Support for indoor bans on electronic cigarettes among current and former smokers

Vaping in the Workplace: Prevalence and Attitudes Among Employed US Adults

Describe workplace vaping, prevalence of observed use, attitudes, and perceptions among US adults.

An examination of social and environmental determinants of secondhand smoke exposure among non-smoking adolescents

INTRODUCTION

Adolescents are at increased risk of secondhand smoke exposure (SHS) due to the limited control that they have over social and physical environments. Yet, knowledge regarding determinants of SHS among non-smoking adolescents is limited. This study identifies social and environmental factors associated with SHS among non-smoking adolescents.

METHODS

To be included, parents and adolescents (aged 11–17 years) of the Adolescents, Place, and Behavior Study had to have completed surveys between March 2019 and May 2020. Adolescents had to have not reported smoking within the past 30 days and provided a saliva sample assayed for cotinine (≤3 ng/mL). A series of stepwise linear regression models were fit to the data to identify social and environmental determinants of SHS, using log-transformed salivary cotinine.

RESULTS

Of the 105 adolescent and parent dyads included, 90.3% were African American, 26.9% of parents reported smoking, 33.3% resided in multi-unit housing, and 67.7% lived in homes where smoking was not permitted. Significant associations were found between parent tobacco use (β=2.56, SE=0.98, p=0.0082) and residing in multi-unit housing (β=1.72, SE=0.86, p=0.0460) with increased log-transformed cotinine levels among non-smoking adolescents. Adolescent age, gender, and race/ ethnicity, parental education, peer tobacco use, the number of adults and children in the home, average number of days of self-reported SHS within public spaces outside of the home, and home smoking policies were not significantly associated with cotinine.

CONCLUSIONS

Results emphasize the importance of reducing secondhand smoke exposure by reducing parental smoking and altering exposures within social and home environments. Parental tobacco use and residential setting should be considered when developing interventions to reduce secondhand smoke exposure among non-smoking adolescents.

Associations of home and workplace vaping restrictions with e-cigarette use among U.S. adults

The current study examined home and workplace vaping restrictions and their associations with e-cigarette use, frequency of e-cigarette use, and exposure to environmental vape aerosol among adults in the U.S. We used data from the 2018 Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey to determine these associations. Analysis was done with a multivariable logistic and zero-inflated Poisson regression. Of 46,751 participants, 2.1% currently used e-cigarettes and 89% reported restricted home vaping. Of 19,091 working participants, 83% had worksite vaping restrictions and 6% reported environmental vapor exposure. Respondents with household vaping restrictions had lower odds of current e-cigarette use (full ban: aOR: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.05-0.09; partial ban: aOR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.40-0.66). The expected number of days of past-month e-cigarette use for those with some household vaping restrictions was significantly fewer than for those without restrictions (full ban: IRR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.85-0.99; partial ban, IRR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.81-0.97). Workers with full workplace vaping restrictions had lower odds of workplace environmental vape aerosol exposure than those without a restriction (aOR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.17-0.25). Vaping restrictions in homes were associated with lower prevalence and frequency of e-cigarette use. Those in worksites with complete vaping bans were less likely to be exposed to environmental aerosol at work. Home e-cigarette restrictions appear to have a stronger association with e-cigarette use behaviors than workplace restrictions.

Rules to prohibit the use of electronic vapor products inside homes and personal vehicles among adults in the U.S., 2017

Most U.S. adults have voluntary rules prohibiting the use of smoked tobacco products in their homes and vehicles. However, the prevalence of similar rules for electronic vapor products (EVPs) is uncertain. This study assessed the prevalence and correlates of rules prohibiting EVP use inside homes and vehicles. Data from a 2017 Internet-based panel survey of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years (n = 4107) were analyzed. For homes and vehicles, prevalence of reporting that EVP use was not allowed, partially allowed, fully allowed, or unknown was assessed overall and by covariates. Correlates of prohibiting EVP use was assessed by multivariable logistic regression. In homes, 58.6% of adults did not allow EVP use, 7.7% partially allowed use, 10.1% fully allowed use, and 23.6% were unsure of the rules. In vehicles, 63.8% of respondents did not allow EVP use, 6.0% partially allowed use, 8.9% fully allowed use, and 21.4% were unsure of the rules. Following multivariable adjustment, prohibiting EVP use inside homes and vehicles was more likely among respondents with higher income and education, and with a child aged <18 years. Users of EVPs and other tobacco products, and respondents living with users of EVPs and other tobacco products, were less likely to prohibit EVP use in these locations. These findings show that about 6 in 10 U.S. adults have rules prohibiting EVP use inside homes and vehicles, but variations exist by population subgroups. Voluntary smoke-free rules in homes and vehicles that include EVPs can help protect children and non-users from secondhand EVP aerosol exposure.

