Ralph S Caraballo1, Ahmed Jamal2, Kimberly H Nguyen2, Nicole M Kuiper2, René A Arrazola2. 1. Office on Smoking and Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, CDC, Atlanta, Georgia. Electronic address: rfc8@cdc.gov. 2. Office on Smoking and Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, CDC, Atlanta, Georgia.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) use has increased rapidly in the U.S. in recent years. The availability and use of ENDS raise new issues for public health practice and tobacco regulation, as it is unknown whether patterns of ENDS use enhance, deter, or have no impact on combustible tobacco product use. This study assessed past-month, lifetime, and frequency of ENDS use among current, former, and never adult cigarette smokers. METHODS: Data were analyzed from the 2014 Styles, a national consumer-based probability-based web panel survey of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years (n=4,269) conducted during June and July. Lifetime ENDS users were defined as those who reported having used ENDS ≥1 day in their lifetime. Past-month ENDS users were defined as those who reported using ENDS in the past 30 days. RESULTS: In 2014, overall lifetime and past-month ENDS use was 14.1% and 4.8%, respectively. By smoking status, 49.5% of current, 14.7% of former, and 4.1% of never cigarette smokers had used ENDS in their lifetime, whereas 20.6% of current, 4.0% of former, and 0.8% of never smokers used ENDS in the past month. Among current and former cigarette smokers who ever used ENDS, 44.1% and 44.7% reported using ENDS >10 days in their lifetime, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Because the effect ENDS use has on combustible tobacco products use is unknown, and lifetime and past-month ENDS use is more common among current than former or never smokers, continued surveillance of ENDS use among adults is critical to programs and policies. Published by Elsevier Inc.
INTRODUCTION: Electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) use has increased rapidly in the U.S. in recent years. The availability and use of ENDS raise new issues for public health practice and tobacco regulation, as it is unknown whether patterns of ENDS use enhance, deter, or have no impact on combustible tobacco product use. This study assessed past-month, lifetime, and frequency of ENDS use among current, former, and never adult cigarette smokers. METHODS: Data were analyzed from the 2014 Styles, a national consumer-based probability-based web panel survey of U.S. adults aged ≥18 years (n=4,269) conducted during June and July. Lifetime ENDS users were defined as those who reported having used ENDS ≥1 day in their lifetime. Past-month ENDS users were defined as those who reported using ENDS in the past 30 days. RESULTS: In 2014, overall lifetime and past-month ENDS use was 14.1% and 4.8%, respectively. By smoking status, 49.5% of current, 14.7% of former, and 4.1% of never cigarette smokers had used ENDS in their lifetime, whereas 20.6% of current, 4.0% of former, and 0.8% of never smokers used ENDS in the past month. Among current and former cigarette smokers who ever used ENDS, 44.1% and 44.7% reported using ENDS >10 days in their lifetime, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Because the effect ENDS use has on combustible tobacco products use is unknown, and lifetime and past-month ENDS use is more common among current than former or never smokers, continued surveillance of ENDS use among adults is critical to programs and policies. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Jennifer L Pearson; Sara C Hitchman; Leonie S Brose; Linda Bauld; Allison M Glasser; Andrea C Villanti; Ann McNeill; David B Abrams; Joanna E Cohen Journal: Tob Control Date: 2017-06-17 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Allison M Glasser; Lauren Collins; Jennifer L Pearson; Haneen Abudayyeh; Raymond S Niaura; David B Abrams; Andrea C Villanti Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2016-11-30 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Karen O Brandon; Vani N Simmons; Lauren R Meltzer; David J Drobes; Úrsula Martínez; Steven K Sutton; Amanda M Palmer; Christopher R Bullen; Paul T Harrell; Thomas H Brandon Journal: Addiction Date: 2019-02-13 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Cati G Brown-Johnson; Andrea Burbank; Eric J Daza; Arianna Wassmann; Amy Chieng; Geoffrey W Rutledge; Judith J Prochaska Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2016-08-26 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Deesha Patel; Kevin C Davis; Shanna Cox; Brian Bradfield; Brian A King; Paul Shafer; Ralph Caraballo; Rebecca Bunnell Journal: Prev Med Date: 2016-09-07 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Meghan E Morean; Ellyn R Butler; Krysten W Bold; Grace Kong; Deepa R Camenga; Dana A Cavallo; Patricia Simon; Stephanie S O'Malley; Suchitra Krishnan-Sarin Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-01-04 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jessica A Kulak; Michelle T Bover Manderski; Cristine D Delnevo; Mary Hrywna; Gregory G Homish; Gary A Giovino Journal: Prev Chronic Dis Date: 2019-10-10 Impact factor: 2.830