Interventions to Reduce Lung Cancer and COPD-Related Stigma: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Many individuals with lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) experience high levels of stigma, which is associated with psychological distress and delayed help-seeking. PURPOSE: To identify interventions aimed at reducing the stigma of lung cancer or COPD and to synthesize evidence on their efficacy. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted by searching PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, and CINAHL for relevant records until March 1, 2024. Studies were eligible if they described an intervention designed to reduce internalized or external stigma associated with COPD or lung cancer and excluded if they did not report empirical findings. RESULTS: We identified 476 papers, 11 of which were eligible for inclusion. Interventions included educational materials, guided behavior change programs, and psychotherapeutic approaches. Interventions targeted people diagnosed with, or at high risk of developing COPD or lung cancer or clinical staff. No interventions that aimed to reduce stigma associated with lung cancer or COPD in the general community were identified. Most interventions yielded a statistically significant reduction in at least one measure of stigma or a decrease in qualitatively reported stigma. CONCLUSIONS: The emerging literature on interventions to reduce stigma associated with lung cancer and COPD suggests that such interventions can reduce internalized stigma, but larger evaluations using randomized controlled trials are needed. Most studies were in the pilot stage and required further evaluation. Research is needed on campaigns and interventions to reduce stigma at the societal level to reduce exposure to external stigma amongst those with COPD and lung cancer.

Many people with lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease experience stigma, such as negative judgments from others or feelings of guilt or shame. This can lead to feelings of distress and delays in seeking medical support. We reviewed existing studies that evaluated interventions aiming to reduce the stigma associated with these diseases. The results showed that there are programs and strategies that may reduce the stigma that patients with these diseases experience. The most promising programs were psychosocial interventions that included established psychological methods, such as mindfulness-based stress reduction, cognitive behavioral therapy or acceptance and commitment therapy. However, the evidence is limited because of the small number of studies and the lack of randomized trials. Most of the evidence focuses on the individual with the illness, and future research is needed on how to reduce the stigma associated with these illnesses at a community or societal level.

Public Support for Tobacco Endgame Policies: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTIONS: An increasing number of countries are adopting the tobacco endgame goal. High levels of public support can accelerate momentum towards implementing tobacco endgame policies. We aimed to conduct a systematic review of public support for tobacco endgame policies and to examine the geographical distribution of studies, support among key populations (adolescents and young adults, people who smoke), and the association between survey design and support. METHODS: We searched Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for studies published from 2013 onwards. Google was used to search the grey literature. The reference lists of included articles were hand-searched. Studies were included if they reported the proportions of people supporting one or more endgame policies. Risk of bias was assessed using the JBI checklist for prevalence studies. RESULTS: Forty-seven articles were included. Aotearoa/New Zealand and the United States were the countries with the most studies (n=11, respectively). Three-level meta-analyses showed the highest support for mandating a very low nicotine content in tobacco products (76%, 95% CI 61-87%). Meta-regressions were performed to assess the associations of population subgroup and survey design with support levels. The level of support was lower among people who smoke compared to the general population (ß range: -1.59 to -0.51). Support for some policies was lower when neutral or don't know response options were included. CONCLUSIONS: Public support for most tobacco endgame policies was high. IMPLICATIONS: Assessing public support can assist with progressing tobacco endgame policies. Policies that are widely supported by the public may be more politically feasible to implement. Qualitative studies and trial studies can further inform communication and implementation strategies for tobacco endgame policies.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of text messaging interventions to support tobacco cessation.

OBJECTIVE: To review randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effectiveness of text message-based interventions for smoking cessation, including the effects of dose (number of text messages) and concomitant use of behavioural or pharmacological interventions. DATA SOURCES: We searched seven databases (PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science), Google Scholar and the reference lists of relevant publications for RCTs. Eligible studies included participants aged ≥15 years who smoked tobacco at enrolment. STUDY SELECTION: One reviewer screened titles and abstracts and two reviewers independently screened full texts of articles. DATA EXTRACTION: One of three reviewers independently extracted data on study and intervention characteristics and smoking abstinence rates using Qualtrics software. DATA SYNTHESIS: 30 of the 40 included studies reported higher rates of smoking cessation among those receiving text messaging interventions compared with comparators, but only 10 were statistically significant. A meta-analysis of seven RCTs found that participants receiving text messages were significantly more likely to quit smoking compared with participants in no/minimal intervention or 'usual care' conditions (risk ratio 1.87, 95% CI 1.52 to 2.29, p <0.001). Three trials found no benefit from a higher dose of text messages on smoking cessation. Two trials that tested the added benefit of text messaging to pharmacotherapy reported outcomes in favour of adding text messaging. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that text messaging-based interventions are effective at promoting smoking cessation. Further research is required to establish if any additional benefit is gained from an increased number of text messages or concurrent pharmacotherapy or behavioural counselling.

