping among youth in the United States, Canada and England from 2018 to 2022.

Public health campaigns have the potential to correct vaping misperceptions. However, campaigns highlighting vaping harms to youth may increase misperceptions that vaping is equally/more harmful than smoking. Vaping campaigns have been implemented in the United States and Canada since 2018 and in England since 2017 but with differing focus: youth vaping prevention (United States/Canada) and smoking cessation (England). We therefore examined country differences and trends in noticing vaping campaigns among youth and, using 2022 data only, perceived valence of campaigns and associations with harm perceptions. Seven repeated cross-sectional surveys of 16-19 year-olds in United States, Canada and England (2018-2022, n = 92 339). Over half of youth reported noticing vaping campaigns, and noticing increased from August 2018 to February 2020 (United States: 55.2% to 74.6%, AOR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.18-1.24; Canada: 52.6% to 64.5%, AOR = 1.13, 1.11-1.16; England: 48.0% to 53.0%, AOR = 1.05, 1.02-1.08) before decreasing (Canada) or plateauing (England/United States) to August 2022. Increases were most pronounced in the United States, then Canada. Noticing was most common on websites/social media, school and television/radio. In 2022 only, most campaigns were perceived to negatively portray vaping and this was associated with accurately perceiving vaping as less harmful than smoking among youth who exclusively vaped (AOR = 1.46, 1.09-1.97). Consistent with implementation of youth vaping prevention campaigns in the United States and Canada, most youth reported noticing vaping campaigns/messages, and most were perceived to negatively portray vaping.

Exposure to Tobacco-Specific Nitrosamines Among People Who Vape, Smoke, or do Neither: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Smoking exposes people to high levels of Tobacco-Specific Nitrosamines (TSNAs), which include potent carcinogens. We systematically reviewed TSNA exposure between people smoking, vaping, and doing neither. AIMS AND METHODS: Databases were searched between August 2017-March 2022, using vaping-related terms. Peer-reviewed articles reporting TSNA metabolites (NNAL, NNN, NAB, and NAT) levels in bio-samples among adults exclusively vaping, exclusively smoking, or doing neither were included. Where possible, meta-analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Of 12 781 identified studies, 22 were included. TSNA levels fell substantially when people who smoke switched to vaping in longitudinal studies and were lower among people who vaped compared to smoked in cross-sectional studies. Levels of TSNAs were similar when comparing people who switched from smoking to vaping, to those who switched to no use of nicotine products, in longitudinal studies. Levels were higher among people who vaped compared to people who neither vaped nor smoked in cross-sectional studies.When comparing people who vaped to smoked: pooled urinary NNAL was 79% lower across three randomized controlled trials and 96% lower across three cross-sectional studies; pooled NAB was 87% lower and NAT 94% lower in two cross-sectional studies. When comparing people who neither vaped nor smoked to people who vaped, pooled urinary NNAL was 80%, NAB 26%, and NAT 27% lower in two cross-sectional studies. Other longitudinal data, and NNN levels could not be pooled. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to all TSNAs was lower among people who vaped compared to people who smoked. Levels were higher among people who vaped compared to people who neither vaped nor smoked. IMPLICATIONS: As well as TSNAs, there are many other toxicant exposures from smoking and vaping that can increase the risk of disease. However, it is likely that the reduced exposure to TSNAs from vaping relative to smoking reduces the risk to health of those who use vaping products to quit smoking. Future high-quality research, with robust definitions of exclusive vaping and smoking, and accounting for TSNAs half-lives, is needed to fully assess exposure to TSNAs among people who vape.

Impact of E-liquid Packaging on Vaping Product Perceptions Among Youth in England, Canada, and the United States: A Randomized Online Experiment.

