Search

Abstract Background This study aimed to characterise patterns of tobacco smoking and vaping among older adults (≥ 65 years) in England, to explore harm perceptions of e-cigarettes among those who smoke, and to estimate the real-world effectiveness of e-cigarettes for helping older adults to stop smoking. Methods Data were collected as part of a representative monthly cross-sectional household survey in England between April 2014 and April 2024 (n = 197,219). We analysed differences between older (≥ 65 years) and younger/middle-aged adults (18–64 years) in (a) time trends in tobacco smoking and vaping, (b) harm perceptions of e-cigarettes vs. cigarettes (adjusting for gender, socioeconomic position, and vaping status), and (c) the real-world effectiveness of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation (adjusting for gender, socioeconomic position, characteristics of the quit attempt, and use of other evidence-based cessation aids). Results Tobacco smoking prevalence remained relatively unchanged over time among older adults (at ~ 9%; 9.5% [8.5–10.6%] in April 2014 and 8.7% [7.7–9.8%] in April 2024) but vaping prevalence increased (from 2.1% [1.6–2.7%] to 3.7% [3.0–4.6%], respectively). These trends differed from those observed among younger/middle-aged adults, among whom there was a clear decline in smoking (from 21.8% [21.0–22.7%] to 18.2% [17.3–19.0%]) and a larger increase in vaping (from 5.6% [5.2–6.1%] to 16.2% [15.3–17.0%]). Older adults were consistently less likely than younger/middle-aged adults to use e-cigarettes to support attempts to quit smoking (26.8% [17.2–39.3%] vs. 43.7% [39.6–48.0%] in April 2024). Older smokers reported greater uncertainty about the harms of e-cigarettes compared with cigarettes (ORadj = 2.48 [2.28–2.69]). E-cigarettes appeared to be effective for helping older adults to stop smoking (ORadj = 1.50 [0.96–2.34]); whether effectiveness was lower than for younger/middle-aged adults was inconclusive. Conclusions Over the past decade, smoking prevalence has remained stable among older adults while decreasing among the rest of the adult population in England. Older adults are more unsure about the relative harms of e-cigarettes and less likely to use them to support attempts to quit smoking, despite evidence that they are effective for smoking cessation in this population.

Abstract Background Cigarette smoking is incredibly harmful, even for people who do not smoke every day. This study aimed to estimate trends in non-daily smoking in England between 2006 and 2024, how these differed across population subgroups, and to explore changes in the profile of non-daily smokers in terms of their sociodemographic and smoking characteristics and vaping and alcohol consumption. Methods Data were collected monthly between November 2006 and April 2024 as part of a nationally representative, repeat cross-sectional survey of adults (≥ 18 years; n = 353,711). We used logistic regression to estimate associations between survey wave and non-daily smoking and used descriptive statistics to characterise the profile of non-daily smokers across 3-year periods. Results The proportion who smoked non-daily was relatively stable between November 2006 and November 2013, at an average of 10.5% [10.1–10.9%] of cigarette smokers, then increased to 27.2% [26.0–28.4%] of cigarette smokers (4.0% [3.7–4.2%] of adults) by April 2024. This increase was particularly pronounced among younger adults (e.g. reaching 52.8%, 20.4%, and 14.4% of 18-, 45-, and 65-year-old cigarette smokers by April 2024) and those who vape (reaching 34.2% among vapers vs. 23.1% among non-vapers). Over time, there were reductions in non-daily smokers’ mean weekly cigarette consumption (from 34.3 in 2006–2009 to 21.1 in 2021–2024), urges to smoke (e.g. the proportion reporting no urges increased from 29.2 to 38.0%), and motivation to stop smoking (e.g. the proportion highly motivated to quit within the next 3 months decreased from 30.8 to 21.0%). Conclusions An increasing proportion of adults in England who smoke cigarettes do not smoke every day, particularly younger adults. Although non-daily smokers report smoking fewer cigarettes and weaker urges to smoke than they used to, which may make it easier for them to stop smoking, they appear to be decreasingly motivated to quit.

Objectives There is evidence that general practitioners (GPs) can increase the uptake of weight management programmes that enhance weight loss compared with self-directed efforts, but the rate at which they do so is unclear. This study examined the prevalence of weight control efforts and practices, the reported frequency and impact of receipt of GP advice on weight loss attempts and perceptions of the appropriateness of health professionals delivering weight loss advice.Design A nationally representative cross-sectional survey.Setting England.Participants 1722 adults (≥16 years) surveyed in October 2018 (mean (SD) age=47.4 (19.2), 51.1% women).Main outcome measures Weight control efforts and practices, whether a GP gave advice or a specific referral/prescription medication, perception of the appropriateness of GP weight loss advice.Results Two-thirds (64.7% (95% CI 58.1% to 71.3%)) of people with obesity reported trying to lose weight. Of people with obesity who visited their GP in the past year, 40% (95% CI 32.2% to 47.7%) recalled receiving any advice on weight loss: 30.8% (95% CI 23.5% to 38.2%) general advice and 9.2% (95% CI 4.6% to 13.7%) a referral to a weight loss service or prescription medication for weight loss. Having received weight loss advice from a GP was strongly associated with a greater likelihood of trying to lose weight (general advice: ORadj=4.49, 95% CI 2.52 to 8.00; referral/medication: ORadj=9.25, 95% CI 2.65 to 32.3). Views on whether health professionals should deliver weight loss advice were mixed, with a substantial minority (19.4% (95% CI 17.5% to 21.4%)) finding it unacceptable. People with a BMI outside of the healthy weight range (underweight/overweight/obesity), women and those from more disadvantaged social grades were less likely to find it acceptable.Conclusions Most people with obesity reported trying to lose weight but less than half recalled receiving advice on weight loss from their GP in the past year and few were referred to community weight-loss programmes. Those who recalled receiving GP advice on weight loss were substantially more likely to report taking action to lose weight. One in five people thought GP advice on weight loss was inappropriate.

Abstract Background Tobacco smoking affects women’s fertility and is associated with substantial risks of adverse pregnancy outcomes. This study explored trends by socioeconomic position in patterns of smoking, use of non-combustible nicotine products, and quitting activity among women of reproductive age in England. Methods Data come from a nationally representative monthly cross-sectional survey. Between October 2013 and October 2023, 197,266 adults (≥ 18 years) were surveyed, of whom 44,052 were women of reproductive age (18–45 years). Main outcome measures were current smoking, vaping, and use of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), heated tobacco products (HTPs), and nicotine pouches; mainly/exclusively smoking hand-rolled cigarettes and level of dependence among current smokers; past-year quit attempts among past-year smokers; and success of quit attempts among those who tried to quit. We modelled time trends in these outcomes, overall and by occupational social grade (ABC1 = more advantaged/C2DE = less advantaged). Results Smoking prevalence among women of reproductive age fell from 28.7% [95%CI = 26.3–31.2%] to 22.4% [19.6–25.5%] in social grades C2DE but there was an uncertain increase from 11.7% [10.2–13.5%] to 14.9% [13.4–16.6%] in ABC1. By contrast, among all adults and among men of the same age, smoking prevalence remained relatively stable in ABC1. Vaping prevalence among women of reproductive age more than tripled, from 5.1% [4.3–6.0%] to 19.7% [18.0–21.5%], with the absolute increase more pronounced among those in social grades C2DE (reaching 26.7%; 23.3–30.3%); these changes were larger than those observed among all adults but similar to those among men of the same age. The proportion of smokers mainly/exclusively smoking hand-rolled cigarettes increased from 40.5% [36.3–44.9%] to 61.4% [56.5–66.1%] among women of reproductive age; smaller increases were observed among all adults and among men of the same age. Patterns on other outcomes were largely similar between groups. Conclusions Among women of reproductive age, there appears to have been a rise in smoking prevalence in the more advantaged social grades over the past decade. Across social grades, there have been substantial increases in the proportion of women of reproductive age who vape and shifts from use of manufactured to hand-rolled cigarettes among those who smoke. These changes have been more pronounced than those observed in the general adult population over the same period.