Commercial tobacco endgame themes in the Australian media from 2000 to 2021.

BACKGROUND: Conventional tobacco control is dominated by demand-reduction measures, whereas commercial tobacco endgame (endgame) policies address the key drivers that maintain the tobacco epidemic, such as Tobacco Industry interference in policymaking, the addictiveness of commercial tobacco products and their widespread availability via retail outlets. While Australia has been a pioneer in tobacco control, Australian Governments are yet to commit to endgame policies. The media play an important role reflecting and influencing public opinion and policymaker positions, and can help set the agenda for policy innovation. METHOD: Media articles mentioning tobacco endgame goals and policies published between 2000 and 2021 were identified by searching Factiva and Google (News). We used reflexive thematic analysis (RTA) to identify themes in the articles, supported by content analysis, to describe elements of the data and sentiment analysis to categorise the article sentiment. A deductive-inductive approach was applied in the RTA, coding text from the articles against predefined codes, while also generating new codes where novel themes were identified. Codes were then grouped and summarised. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-three articles were included for analysis. The media discourse focused on three policies: tobacco-free generation; banning or phasing out retail supply of tobacco; and mandating a very low nicotine content standard for cigarettes. A broad range of themes in the articles supported endgame policies, including the large health toll from tobacco, government responsibility to act and the total social costs far outweighing any economic benefit from the tobacco market. Opposing themes included the purported failures of 'prohibition', illicit trade, 'nanny statism' and impact on retail trade. Equity themes were scarce. The benefits of a smoke-free society were described at a societal level, rather than the personal benefits for individuals. CONCLUSION: Media articles on the tobacco endgame in Australia generally contained positive sentiment about endgame policies. When engaging with the media, endgame advocates should be aware of, and ready to counter, opposing themes such as the purported failures of 'prohibition', 'nanny state' rhetoric or a growth in illicit tobacco trade.

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.

Spokespeople in public health: Important characteristics from the perspective of Australian public health professionals.

BACKGROUND: Spokespeople play a significant role in communicating public health information yet there is little research understanding the characteristics of those who provide such messaging. METHODS: One hundred and four health professionals (70% female) recruited through professional association mailing lists in Australia completed a brief online quantitative and qualitative survey. RESULTS: Participants reported characteristics they believed to be important for spokespeople, those that they believed their organisation considered important, and those they thought engendered public trust. Knowledge of public health issues, public speaking skills, and willingness to speak on behalf of the organisation were identified as important characteristics (by at least 70%). Qualitative results showed some participants distinguished between perceived, as well as actual, expertise, and described the potential for public health university programs to include public speaking and communication skills. Participants also identified an individual's role in the organisation was considered important in their organisation's selection of a spokesperson, particularly in relation to seniority and leadership. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides an initial description and priority considerations from health professionals about key characteristics of effective spokespeople. Findings suggest possible avenues for training and support for spokespeople and the need for further research regarding the characteristics of who are effective spokespeople. SO WHAT?: Findings suggest possible avenues for training and support for spokespeople and the need for further research regarding the characteristics of who are effective spokespeople.

A Pragmatic Randomized Comparative Trial of e-Cigarettes and Other Nicotine Products for Quitting or Long-Term Substitution in Smokers.

