Search

Background and Aims: Long‐acting injectable buprenorphine (LAIB) is a new treatment for opioid use disorder that is generating positive outcomes. Negative effects are typically mild and transient, but can occasionally be serious, resulting in treatment discontinuation/non‐adherence. This paper aims to analyse patients' accounts of how they felt during the first 72 h after initiating LAIB. Methods: Semi‐structured interviews were conducted (June 2021–March 2022) with 26 people (18 males and 8 females) who had started LAIB within the previous 72 h. Participants were recruited from treatment services in England and Wales and were interviewed by telephone using a topic guide. Interviews were audio‐recorded, transcribed and coded. The concepts of embodiment and embodied cognition framed the analyses. Data on participants' substance use, initiation onto LAIB and feelings were tabulated. Next, participants' accounts of how they felt were analysed following the stages of Iterative Categorization. Results: Participants reported complex combinations of changing negative and positive feelings. Bodily experiences included withdrawal symptoms, poor sleep, injection‐site pain/soreness, lethargy and heightened senses inducing nausea ('distressed bodies'), but also enhanced somatic wellbeing, improved sleep, better skin, increased appetite, reduced constipation and heightened senses inducing pleasure ('returning body functions'). Cognitive responses included anxiety, uncertainties and low mood/depression ('the mind in crisis') and improved mood, greater positivity and reduced craving ('feeling psychologically better'). Whereas most negative effects reported are widely recognized, the early benefits of treatment described are less well‐documented and may be an overlooked distinctive feature of LAIB. Conclusions: During the first 72 h after initiating long‐acting injectable buprenorphine, new patients report experiencing a range of interconnected positive and negative short‐term effects. Providing new patients with information about the range and nature of these effects can prepare them for what to expect and help them manage feelings and reduce anxiety. In turn, this may increase medication adherence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims This paper estimates how far monthly changes in prevalence of cigarette smoking, motivation to quit and attempts to stop smoking have been associated with changes in prevalence of high-risk drinking, and motivation and attempts to reduce alcohol consumption in England. Design Data were used from the Alcohol and Smoking Toolkit Studies between April 2014 and June 2016. These involve monthly household face-to-face surveys of representative samples of ~1700 adults in England. Measurements Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average with Exogeneous Input (ARIMAX) modelling was used to assess the association over time between monthly prevalence of (a) smoking and high-risk drinking; (b) high motivation to quit smoking and high motivation to reduce alcohol consumption; and (c) attempts to quit smoking and attempts to reduce alcohol consumption. Findings Mean smoking prevalence over the study period was 18.6% and high-risk drinking prevalence was 13.0%. A decrease of 1% of the series mean smoking prevalence was associated with a reduction of 0.185% of the mean prevalence of high-risk drinking 2 months later [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.033 to 0.337, P = 0.017]. A statistically significant association was not found between prevalence of high motivation to quit smoking and high motivation to reduce alcohol consumption (β = 0.324, 95% CI = -0.371 to 1.019, P = 0.360) or prevalence of attempts to quit smoking and attempts to reduce alcohol consumption (β = −0.026, 95% CI = -1.348 to 1.296, P = 0.969). Conclusion Between 2014 and 2016, monthly changes in prevalence of smoking in England were associated positively with prevalence of high-risk drinking. There was no significant association between motivation to stop and motivation to reduce alcohol consumption, or attempts to quit smoking and attempts to reduce alcohol consumption. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims Regulation of electronic cigarettes has moved to the top of the addiction policy agenda, as demonstrated by the recent focus across the United Kingdom on introducing age-of-sale restrictions. However, the views of those affected by such regulation remain largely unexplored. This paper presents the first detailed qualitative exploration of adolescents' perceptions of existing, and opinions about potential e-cigarette regulation. Methods Sixteen focus groups, including a total of 83 teenagers between the ages of 14 and 17 years, were conducted in deprived, mixed and affluent urban areas in Scotland and England between November 2014 and February 2015. Transcripts were imported into Nivivo 10, coded thematically and analysed. Results Participants critically considered existing evidence and competing interests in regulatory debates and demonstrated sophisticated understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of regulation. They overwhelmingly supported strong e-cigarette regulation and endorsed restrictions