Objectives This study explores the association between vaccine hesitancy, vaccine knowledge and psychological well-being with (1) receipt of/willingness to receive an initial vaccine against COVID-19, and (2) willingness to get vaccinated yearly against COVID-19. The importance of different vaccine attributes (eg, vaccine technology, effectiveness, side effects) to choose a specific COVID-19 vaccine was also assessed.Design Cross-sectional survey administered during May to June 2021 on vaccine hesitancy, vaccine knowledge, psychological well-being, willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccines, sociodemographics and COVID-19-related factors.Setting UK.Participants A self-selected sample of 1408 adults.Outcome measures Receipt of/willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccine for the first time and yearly.Results Receipt of/willingness to receive a vaccine against COVID-19 initially and yearly were high (97.0% and 86.6%, respectively). Vaccine hesitancy was negatively associated with receipt of/willingness to receive vaccine initially/yearly (adjusted OR (aOR)=0.09, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.26, p

Abstract Background Following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, in March 2020 health care delivery underwent considerable changes. It is unclear how this may have affected the delivery of Brief Interventions (BIs) for smoking and alcohol. We examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the receipt of BIs for smoking and alcohol in primary care in England and whether certain priority groups (e.g., less advantaged socioeconomic positions, or a history of a mental health condition) were differentially affected. Methods We used nationally representative data from a monthly cross-sectional survey in England between 03/2014 and 06/2022. Monthly trends in the receipt of BIs for smoking and alcohol were examined using generalised additive models among adults who smoked in the past-year (weighted N = 31,390) and those using alcohol at increasing and higher risk levels (AUDIT score 38, weighted N = 22,386), respectively. Interactions were tested between social grade and the change in slope after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and results reported stratified by social grade. Further logistic regression models assessed whether changes in the of receipt of BIs for smoking and alcohol, respectively, from 12/2016 to 01/2017 and 10/2020 to 06/2022 (or 03/2022 in the case of BIs for alcohol), depended on history of a mental health condition. Results The receipt of smoking BIs declined from an average prevalence of 31.8% (95%CI 29.4–35.0) pre-March 2020 to 24.4% (95%CI 23.5–25.4) post-March 2020. The best-fitting model found that after March 2020 there was a 12-month decline before stabilising by June 2022 in social grade ABC1 at a lower level (~ 20%) and rebounding among social grade C2DE (~ 27%). Receipt of BIs for alcohol was low (overall: 4.1%, 95%CI 3.9–4.4) and the prevalence was similar pre- and post-March 2020. Conclusions The receipt of BIs for smoking declined following March 2020 but rebounded among priority socioeconomic groups of people who smoked. BIs for alcohol among those who use alcohol at increasing and higher risk levels were low and there was no appreciable change over time. Maintaining higher BI delivery among socioeconomic and mental health priority groups of smokers and increasing and higher risk alcohol users is important to support reductions in smoking and alcohol related inequalities.

Abstract Nicotine vaping products (NVPs) and heated tobacco products (HTPs) are designed to replicate the sensory and behavioural aspects of smoking cigarettes while avoiding combustion. The success of these products as harm reduction tools will partially depend on their ability to satisfy smokers and alleviate nicotine-related withdrawal symptoms. This study aims to compare short-term effects of NVPs (Juul and Aspire PockeX) versus HTPs (IQOS) on smoking-related withdrawal relief, product satisfaction, intention to switch to NVP/HTP, perceptions and attitudes in UK adult cigarette smokers naïve to these products. In a randomized cross-over study, 45 participants visited the lab twice, at each visit trying one of the two products (NVP/HTP) and completing a questionnaire. Responses were normalized on a 0–100% scale and mean differences (MD) between NVP and HTP scores computed, with positive and negative MD values indicating greater endorsement for NVP and HTP, respectively. Cigarette cravings were reduced similarly (~ 20.0%) by both products (MD = 4.5%, 95%Confidence Interval (CI) − 4.8, 13.8). Direct positive effects (MD = − 3.5%, 95%CI − 7.2, 0.2) and adverse side effects (MD = 1.8%, 95%CI − 0.3, 3.8) were comparable after each product use, though marginally favouring HTPs. HTPs were perceived as more satisfying overall (MD = − 13.2%, 95%CI − 20.3 − 6.1) than NVPs but both were perceived as similarly addictive (MD = 3.6%, 95%CI − 4.6, 11.8), relative to cigarettes. Intention to switch to either product was comparable (MD = 4.0%, 95%CI − 5.7, 13.8). Comparison of acute use of NVP versus HTP in a sample of UK smokers naïve to these products suggests that HTPs are perceived as more satisfying than NVPs, though still less satisfying than cigarettes. Registration: The analysis plan was pre-registered, and it is available at https://osf.io/6ymdu

Abstract Background Studies conducted during the early stages of the pandemic documented mixed changes in smoking behaviour: more smokers quitting successfully but little change in prevalence. This study aimed to examine whether there have been sustained impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on smoking patterns in England. Methods Data were from 101,960 adults (≥ 18 years) participating in the Smoking Toolkit Study, a monthly representative household survey, between June 2017 and August 2022. Interviews were conducted face-to-face until March 2020 and via telephone thereafter. Generalised additive models estimated associations of the pandemic onset (March 2020) with current smoking, uptake, cessation, quit attempts, and use of support. Models adjusted for seasonality, sociodemographic characteristics, and (where relevant) dependence and tobacco control mass-media expenditure. Results Before the COVID-19 pandemic, smoking prevalence fell by 5.2% per year; this rate of decline slowed to 0.3% per year during the pandemic (RRΔtrend = 1.06, 95% CI = 1.02, 1.09). This slowing was evident in more but not less advantaged social grades (RRΔtrend = 1.15, 1.08, 1.21; RRΔtrend = 1.00, 0.96, 1.05). There were sustained step-level changes in different age groups: a 34.9% (95% CI = 17.7, 54.7%) increase in smoking prevalence among 18–24-year-olds, indicating a potential rise in uptake, in contrast to a 13.6% (95% CI = 4.4, 21.9%) decrease among 45–65-year-olds. In both age groups, these step-level changes were followed by the pre-pandemic declines stopping, and prevalence remaining flat. There were sustained increases in quitting among past-year smokers, with a 120.4% (95% CI = 79.4, 170.9%) step-level increase in cessation and a 41.7% (95% CI = 29.7, 54.7%) increase in quit attempts. The main limitation was the change in modality of data collection when the pandemic started; while this may have contributed to the step-level changes we observed, it is unlikely to explain changes in the slope of trends. Conclusions In England, the rate of decline in adult smoking prevalence stagnated during the COVID-19 pandemic through to 2022. At the start of the pandemic, a potential reduction in smoking prevalence among middle-aged adults and increases in quitting among smokers may have been offset by an increase in smoking among young adults. The slowing in the rate of decline was pronounced in more advantaged social grades.

