Knowledge, Attitude, Practices, and Preparedness of Dental Professionals in Prescribing Nicotine Replacement Therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the knowledge, practice, attitude, and preparedness of dental professionals in prescribing nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). Methodology. A prevalidated voluntary web-based questionnaire was generated as a link through Google Drive and was sent to 117 dental professionals in North India using Whatsapp, Messenger, and Instagram social media platforms. A total of 94 responses were received and out of which 76 responses were analyzed (18 forms were excluded due to incomplete or duplicate responses). Frequency analysis was done using SPSS software version 21. RESULT: The participation rate was found to be 80.3%. More than half of the study population were familiar with the term NRT (77.6%) and its uses (67.1%), but approximately less than half of the total study subjects knew the duration (32.9%), cost (27.6%), dosage (25%), and contraindications (36.8%) of the NRT. Approximately 56.6% of the study participants showed a positive attitude towards helping patients to quit smoking through tobacco cessation counseling. Nearly one-fourth of the study population, i.e., 27.6%, were confident in explaining the negative impacts of tobacco, while 22.4% knew about the tobacco cessation protocol. Among the participants, only 27.6% reported that they practice NRT and out of which approximately less than 20% of the study participants were prescribing correct dose of NRT. CONCLUSION: Though study subjects had an ample knowledge regarding NRT use in tobacco cessation, it does not reflect their current attitude and preparedness. Thus, there is a need for continuing education to further train dental professionals for prescribing NRT.

Impact of a regional smoking cessation intervention for vascular surgery patients.

OBJECTIVE: Tobacco use is common among vascular surgery patients and negatively impacts outcomes and longevity. In the second quarter of 2018, a statewide vascular quality collaborative launched an initiative across its 35 participating hospitals to promote smoking cessation at the time of surgery. This intervention was based on the Vascular Physician Offer and Report (VAPOR) trial and consisted of 3 components: brief physician-delivered advice, referral to telephone-based counseling, and nicotine replacement therapy. The goal of this study is to evaluate the results of this intervention. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients undergoing vascular surgery between 2018 and 2020. Procedures included open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, endovascular aneurysm repair, open vascular bypass, open thrombectomy, carotid endarterectomy, and carotid stenting. The primary explanatory variables were receipt of tobacco cessation interventions as documented in the medical record. The primary outcome was tobacco cessation, captured during 30-day and 1-year chart review and/or patient follow-up. A multivariable logistic regression model was calculated to estimate the association of covariates with smoking cessation while adjusting for patient and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 13,890 patients underwent surgery during the study period. The mean age was 69.4 ± 10 years; 4687 patients (34%) were female, and 5158 patients (37%) were current smokers. At least one smoking cessation component was delivered to 2245 patients (44% of smokers). The quit rate was 35% among 4671 patients with 30-day follow-up and 43% among 2936 patients with 1-year follow up. On multivariable regression, at 30 days, receiving two intervention components was associated with 1.29 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-1.55) higher odds of quitting. At both time points, smoking cessation was also associated with undergoing an emergent procedure (30-day odds ratio [OR], 1.52; 95% CI, 1.16-1.99; 1-year OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.01-1.97) and undergoing open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (30-day OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.20-2.43; 1-year OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.11-2.78). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of vascular surgical patients where tobacco use was common, nearly one-half of patients quit smoking 1 year after surgery. Receiving two smoking cessation intervention components was associated with quitting at 30 days. Overall, these results demonstrate encouraging quit rates and identify an opportunity for longer-term intervention to maintain even greater 1-year tobacco cessation.

Encuesta sobre conocimiento en cigarrillo electrónico y nuevos productos de consumo de nicotina en el personal sanitario / Survey on knowledge of electronic cigarettes and new nicotine consumer products among health personnel

Introducción.La irrupción de los cigarrillos electrónicos (e-cig) y nuevos productos de consumo de tabaco ha supuesto un desfase en el conocimiento del tabaquismo entre el personal sanitario. Los escasos estudios sobre su eficacia y la intromisión de la industria tabaquera no ayudan a dirimir la controversiaexistente entre su uso como ayuda para la cesación/reducción de daños frente a su asimilación al resto de labores del tabaco. Sujetos y métodos: Se realiza una encuesta dirigida a personal sanitario a nivel de toda España tratando de constatar el conocimiento sobre los e-cig, sus potenciales daños, empleo en la clínica, papel de la industria y legislación actual en España. Para ello, a través de un entorno online, se distribuye un cuestionario a responder entre los días 12 y 26 de agosto de 2019. Resultados: Se reciben 266 encuestas, la mayoría de mujeres (3:1), médicas (73,3 %) y con 11 años o más de experiencia (54,5%). Un 30,5% no conoce ningún tipo de e-cig y el 78,6 % no se siente capacitado ni para informar ni para tratar a los consumidores. Ven riesgos de cronificar la cesación (77,8%) y normalizarel consumo de nicotina en lugares ya libres de humo (62,8%), aunque hasta el 44% cree que pueden tenerun papel como herramienta de cesación en determinados pacientes, siendo asumida la ausencia de estudios que los avalen (38,3%). El 62% ve una actitud engañosa de las tabaqueras y el 51,9% en su regulación como productos de consumo sin existir una legislaciónespecífica. Comparadas las respuestas entre profesionales médicos y no médicos, por años de experiencia ygrupos de edad, destacan diferencias estadísticamente significativas (p < 0,05) en la percepción de daños,el papel de las tabaqueras y en el conocimiento más específico de los dispositivos entre el personal másjoven y/o con menos años de experiencia. (AU)

