Ashley Brown1, Rachel O'Donnell1, Douglas Eadie1, Richard Purves1, Helen Sweeting2, Allison Ford1, Linda Bauld3, Kate Hunt1. 1. Institute for Social Marketing and Health, Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK. 2. MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK. 3. Usher Institute and SPECTRUM Consortium, College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Scotland is one of the few countries in which e-cigarettes were available in prisons before the introduction of a comprehensive national smokefree policy, to assist in its implementation. This qualitative study explores the initial views and experiences of vaping in this specific context, from the perspective of people in custody (prisoners). AIMS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight people in custody were interviewed approximately 1-2 months after rechargeable e-cigarettes were made available in prisons and 2-5 weeks before implementation of a smokefree policy. Data were thematically analyzed to identify the range and diversity of views and experiences. RESULTS: Participants expressed support for e-cigarettes in preparation for the smokefree policy, describing their symbolic and practical value in this context. Uptake of vaping was strongly influenced by the need for participants to manage without tobacco in the near future. Participants evaluated their initial vaping experiences, either positively or negatively, in relation to the utility of e-cigarettes for mandated smoking abstinence and in providing satisfaction, pleasure, and novelty. Participant views on several issues related to e-cigarette use, both specific to the prison population (product choice and cost) and more generally (safety and long-term use), are explored. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest possible benefits of e-cigarettes as one means of supporting smokefree policy in a population with many smokers. They also point to potential challenges posed by vaping in prisons and smokefree settings caring for similar populations. There is a need for ongoing measures to maximize the health benefits of smokefree settings and for further research on vaping in situations of enforced abstinence. IMPLICATIONS: To our knowledge, no published studies have explored views and experiences of vaping in prison, when rechargeable vapes were new and the removal of tobacco was imminent. The results can inform tobacco control policy choices, planning and implementation in prisons and similar settings. In prison systems that permitting vaping, it is important that other measures (eg, information campaigns and nicotine dependence services) are implemented concurrently to minimize potential risks to the health or personal finances of people in custody.
INTRODUCTION: Scotland is one of the few countries in which e-cigarettes were available in prisons before the introduction of a comprehensive national smokefree policy, to assist in its implementation. This qualitative study explores the initial views and experiences of vaping in this specific context, from the perspective of people in custody (prisoners). AIMS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight people in custody were interviewed approximately 1-2 months after rechargeable e-cigarettes were made available in prisons and 2-5 weeks before implementation of a smokefree policy. Data were thematically analyzed to identify the range and diversity of views and experiences. RESULTS:Participants expressed support for e-cigarettes in preparation for the smokefree policy, describing their symbolic and practical value in this context. Uptake of vaping was strongly influenced by the need for participants to manage without tobacco in the near future. Participants evaluated their initial vaping experiences, either positively or negatively, in relation to the utility of e-cigarettes for mandated smoking abstinence and in providing satisfaction, pleasure, and novelty. Participant views on several issues related to e-cigarette use, both specific to the prison population (product choice and cost) and more generally (safety and long-term use), are explored. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest possible benefits of e-cigarettes as one means of supporting smokefree policy in a population with many smokers. They also point to potential challenges posed by vaping in prisons and smokefree settings caring for similar populations. There is a need for ongoing measures to maximize the health benefits of smokefree settings and for further research on vaping in situations of enforced abstinence. IMPLICATIONS: To our knowledge, no published studies have explored views and experiences of vaping in prison, when rechargeable vapes were new and the removal of tobacco was imminent. The results can inform tobacco control policy choices, planning and implementation in prisons and similar settings. In prison systems that permitting vaping, it is important that other measures (eg, information campaigns and nicotine dependence services) are implemented concurrently to minimize potential risks to the health or personal finances of people in custody.
Authors: Peter S Hendricks; Christopher B Thorne; Sara N Lappan; Noah W Sweat; JeeWon Cheong; Rekha Ramachandran; Connie L Kohler; William C Bailey; Kathleen F Harrington Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2018-01-05 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Cheneal Puljević; Ross Coomber; Stuart A Kinner; Dominique de Andrade; Courtney Mitchell; Alan White; Sarah L Cresswell; Jasper Bowman Journal: Drug Alcohol Rev Date: 2018-07-26
Authors: Kim A G J Romijnders; Liesbeth van Osch; Hein de Vries; Reinskje Talhout Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2018-06-06 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Rebekah Pratt; Claire Pernat; Linda Kerandi; Azul Kmiecik; Cathy Strobel-Ayres; Anne Joseph; Susan A Everson Rose; Xianghua Luo; Ned Cooney; Janet Thomas; Kola Okuyemi Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2019-05-24 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Anne C Spaulding; Gloria D Eldridge; Cynthia E Chico; Nancy Morisseau; Ana Drobeniuc; Rebecca Fils-Aime; Carolyn Day; Robyn Hopkins; Xingzhong Jin; Junyu Chen; Kate A Dolan Journal: Epidemiol Rev Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: Rachel O'Donnell; Ashley Brown; Douglas Eadie; Danielle Mitchell; Linda Bauld; Evangelia Demou; Richard Purves; Helen Sweeting; Kate Hunt Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-02-21 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Evangelia Demou; Ruaraidh Dobson; Helen Sweeting; Ashley Brown; Scott Sidwell; Rachel O'Donnell; Kate Hunt; Sean Semple Journal: Ann Work Expo Health Date: 2020-11-16 Impact factor: 2.779