The impact of restricting the use of e-cigarettes in public places: a systematic review

Background

We explored whether restrictions on using e-cigarettes in public places deter smokers from switching to e-cigarettes for harm reduction purposes. Secondary objectives looked at the ability to use e-cigarettes in public places as a reason for use and attitudes towards this among smokers.

Methods

Systematic review of the scientific and grey literature.

Results

No studies were found for the primary question. Twelve studies estimated the proportion of smokers citing the ability to use e-cigarettes in public places as a reason for use; estimates varied considerably but were typically higher for smokers than never smokers and lower for former than current smokers. Fourteen studies reported attitudes towards restrictions in public places. Smokers were significantly more likely to support the use of e-cigarettes in public places than never smokers and former smokers significantly less likely to support their use than current smokers.

Conclusions

There is a gap in the evidence base on whether restrictions on e-cigarettes in public places would deter smokers from switching for harm reduction purposes. The role that restrictions in public places play in smoker's choosing to vape, and the level of support for their use in public, is likely to vary between populations and by smoking status.

E-cigarette use and support for banning e-cigarette use in public places in the European Union

We investigated the factors associated with support for banning e-cigarette use in public places in the European Union (EU) and how this varies by socio-demographic determinants, use of tobacco, ever use of e-cigarettes and their perceived harm. Data are from the representative Special Eurobarometer for Tobacco survey performed in 2014 (n=27,801) in 28 EU member states. Analyses were conducted separately by tobacco use status (never, current, and former smokers) and e-cigarette experimentation status. 70.9% of never smokers, 63.1% of former smokers and 45.7% of current smokers in the EU supported a ban on the use of e-cigarettes in public places. In all groups, support for banning e-cigarettes in public places was lower among those who had experimented with e-cigarettes (adjusted odds ratios (aOR) 0.43 vs. 0.50 vs. 0.61, among never, current and former smokers respectively) and higher among those who perceived e-cigarettes as harmful (aORs 2.49 vs 2.35 vs. 2.40, among never, current and former smokers respectively). 40.5% of those who had experimented with e-cigarettes supported a ban on use in public places, although levels of support were lower among those who started using e-cigarettes in order to circumvent existing smoking bans (aOR 0.54, 95% Confidence Interval 0.45-0.64). Bans of e-cigarette use in public places in Europe have high levels of public support even among former and current tobacco smokers, although this does vary across population groups. As legislators consider approaches to e-cigarette use, public opinion is likely to become more important to the passing and enforcement of any legislation.

Restrictions on the use of e-cigarettes in public and private places-current practice and support among adults in Great Britain

Background

Debates around policies regulating e-cigarette use make it important to obtain an overview of current practice, people's attitudes and correlates of policy support. Aims were to assess (i) current practices for e-cigarette use in homes and workplaces; (ii) characteristics associated with allowing e-cigarette use in the home; and (iii) level of, and characteristics associated with, support for extending smoke-free legislation to include e-cigarettes.

Methods

Online survey in 2016, n = 11 389 adults in Great Britain. Descriptives for all measures; multivariable logistic regressions assessed correlates of allowing e-cigarette use and support for extension of legislation.

Results

Most (79%) reporting on workplace policies reported some level of restrictions on e-cigarette use. Small majorities would not allow e-cigarette use in their home (58%) and supported an extension of smoke-free legislation (52%; 21% opposed). Allowing use was less likely and supporting an extension more likely among men, respondents from a higher socio-economic status, ex-smokers, never-smokers, non-users of e-cigarettes and respondents with increased perceived harm of e-cigarettes or nicotine (all P < 0.001). Older respondents were less likely to allow use and to support an extension and Labour voters more likely to allow use.

Conclusions

In Great Britain, the majority of workplaces has policies restricting e-cigarette use. Over half of adults would not allow use of e-cigarettes in their home and support prohibiting the use of e-cigarettes in smoke-free places. Adjusting for socio-demographics, more restrictive attitudes are more common among never-smokers, never-users and those with increased perception of relative harms of e-cigarettes or nicotine as cause of smoking-related illness.

