Search

Background: Effective and scalable prevention approaches are urgently needed to address the rapidly increasing rates of e-cigarette use among adolescents. School-based eHealth interventions can be an efficient, effective, and economical approach, yet there are none targeting e-cigarettes within Australia. This paper describes the protocol of the OurFutures Vaping Trial which aims to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of the first school-based eHealth intervention targeting e-cigarettes in Australia. Methods: A two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial will be conducted among Year 7 and 8 students (aged 12–14 years) in 42 secondary schools across New South Wales, Western Australia and Queensland, Australia. Using stratified block randomisation, schools will be assigned to either the OurFutures Vaping Program intervention group or an active control group (health education as usual). The intervention consists of four web-based cartoon lessons and accompanying activities delivered during health education over a four-week period. Whilst primarily focused on e-cigarette use, the program simultaneously addresses tobacco cigarette use. Students will complete online self-report surveys at baseline, post-intervention, 6-, 12-, 24-, and 36-months after baseline. The primary outcome is the uptake of e-cigarette use at 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes include the uptake of tobacco smoking, frequency/quantity of e-cigarettes use and tobacco smoking, intentions to use e-cigarettes/tobacco cigarettes, knowledge about e-cigarettes/tobacco cigarettes, motives and attitudes relating to e-cigarettes, self-efficacy to resist peer pressure and refuse e-cigarettes, mental health, quality of life, and resource utilisation. Generalized mixed effects regression will investigate whether receiving the intervention reduces the likelihood of primary and secondary outcomes. Cost-effectiveness and the effect on primary and secondary outcomes will also be examined over the longer-term. Discussion: If effective, the intervention will be readily accessible to schools via the OurFutures platform and has the potential to make substantial health and economic impact. Without such intervention, young Australians will be the first generation to use nicotine at higher rates than previous generations, thereby undoing decades of effective tobacco control. Trial registration: The trial has been prospectively registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12623000022662; date registered: 10/01/2023). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The United Kingdom and Australia have developed highly divergent policy responses to electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). To understand the historical origins of these differences, we describe the history of tobacco control in each country and the key roles played in setting ENDS policy in its early stages by public health regulations and policy networks, anti‐smoking organizations, 'vaper' activist networks and advocates of harm reduction policies towards injecting drug use. Methods: We analysed key government reports, policy statements from public health bodies and non‐government organizations (e.g. cancer councils and medical organizations) on ENDS; submissions to an Australian parliamentary inquiry; media coverage of policy debates in medical journals; and the history of tobacco control policy in Australia and England. Key discourses about ENDS were identified for each country. These were compared across countries during a multi‐day face‐to‐face meeting, where consensus was reached on the key commonalities and divergences in historical approaches to nicotine policy. This paper focuses on England, as different policy responses were apparent in constituent countries of the United Kingdom, and Scotland in particular. Results: Policymakers in Australia and England differ markedly in the priority that they have given to using ENDS to promote smoking cessation or restricting smokers' access to prevent uptake among young people. In understanding the origins of these divergent responses, we identified the following key differences between the two countries' approaches to nicotine regulation: an influential scientific network that favoured nicotine harm reduction in the United Kingdom and the absence of such a network in Australia; the success of different types of health activism both in England and in Europe in opposing more restrictive policies; and the greater influence on policy in England of the field of illicit drug harm reduction. Conclusions: An understanding of the different policy responses to electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) in England and Australia requires an appreciation of how actors within the different policy structures, scientific networks and activist organizations in each country and region have interpreted the evidence and the priority that policymakers have given to the competing goals of preventing adolescent uptake and encouraging smokers to use ENDS to quit smoking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION Mounting evidence suggests that electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are extensively promoted and marketed using social media, including through user-generated content and social media influencers. This study explores how e-cigarettes are being promoted on Instagram, using a case-study approach, and the extent to which Meta's Restricted Goods and Services Policy (Meta's policy) is being applied and enforced. METHODS We identified the accounts followed by an Australian Instagram influencer who primarily posts e-cigarette-related content. The main foci of these 855 accounts were coded and 369 vaping-focused accounts were identified. These vaping-focused accounts were then further coded by two trained coders. RESULTS