Objectives Gambling is associated with cigarette smoking and alcohol consumption. We explored the intersection of gambling across all risk levels of harm with smoking and alcohol use among adults in Great Britain.Design A nationally representative cross-sectional survey in October 2022.Setting Great Britain.Participants A weighted total of 2398 adults (18+ years).Outcome measures We examined the prevalence of past-year gambling and, among those reporting gambling, assessed the associations between the outcome of any risk of harm from gambling (scoring >0 on the Problem Gambling Severity Index) and the binary predictor variables of current cigarette smoking and higher risk alcohol consumption (AUDIT-C score≥4). We also explored data on weekly expenditure on gambling with smoking and alcohol use among those categorised at any-risk of harm from gambling.Results Overall, 43.6% (95% CI 41.2% to 45.9%) of adults gambled in the past year. Among these, 7.3% (95% CI 5.3% to 9.3%) were classified at any-risk of harm from gambling, 16.0% (95% CI 13.2% to 18.8%) were currently smoking and 40.8% (95% CI 37.2% to 44.4%) were drinking at increasing and higher risk levels. There were no associations between any risk of harm from gambling and current smoking (OR adjusted=0.80, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.66) or drinking at increasing and higher risk levels (OR adjusted=0.94, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.69), respectively. Analyses using Bayes factors indicated that these data were insensitive to distinguish no effect from a range of associations (OR=95% CI 0.5 to 1.9). The mean weekly spend on gambling was £7.69 (95% CI £5.17 to £10.21) overall, £4.80 (95% CI £4.18 to £5.43) among those classified as at no risk and £45.68 (95% CI £12.07 to £79.29) among those at any risk of harm from gambling.Conclusions Pilot data in a population-level survey on smoking and alcohol use yielded similar estimates to other population-level surveys on gambling participation and at-risk gambling. Further data are needed to elucidate the intersections more reliably between gambling, smoking and alcohol use and inform population-level approaches to reduce harm.

Background Several personality traits have been linked to addictive behaviours, including smoking and excessive drinking. We hypothesised that the combination of low conscientiousness, high extraversion and high neuroticism would be synergistically associated with smoking, excessive drinking and both behaviours combined. Methods Respondents aged 16+ years (N=363,454) were surveyed between 2009-2013 as part of the BBC Lab UK Study, with no restrictions on geographical location. Respondents provided information about sociodemographic characteristics, personality traits, and smoking and alcohol consumption. A series of multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted. Results No significant three-way but significant two-way interactive effects were observed. The association of high extraversion with smoking was more pronounced in those with high (vs. low) conscientiousness (ORadj=1.51, 95% CI=1.46, 1.56, p

Background: Alcohol and smoking brief interventions (BIs) in general practice have been shown to be effective in lowering alcohol and smoking-related harm. Aim: To assess prevalence of self-reported BI receipt among increasing or higher-risk drinkers and past-year smokers in England, Scotland, and Wales, and associations between intervention receipt and socioeconomic position. Design & setting: Cross-sectional study using data from a monthly population-based survey in England, Scotland, and Wales. Method: The study comprised 47 799 participants (15 573 increasing or higher-risk drinkers [alcohol use disorders identification test consumption score ≥5] and 7791 past-year smokers) surveyed via telephone in 2020–2022 (during the COVID-19 pandemic). All data were self-reported. Prevalence of self-reported BI receipt was assessed descriptively; associations between receipt and socioeconomic position were analysed using logistic regression. Results: Among adults in England, Scotland, and Wales, 32.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 31.8 to 32.7) reported increasing or higher-risk drinking and 17.7% (95% CI = 17.3 to 18.1) past-year smoking. Among increasing or higher-risk drinkers, 58.0% (95% CI = 57.1 to 58.9) consulted with a GP in the past year, and of these, 4.1% (95% CI = 3.6 to 4.6) reported receiving BIs. Among past-year smokers, 55.8% (95% CI = 54.5 to 57.1) attended general practice in the past year; of these, 41.0% (95% CI = 39.4 to 42.7) stated receiving BIs. There was a tendency for patients from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds to receive more alcohol (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.38, 95% CI = 1.10 to 1.73) or smoking BIs (aOR 1.11, 95% CI = 0.98 to 1.26), but for the latter the results were statistically non-significant. Results did not differ notably by nation within Great Britain. Conclusion: BIs in general practice are more common for smoking than for alcohol. A greater proportion of BIs for alcohol were found to be delivered to people who were from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds and who were increasing or higher-risk drinkers.

Abstract Background Adherence to health-protective behaviours (regularly washing hands, wearing masks indoors, maintaining physical distancing, carrying disinfectant) remains paramount for the successful control of COVID-19 at population level. It is therefore important to monitor adherence and to identify factors associated with it. This study assessed: 1) rates of adherence, to key COVID-19 health-protective behaviours and 2) the socio-demographic, health and COVID-19-related factors associated with adherence. Methods Data were collected on a sample of UK-based adults during August–September 2020 (n = 1,969; lockdown restrictions were eased in the UK; period 1) and November 2020- January 2021 (n = 1944; second UK lockdown; period 2). Results Adherence ranged between 50–95%, with higher adherence during the period of stricter measures. Highest adherence was observed for wearing masks indoors (period 1: 80.2%, 95%CI 78.4%-82.0%, period 2: 92.4%, 95%CI 91.1%-93.6%) and lowest for carrying own disinfectant (period 1: 48.4%, 95%CI 46.2%-50.7%, period 2: 50.7%, 95%CI 48.4%-53.0%). Generalized estimating equation models indicated that key factors of greater odds of adherence included being female, older age, having higher income, residing in England, living with vulnerable individuals and perceived high risk of COVID-19. Conclusions Targeted messages to different demographic groups may enhance adherence to health-protective behaviours, which is paramount for the control of airborne respiratory diseases. Protocol and analysis plan Registration The analysis plan was pre-registered, and it is available at https://osf.io/6tnc9/ .

Abstract Background Novel nicotine delivery devices (NNDDs) are a safer alternative to combustible tobacco smoking. Understanding what factors can facilitate people who smoke to use NNDDs can inform intervention design and public health messaging. This study aims to explore the facilitators and barriers to NNDD use from the perspective of smokers without prior use, after trialling two NNDDs. Method UK adults who smoke combustible cigarettes (n = 11) were recruited from a larger quantitative study after trialling two NNDDs, an electronic cigarette and a heated tobacco product (order randomly allocated). Semi-structured interviews were conducted, transcribed and thematically analysed, using the COM-B model of behaviour and NVivo12 pro software. Results Five main themes were identified: health knowledge, availability of and accessibility to NNDD products, cost, social acceptance, and NNDD use experience. There was curiosity and interest in the uptake and use of NNDDs, but the absence of centralised product information was identified as a barrier. Other themes were related to the design and functionality of the NNDD products. For example, the e-cigarette with its low maintenance was seen as easier to use than the heated tobacco product, which offered too short a single use duration and was described as ‘cumbersome’. Throat discomfort and high anticipated cost were among additional barriers identified for both product types. Conclusion This study highlights the need for reliable objective information on the health effects of NNDDs compared with combustible cigarettes, which could facilitate their regular use. Product adjustment such as single use duration alignment with combustible cigarette smoking duration may encourage uptake. Interventions offering opportunity for experience of NNDD use and knowledge dissemination of NNDDs could increase motivation to adopt harm reducing behaviours as demonstrated in this study.