Racial/ethnic differences in electronic cigarette knowledge, social norms, and risk perceptions among current and former smokers

Psychosocial factors that may affect electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) initiation or maintenance among racial/ethnic minorities are not well-understood. This study examined racial/ethnic differences in e-cigarette knowledge, risk perceptions, and social norms among current and former smokers. Individuals with a tobacco smoking history and an awareness of e-cigarettes (N=285) were recruited from the community from June to August 2014. Telephone-administered surveys assessed demographics, smoking status, and e-cigarette knowledge, risk perceptions, and normative beliefs. Analyses of covariance and multinomial logistic regression tested associations by race/ethnicity. Controlling for sociodemographics and smoking status, White participants scored significantly higher on e-cigarette knowledge, compared to both Hispanics and African Americans/Blacks. Knowledge was lower among African Americans/Blacks compared to Hispanics. Compared to both Whites and Hispanics, African American/Black participants held lower perceptions regarding e-cigarette health risks and were less likely to view e-cigarettes as addictive. Normative beliefs did not differ by race/ethnicity. In conclusion, e-cigarette knowledge, health risk perceptions, and perceived addictiveness differed by race/ethnicity. The variation in e-cigarette knowledge and beliefs among smokers and former smokers has implications for use, and potentially, dual use. Understanding these relationships in unrepresented populations can inform future research and practice.

Support for e-cigarette policies: a survey of smokers and ex-smokers in Great Britain

INTRODUCTION

E-cigarette regulations are the topic of extensive debate. Approaches vary worldwide, and limited evidence is available on public support for specific policies or what influences support. The present study aimed to assess smokers' and ex-smokers' support for 3 e-cigarette policies: (1) equal or higher availability relative to cigarettes, (2) advertising, (3) use in smoke-free places, and to assess changes in support over time and associations with respondent characteristics.

METHODS

Smokers and ex-smokers (n=1848) provided 3279 observations over 2 waves (2013 and 2014) of a longitudinal web-based survey in Great Britain. Multivariable logistic regressions fitted using generalised estimating equations assessed change in policy support over time, and associations between support and demographics (age, gender and income), smoking and e-cigarette use status, nicotine knowledge and perceived relative harm.

RESULTS

Equal or higher relative availability was supported by 79% in 2013 and 76% in 2014; advertising by 66% and 56%, respectively; neither change was significant in adjusted analyses. Support for use in smoke-free places decreased significantly from 55% to 45%. Compared with ex-smokers, smokers were more likely to support advertising and use in smoke-free places. Respondents using e-cigarettes, those who perceived e-cigarettes as less harmful than cigarettes, and those with more accurate knowledge about nicotine were more likely to support all 3 policies.

CONCLUSIONS

Less restrictive e-cigarette policies were more likely to be supported by e-cigarette users, and respondents who perceived e-cigarettes to be less harmful than cigarettes, or knew that nicotine was not a main cause of harm to health.

Overview of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Rapid developments in e-cigarettes, or electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), and the evolution of the overall tobacco product marketplace warrant frequent evaluation of the published literature. The purpose of this article is to report updated findings from a comprehensive review of the published scientific literature on ENDS.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The authors conducted a systematic review of published empirical research literature on ENDS through May 31, 2016, using a detailed search strategy in the PubMed electronic database, expert review, and additional targeted searches. Included studies presented empirical findings and were coded to at least one of nine topics: (1) Product Features; (2) Health Effects; (3) Consumer Perceptions; (4) Patterns of Use; (5) Potential to Induce Dependence; (6) Smoking Cessation; (7) Marketing and Communication; (8) Sales; and (9) Policies; reviews and commentaries were excluded. Data from included studies were extracted by multiple coders (October 2015 to August 2016) into a standardized form and synthesized qualitatively by topic.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

There were 687 articles included in this systematic review. The majority of studies assessed patterns of ENDS use and consumer perceptions of ENDS, followed by studies examining health effects of vaping and product features.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies indicate that ENDS are increasing in use, particularly among current smokers, pose substantially less harm to smokers than cigarettes, are being used to reduce/quit smoking, and are widely available. More longitudinal studies and controlled trials are needed to evaluate the impact of ENDS on population-level tobacco use and determine the health effects of longer-term vaping.