All (n=369; 100.0%) of the vape content posted by these accounts was positive in sentiment. One-third of the vape accounts (n=127; 34.4%) had a shared focus, indicating that vape content may permeate into other online communities through shared interests. A total of 64 accounts (17.3%) potentially violated Meta's policy by attempting to purchase, sell, raffle or gift e-cigarette products. CONCLUSIONS The findings of this study suggest that pro-vaping information is available and accessible on Instagram. Much of the content identified in this study promoted the purchase or gifting of e-cigarette products and potentially violates Meta's policy. Greater regulation and/or stronger enforcement of e-cigarette content on social media platforms such as Instagram is necessary to prevent the ongoing promotion of these harmful products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION The World Health Organization recommends banning all forms of e-cigarette advertising, promotion, and sponsorship. The aims of the present study were to: 1) examine young people's exposure to e-cigarette advertising across a wide range of media in four diverse countries; and 2) identify any association between the number of different types of media exposures and e-cigarette use. METHODS A cross-sectional online survey was administered to approximately 1000 people aged 15-30 years in Australia, China, India, and the United Kingdom (n=4107). The survey assessed demographic characteristics, e-cigarette and tobacco use, numbers of friends and family members who vape, and exposure to multiple forms of e-cigarette advertising (e.g. television, radio, print, and various types of social media). Descriptive analyses were conducted on those who had heard of e-cigarettes (n=3095, significance threshold p<0.001) and a logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with e-cigarette ever use (significance threshold p<0.05). RESULTS The majority (85%) of respondents who had heard of e-cigarettes reported being exposed to e-cigarette advertising on at least one type of media, and the average number of types of media to which respondents were exposed was 5 (range: 0-17). The number of media types was significantly associated with ever use of e-cigarettes (OR=1.05; 95% CI: 1.02-1.08, p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS Despite advertising restrictions in place in all four countries, large majorities of young people reported being exposed to e-cigarette advertising. Social media and advertising on/around vape shops and other retailers appear to be key exposure locations. Urgent attention is needed to address these forms of exposure given their apparent association with e-cigarette use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION Secondary schools are a setting in which e-cigarette use among students has increased significantly, resulting in an urgent need for educators to develop and implement strategies to curb youth vaping. Research assessing school-based vaping prevention efforts is limited and largely confined to the US. This study assessed Australian secondary school staff members' experiences with e-cigarettes and explored (i) the presence of e-cigarette policies and educational programs, (ii) barriers to policy development and implementation, and (iii) desired support. METHODS Public, Catholic, and Independent secondary schools across Australia were sent an invitation to participate in this study, which involved completion of an online survey. A total of 218 school staff members (55% women) participated. Respondents included school principals, teachers, and other staff members. Data collection occurred May to September 2022. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected. RESULTS Nearly half (46%) of all school staff members surveyed reported finding a student with an e-cigarette on campus at least monthly, and one-third (36%) of principals reported suspending or expelling students at least monthly for e-cigarette possession or use. The vast majority of those surveyed agreed that e-cigarette use is increasingly becoming a problem in secondary schools (93%) and reported being concerned about e-cigarette use by students (94%). Only half (51%) reported that their school had an e-cigarette policy in place. The discreet appearance of e-cigarettes (83%) and difficulties pinpointing from where the vapor/scent is coming (73%) were the most frequently reported barriers to policy enforcement. CONCLUSIONS The results of this study suggest that e-cigarettes present a threat to secondary school environments. There is an urgent need to develop, implement, and enforce both school- and government-level e-cigarette policies to prevent and reduce youth vaping in Australian secondary schools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: This paper presents updated prevalence estimates of awareness, ever‐use, and current use of nicotine vaping products (NVPs) from 14 International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project (ITC Project) countries that have varying regulations governing NVP sales and marketing. Design, Setting, Participants and Measurements: A cross‐sectional analysis of adult (≥ 18 years) current smokers and ex‐smokers from 14 countries participating in the ITC Project. Data from the most recent survey questionnaire for each country were included, which spanned the period 2013–17. Countries were categorized into four groups based on regulations governing NVP sales and marketing (allowable or not), and level of enforcement (strict or weak where NVPs are not permitted to be sold): (1) most restrictive policies (MRPs), not legal to be sold or marketed with strict enforcement: Australia, Brazil, Uruguay; (2) restrictive policies (RPs), not approved for sale or marketing with weak enforcement: Canada, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand; (3) less