INTRODUCTION: Tobacco harm reduction has potential to improve individual and population health. However, little research exists on low-intensity interventions, such as encouraging longer-term NRT or e-cigarette use. We aimed to determine whether: (1) encouraging use of nicotine products as long-term tobacco substitutes is more effective for smoking abstinence than standard treatment, and (2) offering e-cigarettes is more effective than NRT. METHODS: An open-label, parallel-group randomized trial was conducted in Australia between 2014 and 2015, with 1563 adult daily smokers, randomized to: (A) standard cessation advice and NRT: advice to use NRT short-term, (B) quit or substitute advice and NRT: advice to use NRT as a longer-term substitute for smoking if required to maintain smoking cessation, or (C) Quit or substitute advice and NRT and/or e-cigarettes. Participants were offered an initial supply of products they could then purchase for up to 7 months. The primary outcome was self-reported continuous smoking abstinence at 7 months. Point prevalence, dual use, and cigarette reduction were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: At 7 months, 2.8% (N = 9) of group A (N = 324) were abstinent, compared with 1.8% (N = 11) in B (N = 620) and 1.3% (N = 8) in C (N = 619) (adjusted odds ratio [ORs]: B vs. A 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.27-1.63; C vs. A 0.46, 95% CI: 0.17-1.21; C vs. B 0.69, 95% CI 0.27-1.73). There were no suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions associated with trial products. CONCLUSION: A free trial of NRT and first generation e-cigarettes and advice on long-term substitution was no better for smoking abstinence than usual care. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered with the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration under their Clinical Trials Notification scheme and the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12612001210864). IMPLICATIONS: This pragmatic trial allowed the comparison of existing and alternative policy options under semi-realistic conditions, such as product choice and financial cost. All trial arms had low rates of smoking cessation. The findings suggest that providing unflavored cigalike e-cigarettes without additional support may not increase quitting compared with advice to use standard NRT in a general population of Australians who smoke. More intensive support and education, and/or opportunity to try a range of e-cigarette products, may be required to motivate quit attempts using e-cigarettes.

Closing the gaps in tobacco endgame evidence: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: Tobacco endgame policies aim to rapidly and permanently reduce smoking to minimal levels. We reviewed evidence syntheses for: (1) endgame policies, (2) evidence gaps, and (3) future research priorities. DATA SOURCES: Guided by JBI scoping review methodology, we searched five databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase and Web of Science) for evidence syntheses published in English since 1990 on 12 policies, and Google for publications from key national and international organisations. Reference lists of included publications were hand searched. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts. Inclusion criteria were broad to capture policy impacts (including unintended), feasibility, public and stakeholder acceptability and other aspects of policy implementation. DATA EXTRACTION: We report the results according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. DATA SYNTHESIS: Eight policies have progressed to evidence synthesis stage (49 publications): mandatory very low nicotine content (VLNC) standard (n=26); product standards to substantially reduce consumer appeal or remove the most toxic products from the market (n=1); moving consumers to reduced risk products (n=8); tobacco-free generation (n=4); ending sales (n=2); sinking lid (n=2); tax increases (n=7); and restrictions on tobacco retailers (n=10). Based on published evidence syntheses, the evidence base was most developed for a VLNC standard, with a wide range of evidence synthesised. CONCLUSIONS: VLNC cigarettes have attracted the most attention, in terms of synthesised evidence. Additional focus on policies that reduce the availability of tobacco is warranted given these measures are being implemented in some jurisdictions.

The Misuse of the Precautionary Principle in Justifying Australia's Ban on the Sale of Nicotine Vaping Products.

In Australia, the precautionary principle has been used to justify an effective sales ban on nicotine vaping products (NVPs) by requiring all NVPs to be approved as medicines. Australia's policy is out of step with other English-speaking countries, which allow the sale of NVPs as consumer products. We provide a brief history of the precautionary principle, discuss guidelines on how it should be used, and examine key documents from Australian policy debates to describe how the precautionary principle has been misapplied in justifying Australian NVP policy. We argue that the precautionary principle has been inappropriately applied to NVP regulation in Australia in that it has: failed to consider the regulation of similar products, imposed regulations that are disproportionate to the level of risk, failed to assess the costs of its regulatory approach, and failed to undertake a cost/benefit analysis of a range of available regulatory options. Australian policy illustrates the risks of regulating nicotine products in isolation rather than considering NVPs as falling on a continuum of harmful nicotine products. Implications: The precautionary principle has been misapplied to NVP regulation in Australia. We recommend that the precautionary principle be used in a way that regulates nicotine products in proportion to their risks.

Beliefs and Self-reported Practices of Health Care Professionals Regarding Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review and Synthesis.