INTRODUCTION: Vaping is not risk-free but can help those who smoke to reduce harm to health and stop smoking. However, packaging of vaping products, including e-liquids, appeals to youth and might facilitate vaping among nicotine-naïve people. Standardized packaging of vaping products could moderate the appeal of vaping among youth. This study assessed how youth interest in trying and perceived health harms of using e-liquids are associated with branded or standardized (white or olive) e-liquid packaging with different nicotine levels displayed. AIMS AND METHODS: A between-subject experiment with three packaging and two nicotine level conditions included youth (n = 13801) aged 16 to 19 from England, Canada, and the United States as a part of a cross-sectional online survey in August-September 2021. Participants' interest in trying and perceived harm of e-liquids were analyzed using logistic and multinomial regressions adjusted for age, sex, race or ethnicity, country, vaping, and smoking status. RESULTS: Compared with branded e-liquid packs, more youth reported no interest in trying e-liquids in white (aOR = 1.48, 95% CI = 1.34 to 1.64) or olive (aOR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.47 to 1.80) standardized packs. Compared with branded e-liquid packs, more youth inaccurately perceived e-liquids in white (aOR = 1.22, 95% CI: 1.11 to 1.34) or olive (aOR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.18 to 1.41) standardized packs as equally or more harmful than smoking. E-liquid nicotine levels displayed on packs were not associated with youth interest in trying or harm perceptions of using e-liquids. CONCLUSIONS: Among 16- to 19-year-old youth from England, Canada, and the United States, standardized packaging of e-liquids was associated with lower interest in trying and higher health risk perceptions. IMPLICATIONS: Branded packaging of vaping products appeal to youth and might prompt nicotine use among those who had never smoked. This study suggests that restricting branding elements on e-liquid packaging is associated with youth's lower interest in trying e-liquids and higher misperceptions that vaping is equally or more harmful than smoking. Standardized packaging might reduce appeal of vaping among youth, but its potential to discourage vaping for harm reduction should also be considered.

Support Provided by Stop-Smoking Practitioners to Co-users of Tobacco and Cannabis: A Qualitative Study.

INTRODUCTION: Co-use of tobacco and cannabis is highly prevalent among cannabis users and is associated with poorer tobacco cessation outcomes. This study explored the barriers and enablers influencing stop-smoking practitioners' ability to provide optimal support to co-users. AIMS AND METHODS: Online semi-structured interviews were audio recorded. Interviewees (n = 20) were UK-based certified stop-smoking practitioners. An interview schedule informed by the "capability", "opportunity", "motivation" (COM-B) model was designed to explore participants' perceived barriers and enablers in better supporting co-users to achieve abstinence of both substances or tobacco harm reduction. The transcripts were analyzed using framework analysis. RESULTS: Capability: Practitioners' lack of knowledge and skills undermines their delivery of smoking cessation interventions to co-users. Interestingly, when cannabis is used for medicinal reasons, practitioners feel unable to provide adequate support. Opportunity: Service recording systems play an important role in screening for co-use and supporting co-users. When responding to clients' specific needs and practitioners' uncertainties, a positive therapeutic relationship and a support network of peers and other healthcare professionals are needed. Motivation: supporting co-users is generally perceived as part of practitioners' roles but there are concerns that co-users are less likely to successfully stop smoking. CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners are willing to support co-users, but their lack of knowledge and access to an appropriate recording system are barriers to doing so. Having a supportive team and a positive therapeutic relationship is perceived as important. Identified barriers can be mostly addressed with further training to improve tobacco cessation outcomes for co-users.

Support for nicotine reduction in cigarettes: findings from the 2016 and 2020 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys.