Background: Several personality traits have been linked to addictive behaviours, including smoking and excessive drinking. We hypothesised that the combination of low conscientiousness, high extraversion and high neuroticism would be synergistically associated with smoking, excessive drinking and both behaviours combined. Methods: Respondents aged 16+ years (N=363,454) were surveyed between 2009-2013 as part of the BBC Lab UK Study, with no restrictions on geographical location. Respondents provided information about sociodemographic characteristics, personality traits, and smoking and alcohol consumption. A series of multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted. Results: No significant three-way but significant two-way interactive effects were observed. The association of high extraversion with smoking was more pronounced in those with high (vs. low) conscientiousness (ORadj=1.51, 95% CI=1.46, 1.56, p

IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic and attendant lockdowns have had a substantial negative effect on alcohol consumption and physical activity globally. Pre-pandemic evidence in the adult population suggests that higher levels of physical activity were associated with higher levels of drinking, but it is unclear how the pandemic may have affected this. Therefore, this study aims to assess the association between alcohol consumption and physical activity in a UK cohort established during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsAnalyses utilized data from the Health Behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic (HEBECO) study involving 2,057 UK adults (≥18 years). Participants completed self-report measures of alcohol consumption [frequency, quantity, frequency of heavy episodic drinking (HED) and AUDIT-C score] and physical activity [moderate-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), frequency of muscle strengthening activity (MSA) and sedentary behaviour] between November 2020 and January 2021. Ordinal logistic regression models were conducted, adjusting for sociodemographic factors.ResultsFifteen percent of the sample reported abstinence from drinking. Overall, 23.4% of participants drank ≥4 times/week, 13.9% drank more than 6 units/single drinking occasion (HED), 7.5% reported HED daily/almost daily and 4.2% scored ≥11 on AUDIT-C. MSA 3 days/week compared with no MSA was significantly associated with higher odds of alcohol frequency [OR (95 CI%) = 1.41 (1.04-1.91)], quantity [OR (95 CI%) = 1.38 (1.02-1.87)], HED [OR (95 CI%) = 1.42 (1.05-1.94)] and possible dependence [OR (95 CI%) = 1.47 (1.05-2.06)]. The association of MVPA and sedentary behaviour with drinking measures was not significant (p>0.05).ConclusionIn contrast with previous research, MSA rather than aerobic physical activity was associated with increased alcohol consumption during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is conceivable that during lockdown while drinking was used as a coping strategy, limited opportunities for aerobic exercise made MSA a more convenient form of physical activity. To guide public health interventions, more research is required to examine the temporal relationship between different forms of physical activity and alcohol consumption.

BackgroundSmoking and excessive drinking place a strain on household budgets. We aimed to examine the impact of the cost-of-living crisis in Great Britain on the nature of smoking cessation and alcohol reduction attempts, and explore changes in health professionals offering support.MethodsData were from 14,567 past-year smokers and high-risk drinkers (AUDIT-C ≥5) participating in monthly representative surveys, January-2021 through December-2022. We estimated time trends in cost as a motive driving the most recent (smoking cessation/alcohol reduction) attempt, use of paid or evidence-based support, and receipt of GP offer of support for smoking cessation or alcohol reduction, and tested for moderation by occupational social grade.ResultsThe proportion of attempts motivated by cost did not change significantly over time among smokers (25.4% [95%CI = 23.8-26.9%]), but increased between December-2021 and December-2022 among high-risk drinkers from less advantaged social grades (from 15.3% [95%CI 12.1-19.3] to 29.7% [20.1-44.1]). The only change in support use was an increase in smokers using paid support, specifically e-cigarettes (from 28.1% [23.7-33.3] to 38.2% [33.0-44.4]). Among those visiting their GP, the proportion who received an offer of support was similar over time among smokers (27.0% [25.7-28.2]) and high-risk drinkers (1.4% [1.1-1.6%]).ConclusionsThere is limited evidence that the 2021/22 cost-of-living crisis affected the nature of attempts to stop smoking and reduce alcohol consumption, or receipt of GP offer of support. It is encouraging that use of evidence-based support has not declined and that use of e-cigarettes in quit attempts has increased. However, cost is increasingly motivating alcohol reduction attempts among less advantaged drinkers, and rates of GPs offering support, especially for alcohol reduction, remain very low.

Abstract Background and aims Cigarette smoking takes place within a cultural and social context. Political views and practices are an important part of that context. To gain a better understanding of smoking, it may be helpful to understand its association with voting patterns as an expression of the political views and practices of the population who smoke. This study aimed to assess the association between cigarette smoking and voting intentions and to examine how far any association can be explained by sociodemographic factors and alcohol use. Methods Pooled monthly representative repeat cross-sectional household surveys of adults (16+) in England (N = 55,482) between 2015 and 2020 were used to assess the association between cigarette smoking status and voting intentions, and whether this was accounted for by age, occupational grade, gender, region and alcohol use. Voting intention was measured by asking ‘How would you vote if there were a General Election tomorrow?’ Respondents chose from a list of the major English political parties or indicated their intention not to vote. Results In adjusted multinomial regression, compared with intending to vote Conservative (majority party of government during the period), being undecided (aOR1.22 [1.13-1.33]

Abstract Introduction Up-to-date monitoring of non-combustible nicotine products (e.g. e-cigarettes, nicotine replacement therapies (NRT), heated tobacco products (HTP); NNP) is important to assess their impact. To date, there is little evidence on the association between ever regular use (defined here as 1 year or more) of NNP and current smoking status. Aims/methods The purpose of this study was to examine the prevalence, and sociodemographic, alcohol and smoking status correlates, of ever regular use of NNP in England in 2020. A cross-sectional survey of adults in England was conducted between February and June 2020. Results A total of 8486 adults were surveyed; 94.9% (8055) were complete cases. The weighted prevalence of ever regular NNP use was 5.4% (n = 436; 95% CI 5.0–6.0), of which 82% (n = 360; 95% CI 78.7–85.8) was single and 18% (n = 79; 95% CI 14.8–22) multiple product use. Amongst ever regular NNP users, the prevalence of ever regular NRT, e-cigarette and HTP use was 64.7% (95% CI 60.1–69), 43.4% (95% CI 38.8–48) and 2.5% (95% CI 1.4–4.5), respectively. In adjusted analysis, ever regular NNP use was associated with smoking status, being significantly higher among current (22.3%; adjusted OR (aOR) 34.9, 95% CI 24.0–50.8) and ex-smokers (12.7%, aOR 19.8, 95% CI 11.1–14.4) than among never-smokers (0.6%). More advantaged occupational grade (aOR, 1.27 95% CI 1.02–1.57) and at least hazardous alcohol use (aOR, 1.38 95% CI 1.06–1.78) were associated with greater prevalence of ever regular NNP use. Conclusions Ever regularly using NNP was highest among smokers and ex-smokers and rare among never-smokers. Among people who have ever regularly used NNP, NRT is the most popular.