AIMS: This review explores the (1) beliefs and attitudes of health care professionals (HCPs) toward electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) including use as a smoking cessation aid and/or harm reduction, safety and regulation, and (2) the extent and content of patient-HCP communication about ENDS. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched to identify articles published since 2003. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklists were used to assess the quality of studies. Thematic synthesis was used to analyze qualitative data. RESULTS: A total of 45 articles (32 quantitative, 12 qualitative, and 1 mixed) were included. There was wide variation regarding beliefs about the efficacy of ENDS as a cessation aid. Although the majority of HCPs believes that ENDS are safer than combustible cigarettes, they also have concern about the short and long-term safety of ENDS, uptake by adolescents, and the potential for ENDS to act as a "gateway" to smoking cigarettes. Beliefs about ENDS are influenced by media stories and experiences provided by patients. Although most HCPs do not proactively recommend ENDS, they are more likely to support ENDS use among patients with smoking related comorbidities, heavy smokers with previous unsuccessful quit attempts, or patients who express interest in trying them. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, HCPs hold diverse views about the efficacy of ENDS and expressed wariness over their potential health effects. HCP endorsement of ENDS use seems to depend largely on patient health status, the presence of other competing risk factors and patient preferences. IMPLICATION: Although evidence on safety and efficacy of ENDS is emerging, HCPs should be honest with their clients, stating that the long-term safety is not yet established but what is known is that they appear to be a lower risk alternative to cigarettes. Our review highlights a need for further training and support for HCPs regarding ENDS use, which would enable them to guide their clients in making evidence-based decisions.

Smokers' Understandings of Addiction to Nicotine and Tobacco: A Systematic Review and Interpretive Synthesis of Quantitative and Qualitative Research.

Background: Despite the centrality of addiction in academic accounts of smoking, there is little research on smokers' beliefs about addiction to smoking, and the role of nicotine in tobacco dependence. Smokers' perspectives on nicotine's role in addiction are important given the increasing prevalence of nontobacco nicotine products such as e-cigarettes. We conducted a systematic review of studies investigating smokers' understandings and lay beliefs about addiction to smoking and nicotine. Method: We searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO for studies investigating lay beliefs about addiction to smoking. Twenty-two quantitative and 24 qualitative studies met inclusion criteria. Critical interpretive synthesis was used to analyze the results. Results: Very few studies asked about addiction to nicotine. Quantitative studies that asked about addiction to smoking showed that most smokers believe that cigarettes are an addictive product, and that they are addicted to smoking. Across qualitative studies, nicotine was not often mentioned by participants. Addiction to smoking was most often characterized as a feeling of "need" for cigarettes resulting from an interplay between physical, mental, and social processes. Overall, we found that understandings of smoking were more consistent with the biopsychosocial model of addiction than with more recent models that emphasize the biological aspects of addiction. Conclusion: Researchers should not treat perceptions of addiction to smoking interchangeably with perceptions of addiction to nicotine. More research on lay beliefs about nicotine is required, particularly considering the increasing use of e-cigarettes and their potential for long-term nicotine maintenance for harm reduction. Implications: Quantitative studies show that most smokers believe that smoking is addictive and that they are addicted. A feeling of "need" for cigarettes was central to qualitative accounts of addiction, but nicotine was not often discussed. Overall, smokers' understandings of addiction reflect a biopsychosocial model rather than a neurobiological one. Given the growing market for e-cigarettes and therapeutic nicotine, more research is required on lay beliefs about nicotine and addiction.

Do Neurobiological Understandings of Smoking Influence Quitting Self-Efficacy or Treatment Intentions?

Introduction: Addiction is increasingly defined as a "brain disease" caused by changes to neurochemistry. While nicotine addiction has historically been excluded in the brain disease model of addiction (BDMA), it is beginning to be labeled a chronic brain disease. We investigated whether Australian smokers endorse brain-based explanations of smoking, and whether these beliefs are associated with quitting self-efficacy or treatment intentions. Method: Cross-sectional study of Australian smokers (N = 1538) who completed a survey measuring their agreement with statements on the brain's role in smoking. Logistic regressions tested associations between these items and socio-demographic variables, quitting self-efficacy and intention to use cessation medications. Results: The majority (57.9%) agreed that smoking changed brain chemistry and 34.4% agreed that smoking was a brain disease. Younger participants and those with more education were more likely to endorse brain-based understandings of smoking. Participants who agreed smoking changed brain chemistry were more likely to report an intention to use cessation medicines (OR 1.5, 95% CI = 1.0-2.2) as were those who agreed that smoking was a brain disease (OR 1.5, 95% CI = 1.1-2.1). Self-efficacy did not differ between those who agreed and disagreed that smoking changed brain chemistry. However, those who agreed that smoking was a brain disease had higher self-efficacy than those who disagreed (OR 1.7, 95% CI = 1.3-2.3). Conclusion: A neurobiological view of smoking does not dominate public understandings of smoking in Australia. Endorsement of neurobiological explanations of smoking were associated with increased intention to use cessation aids, but were not associated with reduced self-efficacy. Implications: Explaining tobacco dependence in neurobiological terms is unlikely to induce feelings of fatalism in relation to smoking cessation. Those who endorse biomedical explanations of smoking may be more open to using cessation pharmacotherapies. Describing smoking in terms of alterations in brain chemistry may be more acceptable to smokers than labeling smoking a "brain disease" or "brain disorder."

