Mignonne C Guy1,2, Jacob Helt1, Sherilyn Palafox3,4, Kellie Green1, Eric K Soule5,2, Sarah F Maloney5,2, Thomas Eissenberg5,2, Pebbles Fagan2,4. 1. Department of African American Studies, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA. 2. Center for the Study of Tobacco Products, College of Humanities and Sciences, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA. 3. University of Hawaii Cancer Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, HI. 4. Center for the Study of Tobacco, Department Health Behavior and Health Education, Fay Boozman College of Public Health, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR. 5. Department of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Open electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) systems are customizable by consumers and often allow for potential "unorthodox" use of the product; that is, use not as intended by the manufacturer. Little is known about the types and prevalence of unorthodox uses and how these practices are transmitted via popular social media. METHODS: Monthly searches of YouTube were conducted from June through November 2016 using the following search terms: "e-cigarettes," "vaping," and "e-juice." After collecting static and dynamic data on the 150 videos identified, two coders independently coded videos for general information, unorthodox use behaviors, health claims, and production quality and characteristics for orthodox and unorthodox use. Intercoder reliability was high (Cohen's κ 0.81, p < .001). RESULTS: One hundred fifty videos were included in the study with a total of 115 551 563 views. We identified nine categories of unorthodox uses of e-cigarettes. Unorthodox use was three times as prevalent as orthodox use. Seventy-seven percent of the unorthodox use videos included recreational e-cigarette use, 57% included modification of mechanical parts and components, and 44.6% included unorthodox substance application (dripping). There were more than twice as many social media links in videos depicting unorthodox compared to orthodox use, but the level of engagement was lower for unorthodox use. CONCLUSIONS: E-cigarette unorthodox use on YouTube is more prevalent than orthodox use, suggesting the need to further investigate the prevalence of unorthodox use among e-cigarette users and the influence of social media on consumer uptake of unorthodox and orthodox uses of e-cigarettes. IMPLICATIONS: The US Food and Drug Administration has regulatory authority over e-cigarettes, parts and components. Many e-cigarettes currently marketed are open systems. Closed systems may allow less manipulation and may influence the safety of these products. This study provides valuable information on ways that open system e-cigarettes are used and it can inform safety tests that can be conducted by the US Food and Drug Administration to determine whether or not these products should remain on the market. In addition, our definitions of unorthodox use can be incorporated into the Population Assessment of Tobacco on Health Study to better understand the prevalence of these behaviors.
INTRODUCTION: Open electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) systems are customizable by consumers and often allow for potential "unorthodox" use of the product; that is, use not as intended by the manufacturer. Little is known about the types and prevalence of unorthodox uses and how these practices are transmitted via popular social media. METHODS: Monthly searches of YouTube were conducted from June through November 2016 using the following search terms: "e-cigarettes," "vaping," and "e-juice." After collecting static and dynamic data on the 150 videos identified, two coders independently coded videos for general information, unorthodox use behaviors, health claims, and production quality and characteristics for orthodox and unorthodox use. Intercoder reliability was high (Cohen's κ 0.81, p < .001). RESULTS: One hundred fifty videos were included in the study with a total of 115 551 563 views. We identified nine categories of unorthodox uses of e-cigarettes. Unorthodox use was three times as prevalent as orthodox use. Seventy-seven percent of the unorthodox use videos included recreational e-cigarette use, 57% included modification of mechanical parts and components, and 44.6% included unorthodox substance application (dripping). There were more than twice as many social media links in videos depicting unorthodox compared to orthodox use, but the level of engagement was lower for unorthodox use. CONCLUSIONS: E-cigarette unorthodox use on YouTube is more prevalent than orthodox use, suggesting the need to further investigate the prevalence of unorthodox use among e-cigarette users and the influence of social media on consumer uptake of unorthodox and orthodox uses of e-cigarettes. IMPLICATIONS: The US Food and Drug Administration has regulatory authority over e-cigarettes, parts and components. Many e-cigarettes currently marketed are open systems. Closed systems may allow less manipulation and may influence the safety of these products. This study provides valuable information on ways that open system e-cigarettes are used and it can inform safety tests that can be conducted by the US Food and Drug Administration to determine whether or not these products should remain on the market. In addition, our definitions of unorthodox use can be incorporated into the Population Assessment of Tobacco on Health Study to better understand the prevalence of these behaviors.
Authors: Josephine T Hinds; Alexandra Loukas; Sherman Chow; Keryn E Pasch; Melissa B Harrell; Cheryl L Perry; Cristine Delnevo; Olivia A Wackowski Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2016-03-30 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Sarah Soussy; Ahmad El-Hellani; Rima Baalbaki; Rola Salman; Alan Shihadeh; Najat A Saliba Journal: Tob Control Date: 2016-10-25 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: Alison Breland; Eric Soule; Alexa Lopez; Carolina Ramôa; Ahmad El-Hellani; Thomas Eissenberg Journal: Ann N Y Acad Sci Date: 2016-01-15 Impact factor: 5.691
Authors: James F Pankow; Kilsun Kim; Kevin J McWhirter; Wentai Luo; Jorge O Escobedo; Robert M Strongin; Anna K Duell; David H Peyton Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-03-08 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Shu-Hong Zhu; Jessica Y Sun; Erika Bonnevie; Sharon E Cummins; Anthony Gamst; Lu Yin; Madeleine Lee Journal: Tob Control Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Dina M Jones; Mignonne C Guy; Eric Soule; Kari-Lyn K Sakuma; Pallav Pokhrel; Mohammed Orloff; Dennis Trinidad; Denelle Smith; Sharaka Browley; A Paige Walker; Sandilyn Bullock; Thomas Eissenberg; Pebbles Fagan Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2021-08-04 Impact factor: 5.825
Authors: Zachary B Massey; Yachao Li; Jessica Holli; Victoria Churchill; Bo Yang; Katherine Henderson; David L Ashley; Jidong Huang; Lucy Popova Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2020-06-02 Impact factor: 5.428