Abstract This study examined use trends of e-cigarette devices types, heated tobacco products (HTPs) and e-liquid nicotine concentrations in England from 2016 to 2020. Data were from a representative repeat cross-sectional survey of adults aged 16 or older. Bayesian logistic regression was used to estimate proportions and 95% credible intervals (CrIs). Of 75,355 participants, 5.3% (weighted = 5.5%) were currently using e-cigarettes or HTPs, with the majority (98.7%) using e-cigarettes. Among e-cigarette users, 53.7% (CrI 52.0–55.1%) used tank devices, 23.7% (22.4–25.1%) mods, 17.3% (16.1–18.4%) pods, and 5.4% (4.7–6.2%) disposables. Tanks were the most widely used device type throughout 2016–2020. Mods were second until 2020, when pods overtook them. Among all e-cigarette/HTP users, prevalence of HTP use remains rare (3.4% in 2016 versus 4.2% in 2020), whereas JUUL use has risen from 3.4% in 2018 to 11.8% in 2020. Across all years, nicotine concentrations of ≤ 6 mg/ml were most widely (41.0%; 39.4–42.4%) and ≥ 20 mg/ml least widely used (4.1%; 3.4–4.9%). Among e-cigarette/HTP users, ex-smokers were more likely than current smokers to use mod and tank e-cigarettes, but less likely to use pods, disposables, JUUL and HTPs. In conclusion, despite growing popularity of pods and HTPs worldwide, refillable tank e-cigarettes remain the most widely used device type in England.

BackgroundDigital physical activity (PA) program use has been associated with higher PA guideline adherence during COVID-19 pandemic confinements. However, little is known longitudinally about exercise locations (inside vs outside the home environment), digital program use, and their associations with moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) and muscle-strengthening activities (MSAs) during the pandemic. ObjectiveThe aims of this study were to assess the relationship between exercise location and use of digital programs with PA guideline adherence during the COVID-19 pandemic, describe how individuals exercised inside and outside of their home environments, and explore which sociodemographic and contextual factors were associated with exercise locations and digital PA program use. MethodsActive UK adults (N=1938) who participated in the 1-month follow-up survey of the Health Behaviours During the COVID-19 Pandemic (HEBECO) study (FU1, June-July 2020) and at least one more follow-up survey (FU2, August-September; FU3, November-December 2020) reported exercise locations and types of exercises inside and outside their homes, including digital programs (online/app-based fitness classes/programs), MVPA, and MSA. Generalized linear mixed models were used to assess associations of exercise location and digital PA program use with PA guideline adherence (MVPA, MSA, full [combined] adherence), and predictors of exercise location and digital program use. ResultsAs the pandemic progressed, active UK adults were less likely to exercise inside or to use digital PA programs compared with periods of initial confinement: 61% (95% CI 58%-63%; weighted n=1024), 50% (95% CI 48%-53%; weighted n=786), and 49% (95% CI 46%-51%; weighted n=723) performed any exercise inside their homes at FU1, FU2, and FU3, respectively. At FU1, FU2, and FU3, 22% (95% CI 21%-25%; weighted n=385), 17% (95% CI 15%-19%; weighted n=265), and 16% (95% CI 14%-18%; weighted n=241) used digital PA programs, respectively. Most participants who exercised inside already owned indoor equipment, used digital PA programs, or had their own workout routines, whereas MVPA and gentle walking were the most common exercise types performed outside the home. Being female, nonwhite, having a condition limiting PA, indoor exercising space, a lower BMI, and living in total isolation were associated with increased odds of exercising inside the home or garden compared with outside exercise only. Digital PA program users were more likely to be younger, female, highly educated, have indoor space to exercise, and a lower BMI. While exercising inside was positively associated with MSA and exercising outside was positively associated with MVPA guideline adherence, both inside (vs outside only) and outside (vs inside only) activities contributed to full PA guideline adherence (odds ratio [OR] 5.05, 95% CI 3.17-8.03 and OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.10-3.23, respectively). Digital PA program use was associated with a higher odds of MSA (OR 3.97-8.71) and full PA (OR 2.24-3.95), but not with MVPA guideline adherence. ConclusionsDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, full PA guideline adherence was associated with exercising inside and outside of one’s home environment and using digital PA programs. More research is needed to understand the reach, long-term adherence, and differences between digital PA solutions.

Abstract Objective To assess the long-term impact of the increase in age-of-sale of cigarettes from 16 to 18 in England in October 2007. Methods Data were collected between November 2006 and September 2018 on 252,601 participants taking part in a nationally representative survey of adults aged 16+ in England, the Smoking Toolkit Study (STS). We assessed the impact of the introduction of the increase in age-of-sale on prevalence of ever smoking, current smoking, and quit attempts, among 16–17 year olds compared with 18–24 year olds. Results Following the increase in age-of-sale, there was a declining trend in ever smoking that was greater among 16–17 year olds than 18–24 year olds (OR 0.990 versus OR 0.993; p = 0.019). Data on current smoking were insensitive to detect a difference between the age groups in a step-level change or change in trend following the increase in age-of-sale (Bayes factors (BFs) 0.75 and 2.10). Data on quit attempts were also insensitive to detect a change in trend (BF 0.71), and despite a greater step-level decline among those aged 16–17 (OR 0.311 versus OR 0.547, p = 0.025), quit attempts remained higher among those aged 16–17. Secondary analysis indicated that post-policy change, trends in current and ever smoking were linear for 16–17 year olds but quadratic for 18–24 year olds (slowing decline). Conclusion There is some evidence from an assessment of long-term trends in the Smoking Toolkit Study that the increase in legal age-of-sale of cigarettes in England was associated with a greater long-term decline in ever smoking among those aged 16–17 compared with those aged 18–24.

Risk perceptions are important influences on health behaviours. We used descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression models to assess cross-sectionally risk perceptions for severe Covid-19 symptoms and their health behaviour correlates among 2206 UK adults from the HEBECO study. The great majority (89–99%) classified age 70+, having comorbidities, being a key worker, overweight, and from an ethnic minority as increasing the risk. People were less sure about alcohol drinking, vaping, and nicotine replacement therapy use (17.4–29.5% responding ‘don't know’). Relative to those who did not, those who engaged in the following behaviours had higher odds of classifying these behaviours as (i) decreasing the risk: smoking cigarettes (adjusted odds ratios, aORs, 95% CI = 2.26, 1.39–3.37), and using e-cigarettes (aORs = 5.80, 3.25–10.34); (ii) having no impact: smoking cigarettes (1.98; 1.42–2.76), using e-cigarettes (aORs = 2.63, 1.96–3.50), drinking alcohol (aORs = 1.75, 1.31–2.33); and lower odds of classifying these as increasing the risk: smoking cigarettes (aORs: 0.43, 0.32–0.56), using e-cigarettes (aORs = 0.25, 0.18–0.35). Similarly, eating more fruit and vegetables was associated with classifying unhealthy diet as ‘increasing risk’ (aOR = 1.37, 1.12–1.69), and exercising more with classifying regular physical activity as ‘decreasing risk’ (aOR = 2.42, 1.75–3.34). Risk perceptions for severe Covid-19 among UK adults were lower for their own health behaviours, evidencing optimism bias. These risk perceptions may form barriers to changing people's own unhealthy behaviours, make them less responsive to interventions that refer to the risk of Covid-19 as a motivating factor, and exacerbate inequalities in health behaviours and outcomes.