INTRODUCTION: The USA and New Zealand have sought to establish a product standard to set a maximum nicotine level for cigarettes to reduce their addictiveness. This study examined support for very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) in Australia, Canada, England and the USA between 2016 and 2020. METHODS: Repeated cross-sectional data were analysed from participants who currently smoke, formerly smoked or vaped and/or currently vape in the 2016 (n=11 150) and/or 2020 (n=5432) International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey. Respondents were asked if they would support a law that reduces the amount of nicotine in cigarettes to make them less addictive. Adjusted and weighted logistic regression analyses estimated the prevalence and predictors of support, such as country, age, sex, education, income, race and smoking/vaping status for VLNCs (support vs oppose/do not know). RESULTS: A majority of respondents supported a VLNC law, with support highest in Canada (69%; 2016 and 2020 combined), followed by England (61%), Australia (60%) and the USA (58%). Overall, support decreased from 62% in 2016 to 59% in 2020 (p=0.004), which did not differ by country. Levels of support differed by smoking/vaping status, where those who exclusively smoked daily showed the lowest level of support (59%) and those who exclusively vaped non-daily had the highest level of support (72%). CONCLUSION: More than half of respondents in all four countries-including those who smoked daily-supported a hypothetical VLNC standard to render cigarettes less addictive. It is important to examine if support is sustained after policies are implemented.

How is nicotine vaping product (e-cigarette) use monitored in primary care electronic health records in the United Kingdom? An exploratory analysis of Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD).

BACKGROUND: Electronic health records (EHRs) could identify long-term health effects of nicotine vaping. We characterised the extent to which vaping is recorded in primary care EHRs in the UK, on a population level. METHODS: We performed descriptive analysis of Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), primary care electronic health records of 25% of the UK population (~ 16 million patients). Patients aged ≥ 18 years whose vaping status was recorded using medical codes between 2006 and 2022 were identified. We reported the frequency of vaping codes; their distribution by patient age, gender, and ethnicity; trends in vaping recording over time (including interrupted time series analyses); and transitions in patient smoking status. RESULTS: Seven medical codes indicated current or former vaping, from 150,114 patients. When their vaping status was first recorded, mean patient age was 50.2 years (standard deviation: 15.0), 52.4% were female, and 82.1% were White. Of those recorded as currently vaping, almost all (98.9%) had records of their prior smoking status: 55.0% had been smoking, 38.3% had stopped smoking, 5.6% had never smoked. Of those who were smoking prior to being recorded as vaping, more than a year after the vaping record, over a third (34.2%) were still smoking, under a quarter (23.7%) quit smoking, 1.7% received a 'never smoked' status, and there was no smoking status for 40.4%. The 'e-cigarette or vaping product use-associated lung injury' (EVALI) outbreak was significantly associated with a declining trend in new records of current vaping between September 2019 and March 2020; and an immediate significant increase in new records of former vaping, followed by a declining trend. CONCLUSIONS: Few patients are being asked about vaping. Most who vape had smoked, and many quit smoking after starting vaping. To enable electronic health records to provide stronger evidence on health effects, we recommend improved completeness, accuracy and consistency.

Prognosis of older adults with chronic lymphocytic leukemia: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: While prognosis for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) has improved over time in younger adults, only modest improvements have occurred in older adults. We conducted a descriptive study of prognosis in older adults with CLL. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database from 2003 to 2016. We identified older adults (≥66 years) diagnosed with primary CLL between 2004 and 2015 (Overall Cohort). A subset who initiated CLL-directed therapy during the year following diagnosis was also identified (Treated Cohort). Both cohorts were matched to Medicare beneficiaries without cancer based on age, sex, and region. For each year from 2004 to 2013, three-year survival for patients with CLL and non-cancer comparators was described using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Inverse probability weighted Cox regression models were used to compare survival in the CLL and non-cancer comparator cohorts, accounting for demographic information and comorbidity and frailty indices. Among older adults with CLL, ten-year cause-specific cumulative mortality was estimated using Aalen-Johansen estimators that accounted for competing risks. Predictors of cause-specific mortality, including comorbidity and frailty burden, were assessed using sub-distribution hazards models. RESULTS: In the Overall Cohort, three-year survival increased non-monotonically from 71.4% in 2004 to 73.4% in 2013, with a peak of 74.4% in 2011, and was lower than survival in non-cancer comparators (78.3% in 2004 to 83.2% in 2013). In the Treated Cohort, three-year survival was 56.3% in 2004 and 56.5% in 2013, with a peak of 64.2% in 2011. Cox models suggested that survival in the Treated Cohort was approaching survival in non-cancer comparators after 2011 (hazard ratio = 1.04, 95% confidence interval, 0.93-1.17). Ten-year cumulative mortality was 68.6% in the Overall Cohort and 81.7% in the Treated Cohort, with most deaths attributed to non-CLL causes. In the sub-distribution hazards models, age, year of diagnosis, frailty, and comorbidities were all associated with prognosis. DISCUSSION: Prognosis in older adults has been stable over time and most patients with CLL die from non-CLL causes. CLL-directed treatment decision-making in older adults should consider age-related factors, such as comorbidity and frailty.