restrictive policies (LRPs), legal to be sold and marketed with regulations: England, the Netherlands, Republic of Korea, United States; and (4) no regulatory policies (NRPs), Bangladesh, China, Zambia. Countries were also grouped by World Bank Income Classifications. Country‐specific weighted logistic regression models estimated adjusted NVP prevalence estimates for: awareness, ever/current use, and frequency of use (daily versus non‐daily). Findings NVP awareness and use were lowest in NRP countries. Generally, ever‐ and current use of NVPs were lower in MRP countries (ever‐use = 7.1–48.9%; current use = 0.3–3.5%) relative to LRP countries (ever‐use = 38.9–66.6%; current use = 5.5–17.2%) and RP countries (ever‐use = 10.0–62.4%; current use = 1.4–15.5%). NVP use was highest among high‐income countries, followed by upper–middle‐income countries, and then by lower–middle‐income countries. Conclusions: With a few exceptions, awareness and use of nicotine vaping products varied by the strength of national regulations governing nicotine vaping product sales/marketing, and by country income. In countries with no regulatory policies, use rates were very low, suggesting that there was little availability, marketing and/or interest in nicotine vaping products in these countries where smoking populations are predominantly poorer. The higher awareness and use of nicotine vaping products in high income countries with moderately (e.g. Canada, New Zealand) and less (e.g. England, United States) restrictive policies, is likely due to the greater availability and affordability of nicotine vaping products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) may reduce tobacco use and achieve tobacco abstinence in the perioperative period of cardiothoracic surgery for patients who smoke. However, research on patients' views on the role of e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation tool is lacking. This mixed-methods study explored perceptions on the use of e-cigarettes among current smokers and ex-smokers awaiting cardiothoracic surgery in Australia. METHODS A cross-sectional study and semi-structured interviews were conducted with 62 patients who were diagnosed with coronary artery disease or lung cancer and were scheduled for elective cardiothoracic surgery at six metropolitan hospitals in Sydney. Data were collected on demographic characteristics, smoking history, surgical risk index, self-efficacy, interest in, perceived benefits of, and barriers to using e-cigarettes in the perioperative period. RESULTS Current smokers reported significantly higher interest in the use of e-cigarettes (p=0.008), and perceived fewer barriers (p=0.048) and more health benefits (p=0.079), compared to ex-smokers. Current smokers considered e-cigarettes to be either a safer alternative to tobacco or a novel method for quitting. Recent ex-smokers, defined as those who quit 2-8 weeks, were a distinct group with high nicotine dependency, a long history of smoking, and multiple failed quit attempts. Compared to longer-term ex-smokers (8-52 weeks quit), recent ex-smokers were more interested in e-cigarettes (p=0.029) and considered e-cigarettes a useful aid to prevent relapse in the lead up to surgery and to manage their nicotine cravings. CONCLUSIONS E-cigarettes may be considered a short-term novel aid and a bridge to evidence-based methods to reduce harm from continued tobacco use for some patients awaiting cardiothoracic surgery for coronary artery disease or lung cancer. This study presents reasons why patients awaiting cardiothoracic surgery may enquire about or use e-cigarettes, which will help clinicians identify those who need more consistent, sustained cessation support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aims: Previous analyses of the effect of e‐cigarettes on real world smoking cessation success have mainly been based on surveys undertaken in the United States and United Kingdom, where nicotine e‐cigarettes can be readily obtained. In Australia, regulations have made obtaining e‐cigarettes containing nicotine difficult. The effectiveness of e‐cigarette use as a smoking cessation aid in Australia might therefore be lower than survey‐based estimates published to date. This study aimed to estimate the effect of using e‐cigarettes for a smoking cessation attempt on past‐year smoking cessation success in Australia. Design: Multivariable logistic regression models for past‐year smoking cessation success. Setting and participants: Respondents to the 2019 wave of Australia's National Drug Strategy Household Survey who made a smoking cessation attempt in the 12 months leading up to the survey. Measurements Past‐year smoking cessation success was assumed if a smoking cessation attempt resulted in abstinence of more than a month at the time of the survey. Findings In 2019, Australians who attempted to quit smoking using e‐cigarettes achieved greater success than smokers attempting to quit without e‐cigarettes [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.68; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.09–2.60]. If people who only tried e‐cigarettes once or twice are considered not to have used e‐cigarettes, the estimated effect was slightly stronger (aOR = 1.98; 95% CI = 1.27–3.10). Also, the estimated odds ratio was higher among vapers who acquired their e‐cigarettes from overseas websites (aOR = 2.24; 95% CI = 1.02–4.93). Conclusions: Use of e‐cigarettes for a smoking cessation attempt appears to be associated with greater success among Australians who attempted to quit tobacco in 2019 compared with Australians attempting to quit without e‐cigarettes, after adjusting for confounding effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To describe an outbreak of lung injuries in 2019 among people who vaped in the United States (type of injuries, people afflicted, substances