Smoking prevalence in several high-income countries is steadily declining but remains persistently high in 'lower' socioeconomic position (SEP) groups, contributing to inequities in morbidity and mortality. Smoking to relieve stress is a commonly endorsed motive for continued smoking; however, it remains unclear whether smoking to relieve stress has a negative impact on motivation to stop and future quit attempts and if so, whether associations are moderated by SEP. This was an observational study with cross-sectional and prospective survey data from the nationally representative Smoking Toolkit Study in England. A total of 1,135 adult smokers were surveyed at baseline, with 153 (13.5%) respondents followed up at 12 months. Respondents provided information on demographic, social and smoking characteristics. A series of multivariable logistic regression analyses was conducted. Bayes Factors (BFs) were calculated to explore non-significant associations. Smoking to relieve stress was commonly endorsed by respondents from both 'lower' (43.2% [95% CI = 39.4%, 47.0%]) and 'higher' (40.5% [95% CI = 35.9%, 45.1%]) SEP groups (p = 0.39). Smoking to relieve stress was associated with high motivation to stop at baseline (ORadj = 1.48, 95% CI = 1.03-2.12, p = 0.035) but not significantly with the odds of making a quit attempt at a 12-month follow-up, although the magnitude and direction of the effect was similar to that observed for high motivation to stop (ORadj = 1.49, 95% CI = 0.69-3.20, p = 0.3). Data were insensitive to detect moderation effects of SEP (BF = 0.90 and BF = 1.65, respectively). Smoking to relieve stress is a commonly endorsed motive and is associated with high motivation to stop but not significantly with the odds of making a quit attempt in the next 12 months, although the magnitude and direction of the effect was similar for both outcomes. There was no clear evidence of moderation by SEP, although data were insensitive to distinguish the alternative from the null hypothesis.

COVID-19 pandemic restrictions impacted dietary habits during the initial months of the pandemic, but long-term effects are unclear. In this longitudinal study, self-selected UK adults (n = 1,733, 71.1% female, 95.7% white ethnicity) completed three online surveys (May–June, August–September, and November–December 2020, with a retrospective pre-pandemic component in the baseline survey), self-reporting sociodemographics, lifestyle, and behaviours, including high fat, salt, and sugar (HFSS) snacks, HFSS meals, and fruit and vegetable (FV) intake. Data were analysed using generalised estimating equations. Monthly HFSS snacks portion intake increased from pre-pandemic levels (48.3) in May–June (57.6, p < 0.001), decreased in August–September (43.7, p < 0.001), before increasing back to pre-pandemic levels in November–December (49.2, p < 0.001). A total of 48.5% self-reported increased [25.9 (95% confidence interval: 24.1, 27.8)] and 47.7% self-reported decreased [24.1 (22.4, 26.0)] monthly HFSS snacks portion intakes in November–December compared with pre-pandemic levels. Monthly HFSS meals portion intake decreased from pre-pandemic levels (7.1) in May–June (5.9, p < 0.001), was maintained in August–September (5.9, p = 0.897), and then increased again in November–December (6.6, p < 0.001) to intakes that remained lower than pre-pandemic levels (p = 0.007). A total of 35.2% self-reported increased [4.8 (4.3, 5.3)] and 44.5% self-reported decreased [5.1 (4.6, 5.6)] monthly HFSS meals portion intakes in November–December compared with pre-pandemic levels. The proportion meeting FV intake recommendations was stable from pre-pandemic through to August–September (70%), but decreased in November–December 2020 (67%, p = 0.034). Increased monthly HFSS snacks intake was associated with female gender, lower quality of life, and – in a time - varying manner – older age and higher HFSS meals intake. Increased monthly HFSS meals intake was associated with female gender, living with adults only, and higher HFSS snacks intake. Reduced FV intake was associated with higher body mass index (BMI) and lower physical activity. These results suggest large interindividual variability in dietary change during the first year of the pandemic, with important public health implications in individuals experiencing persistent increases in unhealthy diet choices, associated with BMI, gender, quality of life, living conditions, physical activity, and other dietary behaviours.

Background: It is unclear whether smoking increases the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation. We first examined the association of smoking status with hospitalisation for COVID-19 compared with hospitalisation for other respiratory viral infections a year previous. Second, we examined the concordance between smoking status recorded on the electronic health record (EHR) and the contemporaneous medical notes. Methods: This case-control study enrolled adult patients (446 cases and 211 controls) at a single National Health Service trust in London, UK. The outcome variable was type of hospitalisation (COVID-19 vs. another respiratory virus a year previous). The exposure variable was smoking status (never/former/current smoker). Logistic regression analyses adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic position and comorbidities were performed. The study protocol and analyses were pre-registered in April 2020 on the Open Science Framework. Results: Current smokers had lower odds of being hospitalised with COVID-19 compared with other respiratory viruses a year previous (ORadj=0.55, 95% CI=0.31-0.96, p=.04). There was no significant association among former smokers (ORadj=1.08, 95% CI=0.72-1.65, p=.70). Smoking status recorded on the EHR (compared with the contemporaneous medical notes) was incorrectly recorded for 168 (79.6%) controls (χ2(3)=256.5, p=

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has seen repeated government enforced restrictions on movement. This study aimed to evaluate longitudinal trends in physical activity (PA) in a self-selected UK-based sample and identify the key correlates of these trends.MethodsFrom 23 April 2020 to 30 January 2021, measures of PA engagement were collected in a sample of 1,947 UK-based adults. Generalised estimating equations (GEE) explored trends in PA engagement over time, and how sociodemographic, health and contextual factors impacted participant's attainment of World Health Organization (WHO) recommended levels of PA (constituting muscle strengthening activity (MSA), and moderate or vigorous PA (MVPA)).ResultsWhile one in five achieved the recommended levels of PA in the first UK lockdown in April-June 2020 (19.5%, 95%CI: 17.8-21.3%) and a similar proportion in June-July 2020 (17.7%, 95%CI: 16.1-19.5%), this reduced during the period of eased restrictions in August-September 2020 (15.2%, 95%CI: 13.7-16.9%) and the second UK lockdown in November 2020-January 2021 (14.1%, 95%CI: 12.6-15.9%). Similar trends were observed for MSA and MVPA individually. Better quality of life, higher socioeconomic position and pre-COVID-19 PA levels were associated with meeting the WHO recommended levels of PA, while those living with overweight or obesity, a limiting health condition, or isolating showed the inverse associations. Time-specific associations with MSA or MVPA were observed for gender and age.ConclusionReductions in PA levels throughout the first strict lockdown continued without reversal during the ensuing period. The association of negative change with socioeconomic and health-related indices points towards deepening health inequities during the pandemic.