Ethical Guidelines for Genetic Research on Alcohol Addiction and Its Applications.

Research on the genomic correlates to addiction raises ethical issues in a number of different domains. In this paper, we evaluate the status of genetic research on alcohol dependence as background to addressing the ethical issues raised in conducting research on addiction and the application of that research to the formulation of public policies. We conclude that genetic testing is not yet ready for use in the prediction of alcohol dependence liability. Pharmacogenetic testing for responses to treatments may have more clinical utility, although additional research is required to demonstrate utility and cost-effectiveness. Genetic research on addiction raises potential risks for participants that must be clearly communicated to participants, including limitations on the ability of researchers to protect their privacy. Responsible communication of research findings is essential to prevent common misunderstandings about the role of genetics in addiction liability, to prevent its premature or inappropriate use, and to reduce discrimination and stigmatization experienced by addicted individuals. More research is needed to determine the impact of genetic explanations on addicted individuals, treatment-seeking behavior, and on public attitudes towards addicted persons. Importantly, genetic research on addiction must not be at the expense of investments in social, behavioral, and psychological research on addiction.

Framing Tobacco Dependence as a "Brain Disease": Implications for Policy and Practice.

INTRODUCTION: Like other forms of drug dependence, tobacco dependence is increasingly being described as a "chronic brain disease." The potential consequences of this medical labelling have been examined in relation to other addictions, but the implications for tobacco control have been neglected. Some have posited that biomedical conceptions of addiction will reduce stigma and increase uptake of efficacious treatments. Others have countered that it could increase stigma, reduce treatment seeking, and deter unassisted quitting. We explored how smokers respond to the labelling of smoking as a brain disease. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with 29 Australian smokers recruited using purposive sampling. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the results. RESULTS: Most participants questioned the accuracy of the brain disease label as applied to smoking. They believed that smoking was not a chronic disease because they perceived smoking to be an individual's choice. In addition, many believed that this label would increase the stigma that they already felt and, did not want to adopt a "sick role" in relation to their smoking. CONCLUSIONS: Describing smoking as a brain disease is more likely to alienate smokers than to engage them in quitting. The application of overly medical labels of smoking are inconsistent with smokers own conceptualizations of their smoking, and may have unintended consequences if they are widely disseminated in healthcare settings or antismoking campaigns. IMPLICATIONS: The participants in this project believed that biomedical labels of smoking as a "brain disease" or a "chronic disease" were discordant their existing understandings of their smoking. Explanations of addiction that downplay or ignore the role of choice and autonomy risk being perceived as irrelevant by smokers, and could lead to suspicion of health professionals or an unwillingness to seek treatment.

Medicalisation, smoking and e-cigarettes: evidence and implications.

There is debate in the tobacco control literature about the value of a medical model in reducing smoking-related harm. The variety of medical treatments for smoking cessation has increased, health professionals are encouraged to use them to assist smoking cessation and tobacco dependence is being described as a 'chronic disease'. Some critics suggest that the medicalisation of smoking undermines the tobacco industry's responsibility for the harms of smoking. Others worry that it will lead smokers to deny personal responsibility for cessation, create beliefs in 'magic bullets' for smoking cessation, or erode smokers' confidence in their ability to quit. We argue that the medicalisation of smoking will have limited impact due to the emphasis on population-based interventions in tobacco control, the ambiguous place of nicotine among other drugs and the modest efficacy of current pharmacotherapies. These factors, as well as lay understandings of smoking that emphasise willpower, personal choice and responsibility, have contributed to the limited success of medical approaches to smoking cessation. While the rapid uptake of e-cigarettes in some countries has provided an option for those who reject medical treatments for smoking cessation, current regulatory developments could limit the potential of e-cigarettes to provide non-therapeutic nicotine for those who currently smoke tobacco.