on sales to minors, marketing and e-cigarette use in public places. Concern about potential health harms of e-cigarette use and marketing increasing the acceptability of vaping and smoking led these adolescents to support regulation. Conclusions In focus group discussions, a sample of UK adolescents exposed to particular communications about e-cigarettes supported strict regulation of e-cigarettes, including banning sales to minors and use in indoor public areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Aims There is a growing interest in very low rate [fewer than one cigarette per day (CPD)] and light (one to nine CPD) smokers and in some parts of the world their numbers appear to be increasing. This paper examined changes in prevalence over the past 5 years, cessation patterns, and smoking and demographic characteristics of very low rate, light and moderate-to-heavy (10+ CPD) smokers in England. Design Cross-sectional and longitudinal data from aggregated monthly waves of a household survey: the Smoking Toolkit Study. Setting England. Participants A total of 23 245 smokers interviewed between November 2006 and May 2011 and 4147 who provided data at 6-month follow-up. Measurements We compared the demographic and smoking characteristics between the three groups of smokers at baseline, and the rate of attempts to quit, use of aids to cessation and success of quit attempts at follow-up. Findings Very low rate smoking remained extremely rare (1.9% of smokers in 2006 to 2.8% in 2011), but light smoking became increasingly common (23.9-32.8%). Compared with moderate-to-heavy smokers, very low rate and light smokers were younger, more often female and from a higher socio-economic background. They were more motivated to quit and enjoyed smoking less. During the 6-month follow-up period, light smokers, but not very low rate smokers, were more likely to attempt to quit than moderate-to-heavy smokers. When they tried to quit, very low rate and light smokers used aids to cessation less than moderate-to-heavy smokers but still used them to a substantial degree: 18%, 31% and 44% used over-the-counter nicotine replacement therapy in their most recent quit attempt for the three types of smoker, respectively. Even very low rate smokers had a substantial failure rate: 65% failed in their most recent quit attempt within 6 months. Conclusions Very low rate (fewer than one cigarette per day) and light (one to nine cigarettes per day) smokers in England are at least as motivated to quit as heavier smokers. Although they use cessation medication less than heavier smokers and are more likely to succeed, they still use such medication and fail in quit attempts to a substantial degree. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background and aims: Estimating ‘return on investment’ (ROI) from smoking cessation interventions requires reach and effectiveness parameters for interventions for use in economic models such as the EQUIPT ROI tool ( http://roi.equipt.eu). This paper describes the derivation of these parameter estimates for England that can be adapted to create ROI models for use by other countries. Methods: Estimates were derived for interventions in terms of their reach and effectiveness in: (1) promoting quit attempts and (2) improving the success of quit attempts (abstinence for at least 12 months). The sources were systematic reviews of efficacy supplemented by individual effectiveness evaluations and national surveys. Findings: Quit attempt rates were estimated to be increased by the following percentages (with reach in parentheses): 20% by tax increases raising the cost of smoking 5% above the cost of living index (100%); 10% by enforced comprehensive indoor public smoking bans (100%); 3% by mass media campaigns achieving 400 gross rating points (100%); 40% by brief opportunistic physician advice (21%); and 110% by use of a licensed nicotine product to reduce cigarette consumption (12%). Quit success rates were estimated to be increased by the following ratios: 60% by single‐form nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (5%); 114% by NRT patch plus a faster‐acting NRT (2%);124% by prescribed varenicline (5%); 60% by bupropion (1%); 100% by nortriptyline (0%), 10) 298% by cytisine (0%); 40% by individual face‐to‐face behavioural support (2%); 37% by telephone support (0.5%); 88% by group behavioural support (1%); 63% by text messaging (0.5%); and 19% by printed self‐help materials (1%). There was insufficient evidence to obtain reliable, country‐specific estimates for interventions such as websites, smartphone applications and e‐cigarettes. Conclusions: Tax increases, indoor smoking bans, brief opportunistic physician advice and use of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for smoking reduction can all increase population quit attempt rates. Quit success rates can be increased by provision of NRT, varenicline, bupropion, nortriptyline, cytisine and behavioural support delivered through a variety of modalities. Parameter estimates for the effectiveness and reach of these interventions can contribute to return on investment estimates in support of national or regional policy decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]