Introduction: The appearance of electronic cigarettes (E-cig) and new products of use of tobacco have entailed a lag in the knowledge of smoking habit among health care personnel. The scarce studies on its efficacy and the meddling of the tobacco industry have not helped to solve the controversy existing between its use as an aid for smoking cessation/reduction of harm against its assimilation to the remaining tobacco products.Subjects and methods: A survey addressed to the health care personnel in Spain was carried out. It aimed to determine the knowledge on the E-cig, their potential harm, use in the clinical practice, role of the industry and current legislation in Spain. To do so, a questionnaire to be answered was distributed onlinebetween 12 and 26 of August 2019. Results: A total of 266 surveys were received, most of which were from women (3:1), doctors (73.3%) and with 11 years of more of experience (54.5%). Of these, 30.5 % did not know any type of E-cig and 78.6 % did not feel qualified to inform or to treat the users. They see risks of the smoking cessation becoming chronic (77.8%) and making the use of nicotine normal in sites that are already smoke free (62.8%), although up to 44% believe that they canhave a role as a tool to quit smoking in some patients, the absence of studies that support being assumed (38.3%). 62% consider that the tobacco companies have a misleading attitude and 51.9% in their regulation as products of use without the existence of specific legislation. When comparing the answersbetween the medical and non-medical professionals, there are statistically significant differences by years of experience and age groups (p < 0.05) in the perception of harm, the role of the tobacco companies and in the most specific knowledge of the devices among the younger personnel and/or those with fewer years of experience. (AU)

Incidence of Cigarette Smoking Relapse Among Individuals Who Switched to e-Cigarettes or Other Tobacco Products.

Importance: Although e-cigarettes are not approved as a cessation device, many who smoke believe that e-cigarettes will help them quit cigarette smoking successfully. Objective: To assess whether people who recently quit smoking and who had switched to e-cigarettes or another tobacco product were less likely to relapse to cigarette smoking compared with those who remained tobacco free. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed a nationally representative sample of US households that participated in 4 waves of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study (conducted 2013 through 2017), combining 2 independent cohorts each with 3 annual surveys. Eligible participants were individuals who smoked at baseline, had recently quit at the first follow-up, and completed the second follow-up survey. Exposures: Use of e-cigarettes or alternate tobacco products at follow-up 1 after recently quitting smoking. Main Outcomes and Measures: Weighted percentage of participants with over 12 months abstinence by follow-up 2. Results: Of a total of 13 604 participants who smoked cigarettes at baseline, 9.4% (95% CI, 8.7%-10.0%) recently had quit smoking (mean age, 41.9; 95% CI, 39.7-46.6 years; 641 [43.2%] women) Of these, 22.8% (95% CI, 19.7%-26.0%) had switched to e-cigarettes, with 17.6% (95% CI, 14.8%-20.5%) using them daily. A total of 37.1% (95% CI, 33.7%-40.4%) used a noncigarette tobacco product and 62.9% (95% CI, 59.6%-66.3%) were tobacco free. Rates of switching to e-cigarettes were highest for those who were in the top tertile of tobacco dependence (31.3%; 95% CI, 25.0%-37.7%), were non-Hispanic White (26.4%; 95% CI, 22.3%-30.4%), and had higher incomes (annual income ≥$35 000, 27.5%; 95% CI, 22.5%-32.4% vs <$35 000, 19.3%; 95% CI, 16.3%-22.3%). At follow-up 2, unadjusted relapse rates were similar among those who switched to different tobacco products (for any tobacco product: successfully quit, 41.5%; 95% CI, 36.2%-46.9%; relapsed with significant requit, 17.0%; 95% CI, 12.4%-21.6%; currently smoking, 36.2%; 95% CI, 30.9%-41.4%). Controlled for potential confounders, switching to any tobacco product was associated with higher relapse rate than being tobacco free (adjusted risk difference, 8.5%; 95% CI, 0.3%-16.6%). Estimates for those who switched to e-cigarettes, whether daily or not, were not significant. While individuals who switched from cigarettes to e-cigarettes were more likely to relapse, they appeared more likely to requit and be abstinent for 3 months at follow-up 2 (17.0%; 95% CI, 12.4%-21.6% vs 10.4%; 95% CI, 8.0%-12.9%). Conclusions and Relevance: This large US nationally representative study does not support the hypothesis that switching to e-cigarettes will prevent relapse to cigarette smoking.

