Megan E Piper1, Timothy B Baker1, Robin Mermelstein2, Neal Benowitz3, Douglas E Jorenby1. 1. Center for Tobacco Research and Intervention, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Madison. 2. Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago. 3. Department of Medicine and Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to examine dependence on combustible and e-cigarettes among users of both products (dual users), which may provide important insights into long-term use patterns. Method: Dual users (smoking daily for 3 months, using e-cigarettes at least once/week for the past month; N = 256; 45% women, 71% White, M age 39.0 years) not interested in quitting either product participated in a longitudinal, 2-year, observational study. At baseline, participants completed measures of combustible and e-cigarette dependence (Fagerström Test of Cigarette Dependence [FTCD], e-FTCD, Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives [WISDM], e-WISDM, Penn State Cigarette Dependence Index, and Penn State E-Cigarette Dependence Index) and carried a study smartphone for 2 weeks to record cigarette and e-cigarette use events. Results: Most measures of dependence were product specific (e.g., FTCD and e-FTCD were not correlated, r = -0.003) and predicted product-specific outcomes (e.g., long-term use of that product). However, individuals used the two products for some of the same secondary dependence motives (e.g., weight control, cognitive and affective enhancement). These secondary, or instrumental, motives predicted use of both products at 1 year. Which product was used first in the morning was strongly related to product dependence scores and likelihood of continued product use at 1 year. Conclusions: Among dual users of combustible and e-cigarettes, measures of e-cigarette and cigarette dependence tended to be unrelated to one another, but dual users tended to use both products for the same instrumental motives. Which product is used first in the morning may serve as a valuable measure of relative dependence on the two products. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
Objective: The aim of this study was to examine dependence on combustible and e-cigarettes among users of both products (dual users), which may provide important insights into long-term use patterns. Method: Dual users (smoking daily for 3 months, using e-cigarettes at least once/week for the past month; N = 256; 45% women, 71% White, M age 39.0 years) not interested in quitting either product participated in a longitudinal, 2-year, observational study. At baseline, participants completed measures of combustible and e-cigarette dependence (Fagerström Test of Cigarette Dependence [FTCD], e-FTCD, Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives [WISDM], e-WISDM, Penn State Cigarette Dependence Index, and Penn State E-Cigarette Dependence Index) and carried a study smartphone for 2 weeks to record cigarette and e-cigarette use events. Results: Most measures of dependence were product specific (e.g., FTCD and e-FTCD were not correlated, r = -0.003) and predicted product-specific outcomes (e.g., long-term use of that product). However, individuals used the two products for some of the same secondary dependence motives (e.g., weight control, cognitive and affective enhancement). These secondary, or instrumental, motives predicted use of both products at 1 year. Which product was used first in the morning was strongly related to product dependence scores and likelihood of continued product use at 1 year. Conclusions: Among dual users of combustible and e-cigarettes, measures of e-cigarette and cigarette dependence tended to be unrelated to one another, but dual users tended to use both products for the same instrumental motives. Which product is used first in the morning may serve as a valuable measure of relative dependence on the two products. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
Authors: Megan E Piper; Thomas M Piasecki; E Belle Federman; Daniel M Bolt; Stevens S Smith; Michael C Fiore; Timothy B Baker Journal: J Consult Clin Psychol Date: 2004-04
Authors: Timothy B Baker; Megan E Piper; Tanya R Schlam; Jessica W Cook; Stevens S Smith; Wei-Yin Loh; Daniel Bolt Journal: J Abnorm Psychol Date: 2012-05-28
Authors: Neal L Benowitz; Gideon St Helen; Natalie Nardone; Lisa Sanderson Cox; Peyton Jacob Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2020-02-06 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Mohammadhassan Mirbolouk; Paniz Charkhchi; Sina Kianoush; S M Iftekhar Uddin; Olusola A Orimoloye; Rana Jaber; Aruni Bhatnagar; Emelia J Benjamin; Michael E Hall; Andrew P DeFilippis; Wasim Maziak; Khurram Nasir; Michael J Blaha Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2018-08-28 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Megan E Piper; Daniel M Bolt; Su-Young Kim; Sandra J Japuntich; Stevens S Smith; Jeff Niederdeppe; Dale S Cannon; Timothy B Baker Journal: J Abnorm Psychol Date: 2008-11
Authors: Megan E Piper; Timothy B Baker; Neal L Benowitz; Kate H Kobinsky; Douglas E Jorenby Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2019-08-19 Impact factor: 4.244