Claire Adams Spears1, Dina M Jones2, Scott R Weaver3, Bo Yang4, Terry F Pechacek5, Michael P Eriksen5. 1. Department of Health Policy and Behavioral Sciences, School of Public Health, Georgia State University, P.O. Box 3995, Atlanta, GA, 30302-3995, USA. Electronic address: cspears@gsu.eduDina. 2. Center for the Study of Tobacco, Fay W. Boozman College of Public Health, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, 4301 West Markham Street, Little Rock, AR, 72205, USA. 3. Department of Population Health Sciences, School of Public Health, Georgia State University, P.O. Box 3995, Atlanta, GA, 30302-3995, USA. 4. Department of Communication, University of Arizona, 1103 E. University Blvd., Tucson, AZ, 85721-0025, USA. 5. Department of Health Policy and Behavioral Sciences, School of Public Health, Georgia State University, P.O. Box 3995, Atlanta, GA, 30302-3995, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: People with mental health conditions (MHC) experience health disparities related to combustible tobacco use, and recent studies suggest disproportionately high use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS, e.g., e-cigarettes) among adults with MHC. Continued surveillance of ENDS use by MHC status is needed, as well as in-depth examinations of why adults with versus without MHC are using ENDS. METHODS: Using 2018 U.S. nationally representative data (N = 5878), this study examined associations between MHC and serious psychological distress (SPD) with ENDS use. Among current ENDS users (n = 544), associations between MHC and SPD with perceived benefits and reasons for using ENDS were also investigated. RESULTS: Both MHC and SPD were associated with higher likelihood of having ever used ENDS, currently using ENDS, and currently using ENDS daily. There was an interaction between SPD and smoking status in predicting current ENDS use such that the association between SPD and higher current ENDS use was stronger among never smokers. Compared to those without MHC, participants with MHC indicated that using ENDS helped them feel more relaxed and that stress management was a more important reason for ENDS use. CONCLUSIONS: U.S. adults with MHC (and particularly never smokers with SPD) report disproportionately high use of ENDS. Individuals with MHC may be particularly likely to use ENDS for relaxation and stress management.
BACKGROUND: People with mental health conditions (MHC) experience health disparities related to combustible tobacco use, and recent studies suggest disproportionately high use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS, e.g., e-cigarettes) among adults with MHC. Continued surveillance of ENDS use by MHC status is needed, as well as in-depth examinations of why adults with versus without MHC are using ENDS. METHODS: Using 2018 U.S. nationally representative data (N = 5878), this study examined associations between MHC and serious psychological distress (SPD) with ENDS use. Among current ENDS users (n = 544), associations between MHC and SPD with perceived benefits and reasons for using ENDS were also investigated. RESULTS: Both MHC and SPD were associated with higher likelihood of having ever used ENDS, currently using ENDS, and currently using ENDS daily. There was an interaction between SPD and smoking status in predicting current ENDS use such that the association between SPD and higher current ENDS use was stronger among never smokers. Compared to those without MHC, participants with MHC indicated that using ENDS helped them feel more relaxed and that stress management was a more important reason for ENDS use. CONCLUSIONS: U.S. adults with MHC (and particularly never smokers with SPD) report disproportionately high use of ENDS. Individuals with MHC may be particularly likely to use ENDS for relaxation and stress management.
Authors: Timothy B Baker; Megan E Piper; Danielle E McCarthy; Matthew R Majeskie; Michael C Fiore Journal: Psychol Rev Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 8.934
Authors: Ban A Majeed; Scott R Weaver; Kyle R Gregory; Carrie F Whitney; Paul Slovic; Terry F Pechacek; Michael P Eriksen Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2016-10-26 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Li-Shiun Chen; Timothy Baker; Ross C Brownson; Robert M Carney; Douglas Jorenby; Sarah Hartz; Nina Smock; Mark Johnson; Douglas Ziedonis; Laura J Bierut Journal: Community Ment Health J Date: 2016-11-30
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: Pasquale Caponnetto; Roberta Auditore; Cristina Russo; Giorgio Carlo Cappello; Riccardo Polosa Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2013-01-28 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Scott R Weaver; Jidong Huang; Terry F Pechacek; John Wesley Heath; David L Ashley; Michael P Eriksen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-07-09 Impact factor: 3.240