Self-reported depression and anxiety and healthcare professional interactions regarding smoking cessation and nicotine vaping: Findings from 2018 International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping (ITC 4CV) Survey.

INTRODUCTION: People with mental health conditions are disproportionately affected by smoking-related diseases and death. The aim of this study was to assess whether health professional (HP) interactions regarding smoking cessation and nicotine vaping products (NVPs) differ by mental health condition. METHODS: The cross-sectional 2018 International Tobacco Control Four Country (Australia, Canada, England, United States) Smoking and Vaping Survey data included 11040 adults currently smoking or recently quit. Adjusted weighted logistic regressions examined associations between mental health (self-reported current depression and/or anxiety) and visiting a HP in last 18 months; receiving advice to quit smoking; discussing NVPs with a HP; and receiving a recommendation to use NVPs. RESULTS: Overall, 16.1% self-reported depression and anxiety, 7.6% depression only, and 6.6% anxiety only. Compared with respondents with no depression/anxiety, those with depression (84.7%, AOR=2.65; 95% CI: 2.17-3.27), anxiety (82.2%, AOR=2.08; 95% CI: 1.70-2.57), and depression and anxiety (87.6%, AOR=3.74; 95% CI: 3.19-4.40) were more likely to have visited a HP. Among those who had visited a HP, 47.9% received advice to quit smoking, which was more likely among respondents with depression (AOR=1.58; 95% CI: 1.34-1.86), and NVP discussions were more likely among those with depression and anxiety (AOR=1.63; 95% CI: 1.29-2.06). Of the 6.1% who discussed NVPs, 33.5% received a recommendation to use them, with no difference by mental health. CONCLUSIONS: People with anxiety and/or depression who smoke were more likely to visit a HP than those without, but only those with depression were more likely to receive cessation advice, and only those with depression and anxiety were more likely to discuss NVPs. There are missed opportunities for HPs to deliver cessation advice. NVP discussions and receiving a positive recommendation to use them were rare overall.

Trends in Psychological Distress Among Adults in England, 2020-2022.

Importance: In the last 3 years, people in England have lived through a pandemic and cost-of-living and health care crises, all of which may have contributed to worsening mental health in the population. Objective: To estimate trends in psychological distress among adults over this period and to examine differences by key potential moderators. Design, Setting, and Participants: A monthly cross-sectional, nationally representative household survey of adults aged 18 years or older was conducted in England between April 2020 and December 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Past-month distress was assessed with the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale. Time trends in any distress (moderate to severe, scores ≥5) and severe distress (scores ≥13) were modeled, and interactions with age, gender, occupational social grade, children in the household, smoking status, and drinking risk status were tested. Results: Data were collected from 51 861 adults (weighted mean [SD] age, 48.6 [18.5] years; 26 609 women [51.3%]). There was little overall change in the proportion of respondents reporting any distress (from 34.5% to 32.0%; prevalence ratio [PR], 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87-0.99), but the proportion reporting severe distress increased by 46%, from 5.7% to 8.3% (PR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.21-1.76). Although trends differed by sociodemographic characteristics, smoking, and drinking, the increase in severe distress was observed across all subgroups (with PR estimates ranging from 1.17 to 2.16), with the exception of those aged 65 years and older (PR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.43-1.38); the increase was particularly pronounced since late 2021 among those younger than 25 years (increasing from 13.6% in December 2021 to 20.2% in December 2022). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of adults in England, the proportion reporting any psychological distress was similar in December 2022 to that in April 2020 (an extremely difficult and uncertain moment of the COVID-19 pandemic), but the proportion reporting severe distress was 46% higher. These findings provide evidence of a growing mental health crisis in England and underscore an urgent need to address its cause and to adequately fund mental health services.