Evaluation of a national smoke-free prisons policy using medication dispensing: an interrupted time-series analysis.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, smoking prevalence among people in prison custody (ie, people on remand awaiting trial, awaiting sentencing, or serving a custodial sentence) is high. In Scotland, all prisons implemented a comprehensive smoke-free policy in 2018 after a 16-month anticipatory period. In this study, we aimed to use data on medication dispensing to assess the impact of this policy on cessation support, health outcomes, and potential unintended consequences among people in prison custody. METHODS: We did an interrupted time-series analysis using dispensing data for 44 660 individuals incarcerated in 14 closed prisons in Scotland between March 30, 2014, and Nov 30, 2019. We estimated changes in dispensing rates associated with the policy announcement (July 17, 2017) and full implementation (Nov 30, 2018) using seasonal autoregressive integrated moving average models. Medication categories of primary interest were treatments for nicotine dependence (as an indicator of smoking cessation or abstinence attempts), acute smoking-associated illnesses, and mental health (antidepressants). We included antiepileptic medications as a negative control. FINDINGS: A 44% step increase in dispensing of treatments for nicotine dependence was observed at implementation (2250 items per 1000 people in custody per fortnight, 95% CI 1875 to 2624) due primarily to a 42% increase in dispensing of nicotine replacement therapy (2109 items per 1000 people in custody per fortnight, 1701 to 2516). A 9% step decrease in dispensing for smoking-related illnesses was observed at implementation, largely accounted for by respiratory medications (-646 items per 1000 people in custody per fortnight, -1111 to -181). No changes associated with announcement or implementation were observed for mental health dispensing or antiepileptic medications (control). INTERPRETATION: Smoke-free prison policies might improve respiratory health among people in custody and encourage smoking abstinence or cessation without apparent short-term adverse effects on mental health dispensing. FUNDING: National Institute of Health Research Public Health Research programme, Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office, and UK Medical Research Council.

Potential benefits and hazards associated with the use of e-cigarettes - a guide for practitioners and current status in Poland.

The use of electronic cigarettes has dynamically increased over the last few years. Meanwhile, the knowledge regarding their safety has been rapidly changing, which could be a challenge for a medical practitioner. The purpose of this review is to summarize the latest reports and to verify statements on e-cigarettes' influence on health, including in the context of the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Awareness of the benefits of e-cigarettes can provide vital support for doctors caring for patients who smoke tra-ditional cigarettes. Nevertheless, attention should be paid to the dangers of the medically unjustified use of electronic cigarettes. Despite the idea of releasing e-cigarettes into the market as a harmless alternative to traditional cigarettes, this product also has a negative impact on health. Replacing traditional cigarettes with e-cigarettes provides well-documented benefits to patients with certain indications such as hypertension and asthma, as well as to smokers who intend to minimize the negative effects of passive smoking on their environment. Moreover, it could be valuable for patients who are willing to permanently overcome a nicotine addiction, especially when previous attempts to quit smoking with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) monotherapy were unsuccessful. Electronic cigarettes are a rapidly developing technology and an innovative form of a well-known addiction, so it is essential for practitioners to stay informed.

Experiences With Smoking Cessation Attempts and Prior Use of Cessation Aids in Smokers With HIV: Findings From a Focus Group Study Conducted in Durham, North Carolina.

Cigarette smoking remains disproportionately prevalent and is increasingly a cause of death and disability among people with HIV (PWH). Many PWH are interested in quitting, but interest in and uptake of first-line smoking cessation pharmacotherapies are varied in this population. To provide current data regarding experiences with and perceptions of smoking cessation and cessation aids among PWH living in Durham, North Carolina, the authors conducted five focus group interviews (total n = 24; 96% African American) using semistructured interviews. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, coded, and thematically analyzed. Major themes included ambivalence and/or lack of interest in cessation; presence of cessation barriers; perceived perceptions of ineffectiveness of cessation aids; perceived medication side effects; and conflation of the harms resulting from use of tobacco products and nicotine replacement therapy. Innovative and effective interventions must account for the aforementioned multiple barriers to cessation as well as prior experiences with and misperceptions regarding cessation aids.

Receipt of and Spending on Cessation Medication Among US Adults With Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance, 2010 and 2017.

OBJECTIVE: Studies examining the use of smoking cessation treatment and related spending among enrollees with employer-sponsored health insurance are dated and limited in scope. We assessed changes in annual receipt of and spending on cessation medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) among tobacco users with employer-sponsored health insurance from 2010 to 2017. METHODS: We analyzed data on 439 865 adult tobacco users in 2010 and 344 567 adult tobacco users in 2017 from the IBM MarketScan Commercial Database. We used a negative binomial regression to estimate changes in receipt of cessation medication (number of fills and refills and days of supply). We used a generalized linear model to estimate spending (total, employers', and out of pocket). In both models, covariates included year, age, sex, residence, and type of health insurance plan. RESULTS: From 2010 to 2017, the percentage of adult tobacco users with employer-sponsored health insurance who received any cessation medication increased by 2.4%, from 15.7% to 16.1% (P < .001). Annual average number of fills and refills per user increased by 15.1%, from 2.5 to 2.9 (P < .001) and days of supply increased by 26.4%, from 81.9 to 103.5 (P < .001). The total annual average spending per user increased by 53.6%, from $286.40 to $440.00 (P < .001). Annual average out-of-pocket spending per user decreased by 70.9%, from $70.80 to $20.60 (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Use of smoking cessation medications is low among smokers covered by employer-sponsored health insurance. Opportunities exist to further increase the use of cessation medications by promoting the use of evidence-based cessation treatments and reducing barriers to coverage, including out-of-pocket costs.

Characterization of the Abuse Potential in Adult Smokers of a Novel Oral Tobacco Product Relative to Combustible Cigarettes and Nicotine Polacrilex Gum.