Objectives Delivery of craving management tools via smartphone applications (apps) may improve smoking cessation rates, but research on such programmes remains limited, especially in real-world settings. This study evaluated the effectiveness of adding craving management tools in a cessation app (BupaQuit). Methods The study was a two-arm pragmatic pilot parallel randomised controlled trial, comparing a fully-automated BupaQuit app with craving management tool with a control app version without craving management tool. A total of 425 adult UK-based daily smokers were enrolled through open online recruitment (February 2015–March 2016), with no researcher involvement, and individually randomised within the app to the intervention ( n = 208) or control ( n = 217). The primary outcome was self-reported 14-day continuous abstinence assessed at 4-week follow-up. Secondary outcomes included 6-month point-prevalence and sustained abstinence, and app usage. The primary outcome was assessed with Fisher's exact test using intent to treat with those lost to follow-up counted as smoking. Participants were not reimbursed. Results Re-contact rates were 50.4% at 4 weeks and 40.2% at 6 months. There was no significant difference between intervention and control arms on the primary outcome (13.5% vs 15.7%; p = 0.58; relative risk = 0.86, 95% confidence interval = 0.54–1.36) or secondary cessation outcomes (6-month point prevalence: 14.4% vs 17.1%, p = 0.51; relative risk = 0.85, 95% confidence interval = 0.54–1.32; 6-month sustained: 11.1% vs 13.4%, p = 0.55; relative risk = 0.83, 95% confidence interval = 0.50–1.38). Bayes factors supported the null hypothesis ( B [0, 0, 1.0986] = 0.20). Usage was similar across the conditions (mean/median logins: 9.6/4 vs 10.5/5; time spent: 401.8/202 s vs 325.8/209 s). Conclusions The addition of craving management tools did not affect cessation, and the limited engagement with the app may have contributed to this.

Changes in the prevalence of psychological distress among smokers during the COVID-19 pandemic in England may exacerbate existing health inequalities. This study examined the prevalence of psychological distress among smokers following the onset of the pandemic compared with previous years. Cross-sectional data came from a representative survey of smokers (18+) in England (n = 2,927) between April–July in 2016, 2017 and 2020. Logistic regressions estimated the associations between past-month distress across 2016/2017 and 2020, and age. Weighted proportions, chi-squared statistics and stratified logistic regression models were used to compare the distributions of moderate and severe distress, respectively, within socio-demographic and smoking characteristics in 2016/2017 and 2020. Between the combined April–July 2016 and 2017 sample and April–July 2020 the prevalence of moderate and severe distress among past-year smokers increased (2016/2017: moderate 20.66%, 19.02–22.43; severe 8.23%, 7.16–9.47; 2020: moderate 28.79%, 95%CI 26.11–31.60; OR = 2.08, 95%CI 1.34–3.25; severe 11.04%, 9.30–13.12; OR = 2.16, 1.13–4.07). While there was no overall evidence of an interaction between time period and age, young (16–24 years) and middle-age groups (45–54 years) may have experienced greater increases in moderate distress and older age groups (65+ years) increases in severe distress. There were increases of moderate distress among more disadvantaged social grades and both moderate and severe distress among women and those with low cigarette addiction. Between April–July 2016/2017 and April–July 2020 in England there were increases in both moderate and severe distress among smokers. The distribution of distress among smokers differed between 2016/2017 and 2020 and represents a widening of inequalities.

Abstract Background Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) bought over the counter (OTC) appears to be largely ineffective for smoking cessation, which may be partially explained by poor adherence. We developed and evaluated the NRT2Quit smartphone app (for iOS) designed to improve quit attempts with OTC NRT by improving adherence to the medications. Methods This study was a pragmatic double-blind randomised controlled trial with remote recruitment through leaflets distributed to over 300 UK-based community pharmacies. The study recruited adult daily smokers (≥10 cigarettes per day) who bought NRT, wanted to quit smoking, downloaded NTR2Quit and completed the registration process within the app. Participants were automatically randomly assigned within the app to the intervention (full) version of NRT2Quit or to its control (minimal) versions. The primary outcome was biochemically verified 4-week abstinence assessed at 8-week follow-up using Russell Standard criteria and intention to treat. Bayes factors were calculated for the cessation outcome. Secondary outcomes were self-reported abstinence, NRT use, app use and satisfaction with the app. Results The study under-recruited. Only 41 participants (3.5% of the target sample) were randomly assigned to NRT2Quit (n = 16) or the control (n = 25) app versions between March 2015 and September 2016. The follow-up rate was 51.2%. The intervention participants had numerically higher biochemically verified quit rates (25.0% versus 8.0%, P = 0.19, odds ratio = 3.83, 0.61–24.02). The calculated Bayes factor, 1.92, showed that the data were insensitive to test for the hypothesis that the intervention app version aided cessation. The intervention participants had higher median logins (2.5 versus 0, P = 0.01) and were more likely to use NRT at follow-up (100.0% versus 28.6%, P = 0.03) and recommend NRT2Quit to others (100.0% versus 28.6%, P = 0.01). Conclusions Despite very low recruitment, there was preliminary but inconclusive evidence that NRT2Quit may improve short-term abstinence and adherence among smokers using NRT. Well-powered studies on NRT2Quit are needed, but different recruitment methods will be required to engage smokers through community pharmacies or other channels. Trial registration ISRCTN ISRCTN33423896 , prospectively registered on 22 March 2015.

Abstract Background Smoking has played a significant role in the historical culture of mental healthcare settings. Mental health professionals (MHPs) often hold dismissive attitudes regarding the importance of smoking cessation in the context of mental healthcare. In 2007, English mental health inpatient buildings were required by law to become smoke-free, and healthcare trusts have more recently begun to implement comprehensive policies (i.e. smoke-free grounds and buildings) and staff training in response to national guidance. It is therefore important to explore MHPs practice around smoking, smoking cessation, and smoke-free policy adherence. This study aimed to explore these issues by using the COM-B (capability, opportunity, motivation, behaviour) model to systematically identify barriers to, and facilitators for, MHPs addressing smoking with their patients. Methods Five focus groups with a total of 36 MHPs were conducted between March and August 2017. MHPs were recruited from one of the largest mental health trusts in Europe. Discussions were guided by a semi-structured guide. Responses were audio recorded, transcribed and coded using thematic analysis and the COM-B framework. Results Addressing smoking with patients was undermined by MHPs’ 1) psychological capability to recall training content, misunderstand the potential benefits of addressing patient smoking and harm reduction approaches; 2) physical opportunity in terms of time constraints, and easy accessibility of tobacco in the community; 3) social opportunity in terms of increased cultural value of tobacco following inpatient smoke-free policy implementation, and lack of support from colleagues to enforce the smoke-free policy; 4) automatic motivation, including intrinsic biases regarding patients abilities and motivations to quit, and 5) reflective motivation, including perceived job role and decision making processes related to addressing behaviours deemed more important than smoking. The main facilitating factors identified were MHPs’ having opportunity in the form of patients asking directly for support, and MHPs having access to resources such as stop smoking services and spirometers. Conclusion Multiple barriers were identified across all key domains of the COM-B framework that undermine MHPs’ practice regarding smoking cessation. Few facilitators were identified which may have implications for future smoke-free policy and clinical practice.

