K A Vickerman1, G L Schauer2,3, A M Malarcher4, L Zhang4, P Mowery5, C M Nash1. 1. Department of Research, Training, Evaluation, Alere Wellbeing, Seattle, Washington, USA. 2. Battelle Public Health Center for Tobacco Research, Battelle Memorial Institute, Seattle, WA, USA. 3. Guest Researcher, Office on Smoking and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 4. Office on Smoking and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 5. Biostatistics, Inc., Sarasota, Florida, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Describe cigarette smoking abstinence among employer and health plan-sponsored quitline registrants who were not using Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS), were using ENDS to quit smoking or were using ENDS for other reasons at the time of quitline registration. METHODS: We examined 6029 quitline callers aged ≥18 years who smoked cigarettes at registration, and completed ≥1 counselling calls, baseline ENDS use questions and a 6-month follow-up survey (response rate: 52.4%). 30-day point prevalence smoking quit rates (PPQRs) were assessed at 6-month follow-up (ENDS-only users were considered quit). Data were weighted for non-response bias. Logistic regression analyses controlled for participant characteristics and programme engagement. RESULTS: At registration, 13.8% of respondents used ENDS (7.9% to quit smoking, 5.9% for other reasons). 30-day PPQRs were: 55.1% for callers using ENDS to quit, 43.1% for callers using ENDS for other reasons, and 50.8% for callers not using ENDS at registration. Callers using ENDS for other reasons were less likely to quit than other groups (adjusted ORs=0.65-0.77); quit rates did not significantly differ between non-ENDS users and those using ENDS to quit. Among callers using ENDS to quit at baseline, 40% used ENDS regularly at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: ENDS users not using ENDS to quit smoking were less successful at quitting at 6-month follow-up compared with callers using ENDS to quit smoking and callers who did not use ENDS at programme registration. Incorporating reasons for ENDS use may be important for future studies examining the role of ENDS in tobacco cessation. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
OBJECTIVE: Describe cigarette smoking abstinence among employer and health plan-sponsored quitline registrants who were not using Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS), were using ENDS to quit smoking or were using ENDS for other reasons at the time of quitline registration. METHODS: We examined 6029 quitline callers aged ≥18 years who smoked cigarettes at registration, and completed ≥1 counselling calls, baseline ENDS use questions and a 6-month follow-up survey (response rate: 52.4%). 30-day point prevalence smoking quit rates (PPQRs) were assessed at 6-month follow-up (ENDS-only users were considered quit). Data were weighted for non-response bias. Logistic regression analyses controlled for participant characteristics and programme engagement. RESULTS: At registration, 13.8% of respondents used ENDS (7.9% to quit smoking, 5.9% for other reasons). 30-day PPQRs were: 55.1% for callers using ENDS to quit, 43.1% for callers using ENDS for other reasons, and 50.8% for callers not using ENDS at registration. Callers using ENDS for other reasons were less likely to quit than other groups (adjusted ORs=0.65-0.77); quit rates did not significantly differ between non-ENDS users and those using ENDS to quit. Among callers using ENDS to quit at baseline, 40% used ENDS regularly at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: ENDS users not using ENDS to quit smoking were less successful at quitting at 6-month follow-up compared with callers using ENDS to quit smoking and callers who did not use ENDS at programme registration. Incorporating reasons for ENDS use may be important for future studies examining the role of ENDS in tobacco cessation. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cessation; Electronic nicotine delivery devices; Surveillance and monitoring
Authors: Andy S L Tan; Vaughan W Rees; Justin Rodgers; Emeka Agudile; Natasha A Sokol; Kyeungyeun Yie; Ashley Sanders-Jackson Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2018-05-16 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Richard J O'Connor; Vaughan W Rees; Cheryl Rivard; Dorothy K Hatsukami; K Michael Cummings Journal: Subst Abus Date: 2017-05-08 Impact factor: 3.716
Authors: Eric K Soule; Andrew D Plunk; Paul T Harrell; Rashelle B Hayes; Kathryn C Edwards Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2020-04-21 Impact factor: 4.244
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: Andrea C Villanti; Shari P Feirman; Raymond S Niaura; Jennifer L Pearson; Allison M Glasser; Lauren K Collins; David B Abrams Journal: Addiction Date: 2017-10-03 Impact factor: 6.526