Novel noncombustible tobacco products offer adult smokers (ASs) alternatives to combustible cigarettes lower on the continuum of risk; however, the abuse potential of such products has not been well studied. The objective of this study was to evaluate the abuse potential of 2 chewable tobacco-derived nicotine containing products, VERVE Chews Blue Mint (test 1) and Green Mint (test 2), in ASs compared with own-brand cigarettes (CIGS) and nicotine polacrilex gum (GUM) using subjective measures and nicotine pharmacokinetics. ASs used the test products during a 5-day at-home trial prior to completing an in-clinic 4-period randomized crossover study. During the study ASs used test products, CIGS, and GUM once on separate days. Responses to Tobacco/Nicotine Withdrawal and Direct Effects of Product questionnaires were documented, and blood samples were collected to assess nicotine pharmacokinetics during each product use. Nicotine pharmacokinetic parameters (Cmax and AUC) were statistically significantly lower with use of test products compared with CIGS and statistically significantly higher compared with GUM. No appreciable differences were noted between the 2 flavors for any of the end points measured. Reductions in maximum urge to smoke and maximum responses to the question "Is the Product 'Pleasant' Right Now?" for the test products were statistically significantly lower than CIGS but comparable to GUM. Similar results were observed for responses to other items in the 2 questionnaires. The test products, under the conditions of this study, carry lower abuse potential than own-brand cigarettes and similar to nicotine polacrilex gum.

Effectiveness of Electronic Cigarettes in Smoking Cessation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Reports of the effectiveness of e-cigarettes (ECs) for smoking cessation vary across different studies making implementation recommendations hard to attain. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the current evidence regarding effectiveness of ECs for smoking cessation. METHODS: PubMed, PsycInfo, and Embase databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing nicotine ECs with non-nicotine ECs or with established smoking cessation interventions (nicotine replacement therapy [NRT] and or counseling) published between 1 January 2014 and 27 June 2020. Data from eligible studies were extracted and used for random-effects meta-analyses (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019141414). RESULTS: The search yielded 13 950 publications with 12 studies being identified as eligible for systematic review (N = 8362) and 9 studies for random-effects meta-analyses (range: 30-6006 participants). The proportion of smokers achieving abstinence was 1.71 (95 CI: 1.02-2.84) times higher in nicotine EC users compared with non-nicotine EC users. The proportion of abstinent smokers was 1.69 (95 CI: 1.25-2.27) times higher in EC users compared with participants receiving NRT. EC users showed a 2.04 (95 CI: 0.90-4.64) times higher proportion of abstinent smokers in comparison with participants solely receiving counseling. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that nicotine ECs may be more effective in smoking cessation when compared with placebo ECs or NRT. When compared with counseling alone, nicotine ECs are more effective short term, but its effectiveness appears to diminish with later follow-ups. Given the small number of studies, heterogeneous design, and the overall moderate to low quality of evidence, it is not possible to offer clear recommendations. IMPLICATIONS: The results of this study do not allow for a conclusive argument. However, pooling current evidence points toward a potential for ECs as a smoking cessation tool. Though, given the overall quality of evidence, future studies should aim for more clarity in terms of interventions and larger study populations.

An international survey: Tobacco smoking cessation strategies within left ventricular assist device centers.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco smoking is a significant source of morbidity in patients with a durable left ventricular assist device. While various cessation strategies have been investigated, the ability of ventricular assist device centers to implement a successful tobacco cessation program remains uncertain. We explored various cessation strategies employed by ventricular assist device centers and assessed perspectives of their effectiveness, as well as institutional investment in these programs. METHODS: A 37-question online self-report survey was created using Survey Monkey® and distributed worldwide. We investigated (1) programmatic strategies utilized for smoking cessation, (2) the respondent's perspective on the effectiveness of these strategies, (3) the structure with which these therapies are administered, and (4) overall organizational support for these treatments. RESULTS: A total of 47 centers worldwide completed the survey. The most common methods of tobacco cessation were pharmacologic and nicotine replacement therapy (78% and 66%). However, only about half (47% and 50%, respectively) of the centers indicated that these strategies were effective. When asked whether a respondent's center perceives that tobacco smoking should be a deciding factor in destination therapy evaluations, nearly a third (15, 32%) responded in the affirmative. CONCLUSION: While significant overlap exists among centers regarding treatments used for smoking cessation with left ventricular assist device patients, the most common treatments are not thought to be effective. While the current recommendations require tobacco smoking cessation in only bridge-to-transplant patients and not destination therapy patients, a number of centers disagree with the national guidelines and believe smoking should be prohibited in both populations.