vaped and cause of the injuries) and to analyse critically the regulatory responses of public health authorities and the media reporting of the outbreak. Methods: Case studies of the reporting of the e‐cigarette or vaping product use associated lung injury (EVALI) outbreak. We examined data on the number of cases of lung injury provided by the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC), public advice on the causes of the outbreak provided by the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), major media reports of the outbreak and proposed regulatory responses by governments in the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom. Results: The CDC initially suggested that the cause of the outbreak was nicotine vaping because the outbreak followed a large increase in nicotine vaping among US adolescents. Case–control studies revealed that the majority of cases had vaped illicit cannabis oils that were contaminated by vitamin E acetate. The CDC's public advice and the media were slow to report the evidence on the role of cannabis vaping. Popular government regulatory proposals—bans on sales of nicotine flavours and vaporizers—were based on the assumption that nicotine vaping was the cause of the outbreak. Conclusions: Media reporting in the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom of the US Centers for Disease Control's analysis of the causes of the e‐cigarette or vaping product use associated lung injury outbreak contributed to regulatory over‐reactions to nicotine vaping by the public health community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To compare the policy positions of health and medical organisations across Australia, New Zealand, and the UK as they relate to sale and supply of nicotine vaping products (NVPs) and evaluate factors that have informed the differences in policy recommendations among these countries.Methods: We used mixed methods to analyse data from position or policy statements published by health and medical organisations regarding NVPs (n = 30) and consultation documents submitted to government committees regarding policy options for the regulation of NVPs (n = 26). Quality assessment of included documents was conducted using the six-item Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist for Text and Opinion Papers, and findings were presented narratively. Qualitative data were coded using NVivo 12 software and analysed using thematic analysis.Results: An overwhelming majority of health bodies, charities and government agencies in the UK and New Zealand portrayed NVPs as a life-saving harm reduction tool. In contrast, concerns about addicting non-smoking youth to nicotine, a perceived lack of clear and convincing evidence of safety and efficacy and the potential to undermine tobacco control progress continues to define attitudes and recommendations towards NVPs among Australian health and medical organisations. Although the profoundly divided views among stakeholders seem to arise from empirical uncertainties and disagreements over the level and credibility of evidence, the source of most of these disagreements can be traced back to the fundamental and irreconcilable differences in the framing of the NVP debate, and varied tolerability of risk trade-offs associated with NVPs.Conclusion: Progress in resolving the controversy surrounding NVP policy requires stakeholders to be frame-reflective and engage in a meaningful dialogue of risk trade-offs, as well as both intended and unintended consequences of proposed policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To examine whether norms towards nicotine vaping product (NVP) use varied between Australia, Canada, England and the United States and by socio‐demographics, smoking and NVP status. Design Cross‐sectional data from the 2016 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey. Setting: Four countries with distinct regulatory policies relating to the sale and advertising of NVPs: Australia (most restrictive), Canada (restrictive), England and the United States (least restrictive). Participants: A total of 10900 adult (age 18+) current smokers, former smokers, or at least weekly NVP users. Respondents were from Australia (n = 1366), Canada (n = 3309), England (n = 3835) and the United States (n = 2390). Measurements Questions permitted the categorization of respondents as current smokers, former smokers, NVP users and socio‐demographic categories (sex, age, country, ethnicity, income and education). Further questions were asked regarding the frequency of exposure to NVPs in public, whether they had a partner or close friends who vaped and whether they believed society or those considered important to them approved of NVPs. Findings Adjusting for relevant covariates, compared with Australian respondents, those in England, Canada and the United States were more likely to report frequent exposure to NVPs in public (83.1%, 57.3% and 48.3%, respectively, compared to 19.8% in Australia; P < 0.0001), having a partner who vaped (13.8%, 7.1% and 7.7%, respectively, compared to 2.1% in Australia; P < 0.0001) and having close friend(s) who vaped (31.7%, 25.3%, 20.9%, respectively, compared to 10.0% in Australia; P < 0.0001). Compared with Australian respondents, respondents from England were more likely to report that society (27.6% compared to 12.3% in Australia; P < 0.0001) and people important to them approved of NVP use (28.9% compared to 14.3% in Australia; P < 0.0001). Conclusions: Norms towards nicotine vaping product (NVP) use appear to vary among countries with different regulatory contexts regarding sales and advertising. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Debate exists about whether health professionals (HPs) should advise smokers to use nicotine vaping products (NVPs) to quit smoking. The objectives were to examine in four countries: (1) the prevalence of HP discussions and recommendations to use an NVP; (2) who initiated NVP discussions; (3) the type of HP advice received about NVPs; and (4) smoker's characteristics related to receiving advice about NVPs. Design Cross‐sectional study using multivariable logistic regression analyses on weighted data from the 2016 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey (ITC 4CV1). Setting: Four countries with varying regulations governing the sale and marketing of NVPs: 'most restrictive' (Australia), 'restrictive' (Canada) or 'less restrictive' (England and United States). Participants: A total of 6615 adult smokers who reported having visited an HP in the last year (drawn from the total sample of 12 294 4CV1 respondents, of whom 9398 reported smoking cigarettes daily or weekly). Respondents were from the United States (n = 1518), England (n = 2116), Australia (n = 1046), and Canada (n = 1935). Measurements Participants' survey responses indicated if they were current daily or weekly smokers and had visited an HP in the past year. Among those participants, further questions asked participants to report (1) whether NVPs were discussed, (2) who raised the topic, (3) advice received on use of NVPs and (4) advice received on quitting smoking. Findings Among the 6615 smokers who visited an HP in the last year, 6.8% reported discussing NVPs with an HP and 2.1% of smokers were encouraged to use an NVP (36.1% of those who had a discussion). Compared with Australia (4.3%), discussing NVPs with an HP was more likely in the United States [8.8%, odds ratio (OR) = 2.15, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.41–3.29] and Canada (7.8%, OR = 1.87, 95% CI = 1.26–2.78). Smokers in Australia were less likely to discuss NVPs than smokers in England (6.2%), although this was not statistically significant (OR = 1.47, 95% CI = 0.98–2.20). Overall, the prevalence of HPs recommending NVPs was three times more likely in the United States than in Australia (OR = 3.07, 95% CI = 1.45–6.47), and twice as likely in Canada (OR = 2.28, 95% CI = 1.06–4.87) than in Australia. Australia and England did not differ (OR = 1.76, 95% CI = 0.83–3.74). Just over half (54%) of respondents brought up NVPs themselves; there were no significant differences among countries. Conclusions: Discussions in Australia, Canada, England, and the United States between smokers and health professionals about nicotine vaping products appear to be infrequent, regardless of the regulatory environment. A low percentage of health professionals recommended vaping products. This was particularly evident in Australia, which has the most restrictive regulatory environment of the four countries studied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Reducing the burden of physical illness among people living with severe mental illnesses (SMI) is a key priority. Smoking is strongly associated with SMIs resulting in excessive smoking related morbidity and mortality in smokers with SMI. Smoking cessation advice and assistance from mental health practitioners would assist with reducing smoking and smoking‐related harms in this group. This study examined the attitudes and practices of Australian mental health practitioners towards smoking cessation and tobacco harm reduction for smokers with SMI, including adherence to the 5As (ask, assess, advise, assist and arrange follow up) of smoking cessation. We surveyed 267 Australian mental health practitioners using a cross‐sectional, online survey. Most practitioners (77.5%) asked their clients about smoking and provided health education (66.7%) but fewer provided direct assistance (31.1–39.7%). Most believed that tobacco harm reduction strategies are effective for reducing smoking related risks (88.4%) and that abstinence from all nicotine should not be the only goal discussed with smokers with SMI (77.9%). Many respondents were unsure about the safety (56.9%) and efficacy (39.3%) of e‐cigarettes. Practitioners trained in smoking cessation were more likely (OR: 2.9, CI: 1.5–5.9) to help their clients to stop smoking. Community mental health practitioners (OR: 0.3, CI: 0.1–0.9) and practitioners who were current smokers (OR: 0.3, CI: 0.1–0.9) were less likely to adhere to the 5As of smoking cessation intervention. The results of this study emphasize the importance and need for providing smoking cessation training to mental health practitioners especially community mental health practitioners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Many e-cigarette advertisements (ads) are reminiscent of ads for cigarettes. This study explored the effects of e-cigarette ad exposure among former smokers in 2 countries with different e-cigarette regulation contexts. Methods: In an online study, 408 US and 405 Australian former smokers from survey panels were randomized to one of 14 e-cigarette or 2 control ads. Analyses examined effects of ad condition, and interactions by country and relapse susceptibility. Results: Effects were generally consistent across countries. Compared to control ads, those exposed to e-cigarette ads not only were more likely to have some urge or susceptibility to use e-cigarettes, but also were more likely to be reminded of smoking and have some desire to smoke cigarettes; US former smokers were less likely to be confident to abstain from smoking. These effects were especially pronounced among those susceptible to relapse. E-cigarette ad exposure was not associated with estimates of e-cigarette prevalence or perceptions of quitting ease. Conclusions: Exposure to e-cigarette ads can increase former smokers' desire to smoke and weaken their confidence to abstain. Regulators may need to consider the potential population impact of allowing former smokers to be exposed repeatedly to e-cigarette advertising. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]