Do Australians use the prescription pathway when using nicotine vaping products to quit smoking?

BACKGROUND: In Australia, nicotine vaping products (NVPs) are only legally available to those with a prescription from a doctor. We investigated the proportion of people using NVPs to quit smoking who had a prescription, and whether this increased following regulatory changes in 2021 that strengthened the prescription requirement. METHODS: Australian data from the 2018, 2020 and 2022 International Tobacco Control (ITC) Project Survey were analysed using GEE models with Poisson regressions to analyze differences between years. Data from participants who reported making a quit attempt in the previous two years and reported use of NVPs on their last quit attempt were included (480 observations across 418 individuals). Participants reported whether they had a prescription for NVPs on their last quit attempt. In 2022, they were also asked whether they sourced their prescription from their usual medical practice. RESULTS: Among those using NVPs for a quit attempt, use with a prescription increased significantly from 2020 to 2022 (IRR = 0.35 (0.17-0.73), p = .005) but was still low at 16.5 % (95 % CI 11.4-23.1). In 2022, among the small number who reported getting a prescription for NVPs, 27 % reported getting it from their regular practice; the remainder from a specialist online doctor service. CONCLUSION: There was a modest increase in obtaining a prescription among those who used NVPs for their last quit attempt after regulations were strengthened, however most NVP use for quitting was without a prescription.

E-cigarettes: A framework for comparative history and policy.

BACKGROUND: England, Australia and the United States have approached the regulation of e-cigarettes in very different ways, yet all three countries have appealed to the concept of evidence as underpinning policy responses. We compared these policy responses using a combination of the methodologies of historians and policy scientists in order to elucidate the factors that had influenced policy in each country. ARGUMENT/ANALYSIS: Each country's evidence and values intersected in different ways, producing very different responses within specific national contexts and histories. Our analysis accordingly emphasized the historical precursors of the policy issues raised by e-cigarettes and placed the policy debate within the context of regulatory bodies and the networks of researchers and advocates who influenced policy. Issues also of importance were the nature of the state; political context; the pre-history of nicotine for smoking cessation; the role of activism and its links with government; the influence of harm reduction ideas from drugs and HIV; and finally, whom policy was perceived to benefit. In the United Kingdom, based on this pre-history of the smoking issue, it was the existing smoker, while in the United States and Australia, protecting children and adolescents has played a central role. CONCLUSIONS: Structural and historical factors appear to underpin differences in e-cigarette policy development in England, Australia and the United States.

Evaluating the implementation of a prescription only regulatory model for nicotine vaping products: A qualitative study on the experiences and views of healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: Deciding how to regulate nicotine vaping products (NVPs) is a challenge for many countries. Balanced regulation should consider the potential harms to young people from uptake of NVPs alongside the possible benefits of NVPs as a smoking cessation aid. One option is to make NVPs only available via medical prescription to adults who smoke. From October 2021, Australia adopted a unique model that allows prescription access to NVPs that meet a product standard without requiring the NVPs to be approved as therapeutic goods. This research explored the impact of this regulatory model on the smoking cessation practices of health professionals, and their views on the model. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 39 Australian health professionals recruited from professional networks and social media. Health professionals were eligible if they provided smoking cessation advice as part of their role, and included medical practitioners (n = 9), pharmacists (n = 9), and other health professionals that provided smoking cessation counselling (n = 21). Interviews were mostly completed by phone and online teleconferencing software. Questions focused on smoking cessation practices, advice and information provided to patients about NVPs, views about the effectiveness of the model for supporting use of NVPs for smoking cessation and preventing youth uptake, and barriers and facilitators to prescribing and dispensing NVPs. Coding and analysis used a combination of inductive and deductive approaches. RESULTS: Findings indicated a lack of consensus amongst the participants about NVPs as a cessation or harm reduction tool. Participants broadly agreed that the model has not been effective in improving quality control of NVPs, or in reducing youth access. Many participants eligible to prescribe or dispense NVPs felt that the current regulatory model placed an undue time and responsibility burden on clinicians. CONCLUSION: Our research identified several limitations associated with the current Australian prescription-only regulatory model. These were perceived by healthcare professionals to limit the potential for the regulations to reduce youth use and to increase access to safer NVP products for people who smoke to use for smoking cessation.