How Financial Incentives Increase Smoking Cessation: A Two-Level Path Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Financial incentives effectively increase smoking cessation rates, but it is unclear via which psychological mechanisms incentives influence quit behavior. The current study examines how receiving financial incentives for smoking cessation leads to quitting smoking and investigates several mediators and moderators of that relationship. AIMS AND METHODS: The study sample consisted of 604 tobacco-smoking employees from 61 companies in the Netherlands who completed a baseline and follow-up questionnaire. The current study is a secondary analysis from a cluster randomized trial where employees received smoking cessation group counseling at the workplace. Participants in the intervention group additionally received financial incentives of €350 in total for 12-month continuous smoking abstinence. We used a two-level path analysis to test a model that assesses the effects of financial incentives through smoking cessation program evaluation, medication use, nicotine replacement use, attitudes, self-efficacy, and social influences on quit success. We additionally tested whether an individual's reward responsiveness moderated the influence of incentives on quit success. RESULTS: The effect of financial incentives on quit success was mediated by a higher self-efficacy. Financial incentives were also associated with a higher use of cessation medication. A more positive program evaluation was related to higher self-efficacy, more social influence to quit, and more positive attitudes about quitting. The results did not differ significantly by individual reward responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the current study suggest that financial incentives may be used to increase medication use and self-efficacy for quitting smoking, which offers an indirect way to increase successful smoking cessation. IMPLICATIONS: (1) This is the first study investigating via which psychological pathways financial incentives for quitting smoking can lead to long-term quit success. (2) The results showed a path between financial incentives and a higher likelihood of medication use. Incentives may encourage smokers to use medication in order to increase their chance of quitting smoking and receive the reward. (3) There was a path from financial incentives to quit success via a higher self-efficacy. (4) The effects of financial incentives did not depend on individual reward responsiveness.

Association of the COVID-19 lockdown with smoking, drinking and attempts to quit in England: an analysis of 2019-20 data.

AIM: To examine changes in smoking, drinking and quitting/reduction behaviour following the COVID-19 lockdown in England. DESIGN/SETTING: Monthly cross-sectional surveys representative of the adult population in England, aggregated before (April 2019-February 2020) versus after (April 2020) lockdown. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 20 558 adults (≥ 16 years). MEASUREMENTS: The independent variable was the timing of the COVID-19 lockdown (before versus after March 2020). Dependent variables were: prevalence of smoking and high-risk drinking, past-year cessation and quit attempts (among past-year smokers), past-year attempts to reduce alcohol consumption (among high-risk drinkers) and use of evidence-based (e.g. prescription medication/face-to-face behavioural support) and remote support [telephone support/websites/applications (apps)] for smoking cessation and alcohol reduction (among smokers/high-risk drinkers who made a quit/reduction attempt). Covariates included age, sex, social grade, region and level of nicotine and alcohol dependence (as relevant). FINDINGS: The COVID-19 lockdown was not associated with a significant change in smoking prevalence [17.0% (after) versus 15.9% (before), odds ratio (OR) = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.95-1.24], but was associated with increases in quit attempts [39.6 versus 29.1%, adjusted odds ratio (ORadj ) = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.23-1.98], quit success (21.3 versus 13.9%, ORadj  = 2.01, 95% CI = 1.22-3.33) and cessation (8.8 versus 4.1%, ORadj  = 2.63, 95% CI = 1.69-4.09) among past-year smokers. Among smokers who tried to quit, there was no significant change in use of evidence-based support (50.0 versus 51.5%, ORadj  = 1.10, 95% CI = 0.72-1.68) but use of remote support increased (10.9 versus 2.7%, ORadj  = 3.59, 95% CI = 1.56-8.23). Lockdown was associated with increases in high-risk drinking (38.3 versus 25.1%, OR = 1.85, CI = 1.67-2.06), but also alcohol reduction attempts by high-risk drinkers (28.5 versus 15.3%, ORadj  = 2.16, 95% CI = 1.77-2.64). Among high-risk drinkers who made a reduction attempt, use of evidence-based support decreased (1.2 versus 4.0%, ORadj  = 0.23, 95% CI = 0.05-0.97) and there was no significant change in use of remote support (6.9 versus 6.1%, ORadj  = 1.32, 95% CI = 0.64-2.75). CONCLUSIONS: Following the March 2020 COVID-19 lockdown, smokers and high-risk drinkers in England were more likely than before lockdown to report trying to quit smoking or reduce alcohol consumption and rates of smoking cessation and use of remote cessation support were higher. However, high-risk drinking prevalence increased post-lockdown and use of evidence-based support for alcohol reduction by high-risk drinkers decreased with no compensatory increase in use of remote support.

American Indian/Alaska Native Smokers' Utilization of a Statewide Tobacco Quitline: Engagement and Quitting Behaviors From 2008 to 2018.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to examine access, engagement, and quitting behaviors of American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN) callers to the California Smokers' Helpline. Telephone counseling is the primary function of the quitline. The overarching theoretical framework for California's quitline is social cognitive theory, although it also utilizes motivational interviewing and cognitive-behavioral strategies. AIMS AND METHODS: AIAN (n = 16 089) and White (n = 173 425) California quitline callers from 2009 to 2018 were compared on their characteristics, engagement, and quitting behaviors. Quitline callers responded to a telephone survey at intake. A random selection was called for evaluation 7 months later (White n = 8194, AIAN n = 764). Data from the 2009 to 2017 California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) were used as a reference point for AIANs (AIAN n = 1373). RESULTS: The quitline and CHIS had similar proportions of AIANs (4.6% vs. 4.3%, respectively). AIAN smokers were more likely than White smokers to report physical (53.6% vs. 44.9%) and mental (65.7% vs. 57.8%) health conditions at intake. AIANs were more likely to participate in counseling than White callers (67.1% vs. 65.7%). Among those who received counseling, AIANs had greater odds than White smokers of making a quit attempt (adjusted odds ratio = 1.39 [1.06, 1.81]) and similar odds of quitting for 180 days (adjusted odds ratio = 0.95 [0.69, 1.31]). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of access, engagement, and quitting suggest that individualized quitline counseling was as effective with AIANs as it was with White smokers. Increasing efforts to refer AIANs to existing state quitlines can help more smokers quit. IMPLICATIONS: This study showed that AIAN smokers were well represented among California quitline callers, even without a targeted campaign. It also found that AIAN smokers engaged in quitline services and were as able to quit as their White counterparts were, even after adjusting for other baseline characteristics. One implication is that public health programs can promote quitlines using broad-based campaigns knowing that they will still motivate AIAN smokers to seek help. Another implication is that a standard, individualized counseling protocol delivered by culturally competent quitline staff can effectively help AIAN smokers to quit.