Marketing claims on the websites of leading e-cigarette brands in England.

INTRODUCTION: Exposure to electronic cigarette (EC) marketing is associated with EC use, particularly among youth. In England, the Tobacco and Related Products Regulations and Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP) regulate EC marketing to reduce appeal to youth; however, there are little published data on EC marketing claims used online. This study therefore provides an overview of marketing claims present on the websites of EC brands popular in England. METHODS: From January to February 2022, a content analysis of 10 of England's most popular EC brand websites was conducted, including violation of CAP codes. RESULTS: Of the 10 websites, all presented ECs as an alternative to smoking, 8 as a smoking cessation aid and 6 as less harmful than smoking. Four websites presented ECs as risk-free. All mentioned product quality, modernity, convenience, sensory experiences and vendor promotions. Nine featured claims about flavours, colours, customisability and nicotine salts. Seven featured claims concerning social benefits, personal identity, sustainability, secondhand smoke and nicotine strength. Six featured claims about fire safety. Some claimed ECs are cheaper than tobacco (n=5), cited health professionals (n=4) or featured collaborations with brands/icons (n=4). All were assessed by the research team to violate one or more CAP code(s) by featuring medicinal claims (n=8), contents which may appeal to non-smokers (n=7), associations with youth culture (n=6), depictions of youth using ECs (n=6) or media targeting youth (n=5). CONCLUSION: Among 10 top EC brand websites in England, marketing elements that might appeal to youth were commonly identified and CAP code compliance was low.

Associations between smoking and vaping prevalence, product use characteristics, and mental health diagnoses in Great Britain: a population survey.

BACKGROUND: Rates of diseases and death from tobacco smoking are substantially higher among those with a mental health condition (MHC). Vaping can help some people quit smoking, but little is known about vaping among people with MHCs or psychological distress. We assessed the prevalence and characteristics (heaviness, product type) of smoking and/or vaping among those with and without a history of single or multiple MHC diagnoses and with no, moderate or serious psychological distress. METHODS: Data from 27,437 adults in Great Britain surveyed between 2020 and 2022. Multinomial regressions analysed associations between smoking, vaping and dual use prevalence, smoking/vaping characteristics and (a) history of a single or multiple MHC and (b) moderate or serious psychological distress, adjusted for age, gender, and socioeconomic status. RESULTS: Compared with people who had never smoked, those who currently smoked were more likely to report a history of a single (12.5% vs 15.0%, AOR=1.62, 95% CI=1.46-1.81, p<.001) or multiple MHCs (12.8% vs 29.3%, AOR=2.51, 95% CI=2.28-2.75, p<.001). Compared with non-vapers, current vapers were more likely to report a history of a single (13.5% vs 15.5%, AOR=1.28, 95% CI=1.11-1.48, p<.001) or multiple MHCs (15.5% vs 33.4%, AOR=1.66, 95% CI=1.47-1.87, p<.001). Dual users were more likely to report a history of multiple MHCs (36.8%), but not a single MHC than exclusive smokers (27.2%) and exclusive vapers (30.4%) (all p<.05). Similar associations were reported for those with moderate or serious psychological distress. Smoking roll-your-own cigarettes and smoking more heavily, were associated with a history of single or multiple MHCs. There were no associations between vaping characteristics and a history of MHCs. Frequency of vaping, device type and nicotine concentration differed by psychological distress. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking, vaping and dual use were substantially higher among those with a history of MHC, especially multiple MHC, and experiencing past month distress than those not having a history of MHC or experiencing past month distress respectively. Analysis used descriptive epidemiology and causation cannot be determined.

