H Isabella Lanza1, Adam M Leventhal2, Junhan Cho3, Jessica L Braymiller3, Evan A Krueger3, Rob McConnell3, Jessica L Barrington-Trimis3. 1. Department of Human Development, California State University, Long Beach, CA 90840, USA. Electronic address: Isabella.Lanza@csulb.edu. 2. Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90032, USA; Department of Psychology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA; USC Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA. 3. Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90032, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The myriad of e-cigarette devices and flavors used by young adults (YAs) complicates identification of the particular e-cigarette products that are associated with more frequent tobacco use and merit consideration for regulation. The current study used latent class analysis to identify distinct patterns of e-cigarette device and flavor use and evaluate their association with vaping and smoking frequency. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey data (2018-2019) from a Southern California cohort were analyzed. YAs reporting past 30-day nicotine vaping (N = 550; M age = 19.2 years) self-reported e-cigarette device type/brand and flavor. Six device (e-cig/vape pen, mech mod, box mod, JUUL, non-JUUL pod, disposable) and three flavor (tobacco, mint/menthol, sweet/fruit) indicators were included in a latent class analysis. Past 30-day nicotine vaping and cigarette smoking frequency were assessed as correlates of device and flavor class membership. RESULTS: Three classes were identified: Any Pod-Mint/Menthol or Sweet/Fruit Flavor Users (prevalance:47%); Non-JUUL-Sweet/Fruit Flavor Users (28%); and Poly-Device-Poly-Flavor Users (25%). Greater frequency of vaping and smoking were associated with higher odds of belonging to the Poly-Device-Poly-Flavor Users class vs. the Any Pod-Mint/Menthol or Sweet/Fruit Flavor Users (vaping: aOR[95%CI] = 1.36[1.16, 1.59], p < .001; smoking: aOR[95%CI] = 1.25[1.02, 1.54], p = .03) and Non-JUUL-Sweet/Fruit Flavor Users (vaping: aOR[95%CI] = 1.30[1.10, 1.53], p < .01; smoking: aOR[95%CI] = 1.42[1.07, 1.88], p = .02) classes. CONCLUSIONS: Although YAs that predominately used pod devices alongside non-tobacco flavors were most common, YAs characterized by a proclivity toward using many different devices and flavors were appreciably prevalent and smoked and vaped more frequently. Regulations targeting a wide spectrum of vaping products may be optimal in protecting YA health.
OBJECTIVE: The myriad of e-cigarette devices and flavors used by young adults (YAs) complicates identification of the particular e-cigarette products that are associated with more frequent tobacco use and merit consideration for regulation. The current study used latent class analysis to identify distinct patterns of e-cigarette device and flavor use and evaluate their association with vaping and smoking frequency. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey data (2018-2019) from a Southern California cohort were analyzed. YAs reporting past 30-day nicotine vaping (N = 550; M age = 19.2 years) self-reported e-cigarette device type/brand and flavor. Six device (e-cig/vape pen, mech mod, box mod, JUUL, non-JUUL pod, disposable) and three flavor (tobacco, mint/menthol, sweet/fruit) indicators were included in a latent class analysis. Past 30-day nicotine vaping and cigarette smoking frequency were assessed as correlates of device and flavor class membership. RESULTS: Three classes were identified: Any Pod-Mint/Menthol or Sweet/Fruit Flavor Users (prevalance:47%); Non-JUUL-Sweet/Fruit Flavor Users (28%); and Poly-Device-Poly-Flavor Users (25%). Greater frequency of vaping and smoking were associated with higher odds of belonging to the Poly-Device-Poly-Flavor Users class vs. the Any Pod-Mint/Menthol or Sweet/Fruit Flavor Users (vaping: aOR[95%CI] = 1.36[1.16, 1.59], p < .001; smoking: aOR[95%CI] = 1.25[1.02, 1.54], p = .03) and Non-JUUL-Sweet/Fruit Flavor Users (vaping: aOR[95%CI] = 1.30[1.10, 1.53], p < .01; smoking: aOR[95%CI] = 1.42[1.07, 1.88], p = .02) classes. CONCLUSIONS: Although YAs that predominately used pod devices alongside non-tobacco flavors were most common, YAs characterized by a proclivity toward using many different devices and flavors were appreciably prevalent and smoked and vaped more frequently. Regulations targeting a wide spectrum of vaping products may be optimal in protecting YA health.
Authors: Soha Talih; Zainab Balhas; Thomas Eissenberg; Rola Salman; Nareg Karaoghlanian; Ahmad El Hellani; Rima Baalbaki; Najat Saliba; Alan Shihadeh Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2014-09-03 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Nicholas I Goldenson; Matthew G Kirkpatrick; Jessica L Barrington-Trimis; Raina D Pang; Julia F McBeth; Mary Ann Pentz; Jonathan M Samet; Adam M Leventhal Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2016-09-22 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Benjamin W Chaffee; Bonnie Halpern-Felsher; James Alton Croker; Miranda Werts; Elizabeth T Couch; Jing Cheng Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Rep Date: 2022-06-03
Authors: Mohammed M Alqahtani; Zachary B Massey; Robert T Fairman; Victoria Churchill; David L Ashley; Lucy Popova Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-06-02 Impact factor: 4.614
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