Comparison between success rates for smokers re-treated by a smokers' clinic and success rates for smokers treated for the first time.

AIMS: To compare success rates and characteristics of smokers treated a second time by a smokers' clinic with success rates of their first treatment. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Tobacco Dependence Treatment clinic in Prague, Czech Republic, between 2005 and 2017. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 5225 smokers treated either once (n = 5006, single treatment sample, SS) or also second time (n = 219, re-treated sample, RS), on average 4.47 years after the first visit. INTERVENTION: Smokers received intensive treatment of tobacco dependence with pharmacotherapy options. Outcomes were evaluated after 1 year. In case of failure or relapse, participants could undergo re-treatment in the same setting at least 1 year after the start of the first treatment. MEASUREMENTS: Twelve-month self-reported continuous abstinence; CO-validated (≤ 6 parts per million); number of visits; type of pharmacotherapy; mental health history; Fagerström Test for Cigarette Dependence; time between first and second treatment. RESULTS: The abstinence rate in the SS was 34.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 33.4%, 36.1%] and in the RS was 37% (95% CI = 30.6%, 43.8%) and 39.7% (95% CI = 33.2%, 45.5%) for their first and second treatments, respectively. The samples were comparable on smoking and socio-demographic characteristics and pharmacotherapy used, but the RS in the second treatment had a higher prevalence of diagnosed mental health disorder at 39.3% (95% CI = 32.8%; 46.1%) compared with 23.7% (95% CI = 22.5%; 24.9%) in the SS. Participants who initiated their second quit attempt 1 to 2 years after the first one were less successful than those who initiated their second quit attempt later (25 versus 43%; P < 0.05). The results of the first treatment cycle were not found to be a reliable predictor for outcomes of the second cycle of treatment in univariate or multivariate logistic regression (odds ratio = 1.35, 95% CI = 0.70-2.63, P = 0.373). CONCLUSION: In Prague, Czech Republic, smokers re-attending stop-smoking treatment more than 2 years after their previous quit attempt appear to achieve similar success rates to those being treated for the first time.

Comparative Safety of Smoking Cessation Pharmacotherapies During a Government-Sponsored Reimbursement Program.

INTRODUCTION: The British Columbia Ministry of Health launched a Smoking Cessation Program on September 30, 2011, providing financial coverage for smoking cessation pharmacotherapies. Although pharmacotherapies have been shown to have a moderate short-term benefit as a quitting aid, substantial cardiovascular and neuropsychiatric safety concerns have been identified in adverse-reporting databases, leading to prescription label warnings by Health Canada and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. However, recent studies indicate these warnings may be without merit. This study examined the comparative safety of medications commonly used to aid smoking cessation. AIMS AND METHODS: Population-based retrospective cohort study using B.C. administrative data to assess the relative safety between varenicline, bupropion, and nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular hospitalizations. Secondary outcomes included mortality, a composite of neuropsychiatric hospitalizations, and individual components of the primary outcome. Statistical analysis used propensity score-adjusted log-binomial regression models. A sensitivity analysis excluded patients with a history of cardiovascular disease. RESULTS: The study included 116 442 participants. Compared with NRT, varenicline was associated with a 10% 1-year relative risk decrease of cardiovascular hospitalization (adjusted risk ratio [RR] = 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.82 to 1.00), a 20% 1-year relative risk decrease of neuropsychiatric hospitalization (RR: 0.80, CI: 0.7 to 0.89), and a 19% 1-year relative risk decrease of mortality (RR: 0.81, CI: 0.71 to 0.93). We found no significant association between NRT and bupropion for cardiovascular hospitalizations, neuropsychiatric hospitalizations, or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with NRT, varenicline is associated with fewer serious adverse events and bupropion the same number of serious adverse events. IMPLICATIONS: This study addresses the need for comparative safety evidence in a real-world setting of varenicline and bupropion against an active comparator. Compared with NRT, varenicline was associated with a decreased risk of mortality, serious cardiovascular events, and neuropsychiatric events during the treatment, or shortly after the treatment, in the general population of adults seeking pharmacotherapy to aid smoking cessation. These results provide support for the removal of the varenicline boxed warning for neuropsychiatric events and add substantively to the cardiovascular safety findings of previous observational studies and randomized clinical trials.

QuitNic: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Nicotine Vaping Products With Nicotine Replacement Therapy for Smoking Cessation Following Residential Detoxification.

