Exploring the opinions and potential impact of unflavoured e-liquid on smoking cessation among people who smoke and smoking relapse among people who previously smoked and now use e-cigarettes: findings from a UK-based mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Although electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) appear to be effective in helping people who smoke to stop smoking, concerns about use of e-cigarettes among young people have led to restrictions on non-tobacco flavoured e-liquids in some countries and some US states. These restrictions could reduce the appeal of these products to non-smoking youth but could have negative consequences for people who smoke or use e-cigarettes. METHODS: In this mixed methods study, we recruited UK adults who smoked or used to smoke and subsequently vaped to explore their opinions of unflavoured e-liquids and their beliefs about how they would be impacted by hypothetical e-liquid flavour restrictions. Participants trialled an unflavoured e-liquid instead of their usual nicotine product for four hours and completed a survey and an online interview. RESULTS: Using Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis and graphically presented data, we found differences in participants' opinions of unflavoured e-liquid. If only unflavoured, tobacco flavoured, and menthol flavoured e-liquids remained on the UK market, some people who smoke or vape may be unaffected, but some may relapse to smoking or continue smoking. Despite most wanting to prevent young people from initiating vaping, participants had varying opinions on whether flavour restrictions would be an effective method. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight that people who smoke and vape could be impacted by flavour restrictions in a range of ways, some of which could have a potential adverse impact on harm reduction efforts in the UK (e.g., by making smoking more appealing than vaping).

Potential smoke-free dividend across local areas in England: a cross-sectional analysis.

BACKGROUND: The value that might be added to local economies each year through the money that people who smoke tobacco would save if everyone quit smoking is called the 'smoke-free dividend'. This study aimed to estimate the value of the smoke-free dividend across local areas in England, and how it relates to the average income in those areas. METHODS: The study was a cross-sectional descriptive analysis of tobacco expenditure from the Smoking Toolkit Study (STS) matched to income and smoking prevalence data for English local authorities. The STS sample was from 2014 to 2020 and comprised 18 721 adults who smoke cigarettes. Self-reported expenditure estimates from the STS were adjusted for under-reporting. This adjustment aimed to align the total expenditure estimate with figures derived from government tax receipts and national estimates of illicit tobacco use. The smoke-free dividend is calculated as 93% of spending on legal tobacco, which is the percentage estimated to leave the local economy, plus 100% of spending on illicit tobacco. RESULTS: The total dividend in England is estimated to be £10.9 billion each year, which equates to £1776 per person who smokes or £246 per adult regardless of smoking status. The estimated dividend is greater in areas with lower average income, with a correlation coefficient of -0.521 (95% CI -0.629, -0.392) between the average income of local areas and the dividend per adult. CONCLUSIONS: This study has estimated that local economies could gain a substantial dividend if everybody stopped smoking, which is larger in lower income areas, meaning that geographical economic inequalities could be reduced.

Effects of electronic cigarette e-liquid flavouring on cigarette craving.

BACKGROUND: E-liquid flavour restrictions may discourage electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) uptake among youth. However, possible unintended consequences may include reduced appeal and effectiveness of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation. Non-tobacco flavours appear to be important for smoking cessation, but how and why are currently unclear. METHODS: We conducted an experimental study in a UK sample of adult daily smokers using an independent groups design (N=84). Participants were randomised to use an e-cigarette with nicotine-containing fruit/sweet-flavoured e-liquid (blackcurrant, strawberry, vanilla, caramel) or unflavoured e-liquid for 1 week. The primary outcomes were average, peak and cue-elicited cigarette craving (the latter was assessed using a cue exposure task). The secondary outcomes were smoking lapse occurrence, enjoyment of the e-cigarette, ease of transitioning from smoking to using an e-cigarette, intentions to continue using an e-cigarette, intentions and motivation to quit smoking, return to smoking, and continuation of e-cigarette use. RESULTS: E-liquid flavouring did not appear to have an effect on average cigarette craving (b 0.18, 95% CI -0.44 to 0.79, p=0.57), peak cigarette craving (b -0.12, 95% CI -0.59 to 0.35, p=0.62) or cue-elicited cigarette craving (b -0.21, 95% CI -3.86 to 3.43, p=0.91). We did not find evidence of a difference in secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find evidence to suggest that nicotine-containing fruit/sweet-flavoured and unflavoured e-liquids have different effects on cigarette cravings after 1 week of use. Further research is needed to establish if differences emerge over longer periods of exposure and extend to smoking cessation outcomes.

Reciprocal influences of tobacco use on illicit opioid and alcohol use during the first six-months of specialist addiction treatment.

BACKGROUND: This is the first national study of lagged reciprocal associations between tobacco smoking frequency and change in illicit opioid or alcohol use frequency within six-months of treatment. METHODS: All adults admitted to publicly-funded specialist addiction treatment in England in 2018/19 and enrolled for at least six months for either opioid use disorder (OUD; n = 22,046; 82.4 % of those eligible) or alcohol use disorder (AUD; n = 15,251; 78.8 % of those eligible). Two cross-lagged panel models estimated, separately for OUD and AUD patients, the relationships between smoking at admission and change in main drug over six months, and between main drug use at admission and change in smoking over six months. RESULTS: Within the OUD cohort, illicit opioid use frequency reduced from 17.7 days to 8.0 days and smoking tobacco remained at 18.8 days. After controlling for available covariates, higher smoking frequency at admission was associated with a relative increase in illicit opioid use at six-months (0.02 days [95 % CI 0.00-0.03]). Within the AUD cohort, alcohol use frequency reduced from 21.2 days to 14.4 days while smoking tobacco reduced from 12.6 days to 11.5 days. Higher smoking frequency at admission was associated with a relative increase in alcohol use at six-months (0.03 days [95 % CI 0.02-0.04]) and higher alcohol use frequency at admission was associated with a relative increase in smoking at six-months (0.04 [95 % CI 0.02-0.06]), controlling for available covariates. CONCLUSIONS: Higher smoking frequency at admission is associated with higher illicit opioid and alcohol use frequency after six-months of specialist addiction treatment.

Prevalence of waterpipe (Shisha, Narghille, Hookah) use among adults in Great Britain and factors associated with waterpipe use: data from cross-sectional Online Surveys in 2012 and 2013.

INTRODUCTION: We assessed the prevalence and frequency of waterpipe smoking among adults (aged 18+ years) in Great Britain (GB) and determined demographic factors associated with use. METHODS: We used cross-sectional representative population surveys conducted online in 2012 and 2013. A total of 12,436 adults in 2012 and 12,171 in 2013 were recruited from a commercial online survey panel. RESULTS: The prevalence of ever use of waterpipe across both survey years combined was 11.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 11.0-12.1). Frequent use (at least once or twice a month) was 1.0% (95% CI = 0.8-1.2) and was similar in both 2012 and 2013. There was some suggestion of increased ever but not frequent use among 18-24-year-olds between survey years. After adjustment for covariates, females had lower odds of ever waterpipe use than males (odds ratio [OR] = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.63-0.79), those in the lowest social grade had lower odds of use compared to those in the highest social grade (OR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.35-0.54), older people were at much lower odds of ever use than younger people, ever having smoked cigarettes increased odds of ever waterpipe use, and being Asian (OR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.39-2.45) or of mixed ethnicity (OR = 2.36, 95% CI = 1.64-3.40) increased likelihood of ever use compared to White ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Frequent waterpipe smoking was relatively rare in these representative samples of the GB adult population, and prevalence was similar between 2012 and 2013. Continued monitoring and targeted interventions are appropriate.