Literature DB >> 31564602

E-Hookah Versus E-Cigarettes: Findings From Wave 2 of the PATH Study (2014-2015).

Mary Rezk-Hanna1, Joy Toyama2, Ebahi Ikharo3, Mary-Lynn Brecht2, Neal L Benowitz4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: ENDS are evolving quickly with increasing use in the U.S. More recently, e-hookahs have been introduced as healthier alternatives to the traditional hookah-flavored tobacco smoking. To date, virtually all studies of ENDS have focused on e-cigarettes; consequently, little is known about e-hookah use.
METHODS: Data were drawn from the 2014-2015 Wave 2 Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health study, a nationally representative sample of adults aged ≥18 years (n=28,362) and youth aged 12-17 years (n=12,172). Weighted analyses, conducted in 2018-2019, estimated the prevalence of e-hookah versus e-cigarette and examined comparisons among users and sociodemographics, patterns of use, and co-use of tobacco products and substances.
RESULTS: Overall, 4.6% of adults reported ever e-hookah use; of these, more than a quarter (26.8%) reported current use. For e-cigarettes, 22.5% reported ever use with 24.8% reporting current use. Among youth, 7.7% reported ever e-hookah use versus 14.3% for e-cigarette use. Comparing e-hookah versus e-cigarette only users, the majority were young adults aged 18-24 years versus ≥25 years (60.5% vs 17.3%, p<0.0001) with the majority being female (58.8% vs 46.0%, p<0.0001). Although alcohol and marijuana were the most common substances used among e-hookah and e-cigarette users, both adult and youth e-hookah only users had a higher prevalence of use than e-cigarette only users.
CONCLUSIONS: Although e-hookahs are used less commonly than e-cigarettes, e-hookah use is not rare. Compared with e-cigarette users, e-hookah users have a different profile in terms of user demographics and co-use of substances. Given the rapid uptake of ENDS by young adults, these findings suggest the need to understand e-hookah products' distinct characteristics and users' smoking patterns and behaviors to help inform tobacco regulation specific to hookah.
Copyright © 2019 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 31564602     DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2019.05.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Prev Med        ISSN: 0749-3797            Impact factor:   5.043


  4 in total

1.  Use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) among U.S. women of reproductive age: Prevalence, reported reasons for use, and toxin exposure.

Authors:  Sulamunn R M Coleman; Janice Y Bunn; Tyler D Nighbor; Allison N Kurti; Hypatia A Bolívar; Rachel F Tyndale; Stephen T Higgins
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2021-04-27       Impact factor: 4.018

Review 2.  The effect of emerging tobacco related products and their toxic constituents on thrombosis.

Authors:  Ahmed B Alarabi; Patricia A Lozano; Fadi T Khasawneh; Fatima Z Alshbool
Journal:  Life Sci       Date:  2021-12-23       Impact factor: 6.780

3.  Ascorbic Acid Prevents Vascular Endothelial Dysfunction Induced by Electronic Hookah (Waterpipe) Vaping.

Authors:  Mary Rezk-Hanna; Douglas R Seals; Matthew J Rossman; Rajat Gupta; Charlie O Nettle; Angelica Means; Daniel Dobrin; Chiao-Wei Cheng; Mary-Lynn Brecht; Zab Mosenifar; Jesus A Araujo; Neal L Benowitz
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2021-02-20       Impact factor: 6.106

4.  Differential Effects of Electronic Hookah Vaping and Traditional Combustible Hookah Smoking on Oxidation, Inflammation, and Arterial Stiffness.

Authors:  Mary Rezk-Hanna; Rajat Gupta; Charlie O Nettle; Daniel Dobrin; Chiao-Wei Cheng; Angelica Means; Mary-Lynn Brecht; Donald P Tashkin; Jesus A Araujo
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2021-07-21       Impact factor: 10.262

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.