Efficacy of WeChat-based online smoking cessation intervention ('WeChat WeQuit') in China: a randomised controlled trial.

Background: China has approximately 300 million current smokers, and smoking cessation services are limited. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of a Cognitive Behavioral Theory-based smoking cessation intervention ('WeChat WeQuit') via the most popular social media platform in China, WeChat. Methods: A parallel, single-blind, two-arm randomised controlled trial was conducted via WeChat between March 19, 2020 and November 16, 2022. Chinese-speaking adult smokers (n = 2000) willing to quit within one month were recruited and randomised in a 1:1 ratio. The intervention group (n = 1005) received the 'WeChat WeQuit' program and the control group (n = 955) received control messages for 14 weeks (2-week prequit and 12-week postquit). Participants were followed up to 26 weeks after the quit date. The primary outcome was self-reported continuous smoking abstinence rate, biochemically validated at 26 weeks. The secondary outcomes were self-reported 7-day and continuous abstinence rates at 6 months. All analyses were by intention to treat. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03169686). Findings: By intention-to-treat analysis, the biochemically verified 26-week continuous abstinence rate was 11.94% in the intervention group and 2.81% in the control group (OR = 4.68, 95% CI: 3.07-7.13, p < 0.0001). The self-reported 7-day abstinence rates ranged from 39.70% at week 1-32.04% at week 26 for the intervention group and 14.17%-11.86% in the control group for weeks 1 and 26, respectively; the self-reported continuous abstinence rates at weeks 1 and 26 ranged from 34.33% to 24.28% and 9.65% to 6.13% in the intervention group and the control group respectively (all p < 0.0001). Participants with low nicotine dependence or previous quit attempts were more likely to successfully quit smoking. Interpretation: The 'WeChat WeQuit' intervention significantly increased smoking abstinence rates at 6 months and should be considered for treatment-seeking smokers in China. Funding: The research is supported by the Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province (2020JJ4794, YLiao), the K.C. Wong Postdoctoral Fellowship for YLiao to study at King's College London, and China Medical Board (CMB) Open Competition Program (grant no. 15-226, 22-485, YLiao).

Pattern and prevalence of vaping nicotine and non-nicotine drugs in the United Kingdom: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: Electronic vaping devices are being used to consume nicotine and non-nicotine psychoactive drugs. We aimed to determine the pattern and prevalence of using vaping devices for nicotine and/or non-nicotine drug administration in the United Kingdom and how these differ by drug type and individual sociodemographic characteristics. We explored reasons for vaping onset and continuation. DESIGN: An online cross-sectional survey PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of adults (aged ≥18 years) in the UK. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was prevalence of current use (within the last 30 days) of a vaping device to administer either nicotine or 18 types of non-nicotine drugs. We additionally evaluated reasons for onset and continuation of vaping. Sociodemographic characteristics were compared between the UK general population using census data and those vaping non-nicotine drugs. RESULTS: We recruited 4027 participants of whom 1637 (40.7%) had ever used an electronic vaping device; 1495 (37.1%) had ever vaped nicotine and 593 (14.7%) had ever vaped a non-nicotine drug. Overall, 574 (14.3%) currently vaped nicotine and 74 (1.8%) currently vaped a non-nicotine drug. The most common currently vaped non-nicotine drug was cannabis (n=58, 1.4%). For nicotine, people's modal reasons to start and continue vaping was to quit smoking tobacco. For almost all other drugs, people's modal reason to start vaping was curiosity and to continue was enjoyment. Compared with the general population, the population who had ever vaped a non-nicotine drug were significantly younger, had more disabilities and fewer identified as white, female, heterosexual or religious. CONCLUSIONS: A non-trivial number of people report current use and ever use of an electronic vaping device for non-nicotine drug administration. As vaping technology advances and drug consumption changes, understanding patterns of use and associated behaviours are likely to be increasingly important to both users and healthcare professionals.