To Regulate or Not to Regulate? Views on Electronic Cigarette Regulations and Beliefs about the Reasons for and against Regulation

Background

Policies designed to restrict marketing, access to, and public use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are increasingly under debate in various jurisdictions in the US. Little is known about public perceptions of these policies and factors that predict their support or opposition.

Methods

Using a sample of US adults from Amazon Mechanical Turk in May 2015, this paper identifies beliefs about the benefits and costs of regulating e-cigarettes and identifies which of these beliefs predict support for e-cigarette restricting policies.

Results

A higher proportion of respondents agreed with 8 different reasons to regulate e-cigarettes (48.5% to 83.3% agreement) versus 7 reasons not to regulate e-cigarettes (11.5% to 18.9%). The majority of participants agreed with 7 out of 8 reasons for regulation. When all reasons to regulate or not were included in a final multivariable model, beliefs about protecting people from secondhand vapor and protecting youth from trying e-cigarettes significantly predicted stronger support for e-cigarette restricting policies, whereas concern about government intrusion into individual choices was associated with reduced support.

Discussion

This research identifies key beliefs that may underlie public support or opposition to policies designed to regulate the marketing and use of e-cigarettes. Advocates on both sides of the issue may find this research valuable in developing strategic campaigns related to the issue.

Implications

Specific beliefs of potential benefits and costs of e-cigarette regulation (protecting youth, preventing exposure to secondhand vapor, and government intrusion into individual choices) may be effectively deployed by policy makers or health advocates in communicating with the public.

E-cigarette regulation and policy: UK vapers' perspectives

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The rapid increase in use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) has created an international policy dilemma concerning how to use these products. This study assesses the types of beliefs that e-cigarette users in the United Kingdom may hold concerning regulation.

DESIGN

Qualitative thematic analysis of written answers to open-ended questions.

SETTING

United Kingdom, questionnaire conducted by post, 44% recruited from online forums and 56% non-online.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifty-five UK vapers, 55% male, mean age 46 years, 84% sole users of e-cigarettes, 95% vaping daily.

MEASUREMENTS

Open-ended questions on regulatory and policy options.

FINDINGS

'Protecting youth' was seen as a fundamental regulatory requirement which should be achieved through childproofing, age limits, no advertising aimed at children and health warnings about addictiveness of nicotine, but not the restriction of flavours. There was little support for regulating e-cigarettes as medicines or limiting the strength of nicotine liquids. In terms of public use, participants argued against a blanket ban on public vaping given perceptions of a lack of scientific evidence of harm. However, they supported the principle of autonomy, that individuals and organizations have the right to restrict vaping. Some participants suggested banning vaping in places such as schools, hospitals or around food, in line with current smoking norms. Vapers' regulatory positions were accompanied by political concerns about the use (and misuse) of scientific evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

With regard to regulation of e-cigarettes, issues that are salient to UK vapers may include the need for youth protection, regulation as medicines, strength of e-liquids, bans on public vaping and concerns about the misuse of scientific evidence.

Perceptions of Secondhand E-Cigarette Aerosol Among Twitter Users

OBJECTIVES

There is considerable debate among the public health community about the health risks of secondhand exposure to the aerosol from electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes). Despite mounting scientific evidence on the chemical content of e-cigarette aerosol, public perceptions of the relative safety of secondhand e-cigarette aerosol have not been well characterized.

METHOD

This study collected tweets, or messages sent using Twitter, about exposure to secondhand e-cigarette aerosol over a 6-week period in 2015. Tweets were coded on sentiment about e-cigarettes (pro-, anti-, or neutral/unknown) and topic (health, social, advertisement, or unknown).

RESULTS

The 1519 tweets included 531 pro-e-cigarette tweets, 392 anti-e-cigarette tweets, and 596 neutral tweets. Social tweets far outnumbered health tweets (747 vs. 182, respectively). Social-focused tweets were predominantly pro-e-cigarette, whereas health-focused tweets were predominantly anti-e-cigarette.

DISCUSSION

Twitter discussions about secondhand vaping are dominated by pro-e-cigarette social tweets, although there is a presence of anti-e-cigarette social tweets and tweets about negative and positive health effects. Public health and regulatory agencies could use social media and traditional media to disseminate the message that e-cigarette aerosol contains potentially harmful chemicals and could be perceived as offensive. This study identifies the prevalent topics and opinions that could be incorporated into health education messages.