INTRODUCTION: The QuitNic pilot trial aimed to test the feasibility of providing a nicotine vaping product (NVP) compared with combination nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) to smokers upon discharge from a smoke-free residential substance use disorder (SUD) treatment service. METHODS: QuitNic was a pragmatic two-arm randomized controlled trial. At discharge from residential withdrawal, 100 clients received telephone Quitline behavioral support and either 12-week supply of NRT or an NVP. Treatment adherence and acceptability, self-reported abstinence, cigarettes smoked per day (CPD), frequency of cravings, and severity of withdrawal symptoms were assessed at 6 and 12 weeks. Results are reported for complete cases and for abstinence outcomes, penalized imputation results are reported where missing is assumed smoking. RESULTS: Retention on was 63% at 6 weeks and 50% at 12 weeks. At 12 weeks, 68% of the NRT group reported using combination NRT while 96% of the NVP group used the device. Acceptability ratings for the products were high in both groups. At 12 weeks, 14% of the NVP group and 18% of the NRT group reported not smoking at all in the last 7 days. Mean CPD among continued smokers decreased significantly between baseline to 12 weeks in both groups; from 19.91 to 4.72 for the NVP group (p < .001) and from 20.88 to 5.52 in the NRT group (p < .001). Cravings and withdrawal symptoms significantly decreased for both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Clients completing residential withdrawal readily engaged with smoking cessation post-treatment when given the opportunity. Further research is required to identify the most effective treatments postwithdrawal for this population at elevated risk of tobacco-related harm. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12617000849392. IMPLICATIONS: This pilot study showed that smoking cessation support involving options for nicotine replacement and Quitline-delivered cognitive behavioral counseling is attractive to people after they have been discharged from SUD treatment. Both nicotine vaping products and nicotine replacement therapies were highly acceptable and used by participants who reported reductions in cravings for cigarettes and perceptions of withdrawal symptoms and reductions in number of cigarettes smoked. Some participants self-reported abstinence from cigarettes-around one in five reported having quit smoking cigarettes at 12 weeks postdischarge. The results have significant public health implications for providing quit support following discharge from SUD treatment.

Nicotine replacement treatment, e-cigarettes and an online behavioural intervention to reduce relapse in recent ex-smokers: a multinational four-arm RCT.

BACKGROUND: Relapse remains an unresolved issue in smoking cessation. Extended stop smoking medication use can help, but uptake is low and several behavioural relapse prevention interventions have been found to be ineffective. However, opportunistic 'emergency' use of fast-acting nicotine replacement treatment or electronic cigarettes may be more attractive and effective, and an online behavioural Structured Planning and Prompting Protocol has shown promise. The present trial aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these two interventions. DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial. SETTING: English stop smoking services and Australian quitlines, Australian social media and St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Fitzroy, VIC. PARTICIPANTS: Ex-smokers abstinent for at least 4 weeks, with some participants in Australia also recruited from 1 week post quit date. The planned sample size was 1400, but the trial was curtailed when 235 participants were recruited. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised in permuted blocks of random sizes to (1) oral nicotine replacement treatment/electronic cigarettes to use if at risk of relapse, plus static text messages (n = 60), (2) the Structured Planning and Prompting Protocol and interactive text messages (n = 57), (3) oral nicotine replacement treatment/electronic cigarettes plus the Structured Planning and Prompting Protocol with interactive text messages (n = 58) or (4) usual care plus static text messages (n = 59). OUTCOME MEASURES: Owing to delays in study set-up and recruitment issues, the study was curtailed and the primary outcome was revised. The original objective was to determine whether or not the two interventions, together or separately, reduced relapse rates at 12 months compared with usual care. The revised primary objective was to determine whether or not number of interventions received (i.e. none, one or two) affects relapse rate at 6 months (not biochemically validated because of study curtailment). Relapse was defined as smoking on at least 7 consecutive days, or any smoking in the last month at final follow-up for both the original and curtailed outcomes. Participants with missing outcome data were included as smokers. Secondary outcomes included sustained abstinence (i.e. no more than five cigarettes smoked over the 6 months), nicotine product preferences (e.g. electronic cigarettes or nicotine replacement treatment) and Structured Planning and Prompting Protocol coping strategies used. Two substudies assessed reactions to interventions quantitatively and qualitatively. The trial statistician remained blinded until analysis was complete. RESULTS: The 6-month relapse rates were 60.0%, 43.5% and 49.2% in the usual-care arm, one-intervention arm and the two-intervention arm, respectively (p = 0.11). Sustained abstinence rates were 41.7%, 54.8% and 50.9%, respectively (p = 0.17). Electronic cigarettes were chosen more frequently than nicotine replacement treatment in Australia (71.1% vs. 29.0%; p = 0.001), but not in England (54.0% vs. 46.0%; p = 0.57). Of participants allocated to nicotine products, 23.1% were using them daily at 6 months. The online intervention received positive ratings from 63% of participants at 6 months, but the majority of participants (72%) completed one assessment only. Coping strategies taught in the Structured Planning and Prompting Protocol were used with similar frequency in all study arms, suggesting that these are strategies people had already acquired. Only one participant used the interactive texting, and interactive and static messages received virtually identical ratings. LIMITATIONS: The inability to recruit sufficient participants resulted in a lack of power to detect clinically relevant differences. Self-reported abstinence was not biochemically validated in the curtailed trial, and the ecological momentary assessment substudy was perceived by some as an intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Recruiting recent ex-smokers into an interventional study proved problematic. Both interventions were well received and safe. Combining the interventions did not surpass the effects of each intervention alone. There was a trend in favour of single interventions reducing relapse, but it did not reach significance and there are reasons to interpret the trend with caution. FUTURE WORK: Further studies of both interventions are warranted, using simpler study designs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN11111428. 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. 24, No. 68. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Funding was also provided by the National Health and Medical Research Council, Canberra, ACT, Australia (NHMRC APP1095880). Public Health England provided the funds to purchase the nicotine products in England.

Stop smoking services help people to stop smoking over a short period of time. However, nearly three-quarters of quitters return to smoking (i.e. relapse) within 1 year. Effective relapse prevention strategies are needed. Traditional behavioural relapse prevention strategies (e.g. teaching techniques to resist having a cigarette) have not proved effective. However, an earlier study showed that an online programme guiding smokers in stopping smoking and remaining abstinent reduced relapse between 1 week and 6 months. Long-term use of stop smoking medications (e.g. nicotine replacement treatment) can also help, but most successful quitters do not continue to use them. Nicotine mouth spray, lozenges or electronic cigarettes that can quickly help relieve urges to smoke and that ex-smokers can use 'in emergencies' could be a more attractive option. We planned to test these two interventions, on their own and together, in 1400 participants who had quit ≥ 4 weeks previously and who were recruited from English stop smoking services and Australian quitlines. We would then compare these participants with the participants following usual care (i.e. access to stop smoking medications used during the quit attempt for up to 3 months). Owing to delays in study set-up and difficulties in recruiting, the study recruited only 234 participants (n = 131 in Australia and n = 103 in England). We studied participants' reactions to the two interventions and to their combination, and how clinically effective the interventions were. Both interventions were rated positively by most participants. Among the participants in Australia, electronic cigarettes were more popular than medical nicotine products. In England, both products were equally popular. Participants in the online intervention group appreciated the advice on coping strategies, but they rarely completed repeat assessments. In addition, participants who were not in this group used the strategies just as much. There were hints that the interventions may be helpful in preventing relapse. There is an indication that the two interventions combined did not do any better than each on its own, but this requires replication in a larger study. Although the interventions show promise, the small number of participants recruited means that we are unable to make strong conclusions. The study identified areas for future work.

Preparedness of primary health care providers for tobacco cessation - Experiences from a non-communicable disease training program.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco use can lead to tobacco/nicotine dependence and serious health problems. Quitting smoking significantly reduces the risk of developing smoking-related diseases. In a low resource setting like India, the role of primary healthcare providers in tobacco cessation is immense. The current study was conducted with the objective of evaluating the preparedness, knowledge and attitude of the primary healthcare providers in tobacco cessation. METHODS: A cross-sectional study involving 289 trainees taking part in a non-communicable disease training in the calendar year 2015, held at All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Bhopal were interviewed with a close-ended questionnaire on the demographic profile of participants, their preparedness, and current knowledge and attitude related with tobacco cessation activities. RESULTS: Among the 289 trainees, majority of the study participants were staff nurses (54.7%) and medical officers (41.2%) with a mean (± Standard Deviation, range) age of 35 (±10, 22-63) years predominantly from district and sub-district hospitals (52.9%). In total, 86.9% counsel their patients regarding tobacco cessation and 13.1% use nicotine replacement therapy in aiding tobacco cessation. 174 (60.2%) participants received on-job training of various duration on tobacco control, and 96 (33.2%) did not receive any training. Preparedness toward tobacco cessation was present in 15.01% (41) of the study participants. CONCLUSION: The study reveals that the majority of the healthcare providers were not prepared, and only half of the participants had favorable attitudes and practices of delivering tobacco cessation activities.

Comparing the Characteristics of Cigarette Smoking and e-Cigarette and IQOS Use among Adolescents in Taiwan.

Objectives: Our objective in this study was to identify the risk factors for cigarette, e-cigarette, and IQOS use among adolescents in Taiwan, with a particular focus on socioeconomic status, smoking status of parents and peers, cigarette promotions, and anti-tobacco campaigns. Methods: Data were obtained from the 2018 version of the annual cross-sectional Taiwan Global Youth Tobacco Survey, which is used to monitor tobacco use among Taiwanese adolescents in junior and senior high schools. The dependent variables in the study were "current cigarette smoking," "current use of e-cigarettes," and "current use of IQOS devices" (i.e., during the 30 days prior to survey completion). Independent variables included gender, school grade, monthly income/allowance, educational level of parents, smoking status of parents, smoking status of close friends, access to free cigarettes, exposure to cigarette advertisements, and attendance at anti-tobacco courses. Logistic regression was used in the identification of factors correlated with the current use of cigarettes, e-cigarettes, or IQOS. Results: We determined that 5.65% of the adolescents in the study were currently using cigarettes, 2.74% were currently using e-cigarettes, and 2.33% were currently using IQOS. Our analysis revealed a number of factors that have a bearing on smoking behavior, including gender, monthly allowance, educational level of parents, smoking status of parents and close friends, access to free cigarettes, and exposure to cigarette advertisements. Conclusions: The tobacco product that was most widely used by adolescents was cigarettes, followed by e-cigarettes and IQOS. The socioeconomic status, smoking status of parents/close friends, and access to cigarettes were all identified as important factors related to the current use of cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and IQOS by adolescents.