Background The Smoking and Alcohol Toolkit Study (STS/ATS) in England has delivered timely insights to inform and evaluate strategies aimed at reducing tobacco smoking- and alcohol-related harm. From the end of 2020 until at least 2024 the STS/ATS is expanding to Scotland and Wales to include all constituent nations in Great Britain. Expanding data collection to Scotland and Wales will permit the evaluation of how smoking and alcohol related behaviours respond to divergent policy scenarios across the devolved nations. Methods The STS/ATS consists of monthly cross-sectional household interviews (computer or telephone assisted) of representative samples of adults in Great Britain aged 16+ years. Commencing in October 2020 each month a new sample of approximately 1700 adults in England, 450 adults in Scotland and 300 adults in Wales complete the survey (~n = 29,400 per year). The expansion of the survey to Scotland and Wales has been funded for the collection of at least 48 waves of data across four years. The data collected cover a broad range of smoking and alcohol-related parameters (including but not limited to smoking status, cigarette/nicotine dependence, route to quit smoking, prevalence and frequency of hazardous drinking, attempts and motivation to reduce alcohol consumption, help sought and motives for attempts to reduce alcohol intake) and socio-demographic characteristics (including but not limited to age, gender, region, socio-economic position) and will be reviewed monthly and refined in response to evolving policy needs and public interests. All data analyses will be pre-specified and available on a free online platform. A dedicated website will publish descriptive data on important trends each month. Discussion The Smoking and Alcohol Toolkit Study will provide timely monitoring of smoking and alcohol related behaviours to inform and evaluate national policies across Great Britain.

The main causes of non-communicable diseases (NCDs), health inequalities and health inequity include consumption of unhealthy commodities such as tobacco, alcohol and/or foods high in fat, salt and/or sugar. These exposures are preventable, but the commodities involved are highly profitable. The economic interests of ‘Unhealthy Commodity Producers’ (UCPs) often conflict with health goals but their role in determining health has received insufficient attention. In order to address this gap, a new research consortium has been established. This open letter introduces the SPECTRUM (Shaping Public hEalth poliCies To Reduce ineqUalities and harM) Consortium: a multi-disciplinary group comprising researchers from 10 United Kingdom (UK) universities and overseas, and partner organisations including three national public health agencies in Great Britain (GB), five multi-agency alliances and two companies providing data and analytic support. Through eight integrated work packages, the Consortium seeks to provide an understanding of the nature of the complex systems underlying the consumption of unhealthy commodities, the role of UCPs in shaping these systems and influencing health and policy, the role of systems-level interventions, and the effectiveness of existing and emerging policies. Co-production is central to the Consortium’s approach to advance research and achieve meaningful impact and we will involve the public in the design and delivery of our research. We will also establish and sustain mutually beneficial relationships with policy makers, alongside our partners, to increase the visibility, credibility and impact of our evidence. The Consortium’s ultimate aim is to achieve meaningful health benefits for the UK population by reducing harm and inequalities from the consumption of unhealthy commodities over the next five years and beyond.

Background Improving adherence to self-protective behaviours is a public health priority. We aimed to assess the potential effectiveness and ease of use of an online version of the Risk Acceptance Ladder (RAL) in promoting help-seeking for cigarette smoking, excessive alcohol consumption, insufficient physical activity, or low fruit and vegetable consumption. Methods 843 UK adults were recruited, of whom 602 engaged in at least one risky behaviour. Those with no immediate plans to change (n = 171) completed a behaviour specific RAL. Participants were randomised to one of two conditions; a short message congruent (on-target, n = 73) or incongruent (off-target, n = 98) with their RAL response. Performance of the RAL was assessed by participants’ ability to select an applicable RAL item and reported ease of use of the RAL. Effectiveness was assessed by whether or not participants clicked a link to receive information about changing their target behaviour. Results Two thirds (68.9%, 95% CI = 61.8%-75.3%) of participants were able to select an applicable RAL item that corresponded to what they believed would need to change in order to alter their target behaviour, with 64.9% (95% CI = 57.5%-71.7%) reporting that it was easy to select one option. Compared with the off-target group, participants allocated to the on-target group had greater odds of clicking on the link to receive information (31.5% vs 19.4%; OR = 2.07, 95% CI = 1.01–4.26). Conclusion The Risk Acceptance Ladder may have utility as a tool for tailoring messages to prompt initial steps to engaging in self-protective behaviours.

ObjectivesTo investigate associations of dual use of e-cigarettes and cigarettes with subsequent quitting activity (smoking reduction, quit attempts and use of evidence-based cessation aids). To overcome potential confounding by factors associated with use of pharmacological support, we selected dual use of over-the-counter nicotine replacement therapy (OTC NRT) and cigarettes as a behavioural control.DesignProspective cohort study with 6-month follow-up.SettingEngland, 2014–2016.Participants413 current smokers participating in the Smoking Toolkit Study, a representative survey of adults in England, who reported current use of e-cigarettes or OTC NRT and provided data at 6-month follow-up.Main outcome measuresThe exposure was dual use of e-cigarettes or OTC NRT at baseline. Outcomes were change in cigarette consumption, quit attempts and use of evidence-based cessation aids during quit attempts over 6-month follow-up. Relevant sociodemographic and smoking characteristics were included as covariates.ResultsAfter adjustment for covariates, dual e-cigarette users smoked two fewer cigarettes per day at follow-up than at baseline compared with dual OTC NRT users (B=2.01, 95% CI −3.62; −0.39, p=0.015). While dual e-cigarette users had 18% lower odds than dual OTC NRT users to make a quit attempt at follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.00, p=0.049), the groups did not differ in use of cessation aids (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.21, p=0.388).ConclusionsDual use of e-cigarettes is associated with a greater reduction in cigarette consumption than dual use of OTC NRT. It may discourage a small proportion of users from making a quit attempt compared with dual OTC NRT use but it does not appear to undermine use of evidence-based cessation aids.

BackgroundThe Covid-19 pandemic raises questions about the role that relationships and interactions between humans and animals play in the context of widespread social distancing and isolation measures. We aimed to investigate links between mental health and loneliness, companion animal ownership, the human-animal bond, and human-animal interactions; and to explore animal owners' perceptions related to the role of their animals during lockdown.MethodsA cross-sectional online survey of UK residents over 18 years of age was conducted between April and June 2020. The questionnaire included validated and bespoke items measuring demographics; exposures and outcomes related to mental health, wellbeing and loneliness; the human-animal bond and human-animal interactions.ResultsOf 5,926 participants, 5,323 (89.8%) had at least one companion animal. Most perceived their animals to be a source of considerable support, but concerns were reported related to various practical aspects of providing care during lockdown. Strength of the human-animal bond did not differ significantly between species. Poorer mental health pre-lockdown was associated with a stronger reported human-animal bond (b = -.014, 95% CI [-.023 - -.005], p = .002). Animal ownership compared with non-ownership was associated with smaller decreases in mental health (b = .267, 95% CI [.079 - .455], p = .005) and smaller increases in loneliness (b = -.302, 95% CI [-.461 - -.144], p = .001) since lockdown.ConclusionThe human-animal bond is a construct that may be linked to mental health vulnerability in animal owners. Strength of the human-animal bond in terms of emotional closeness or intimacy dimensions appears to be independent of animal species. Animal ownership seemed to mitigate some of the detrimental psychological effects of Covid-19 lockdown. Further targeted investigation of the role of human-animal relationships and interactions for human health, including testing of the social buffering hypothesis and the development of instruments suited for use across animal species, is required.

Background Young people in state care, often due to abuse or neglect, have a four-fold increased risk of drug and alcohol use compared to their peers. Aim The SOLID study aimed to investigate the feasibility of a definitive randomised controlled trial, comparing two behaviour change interventions to reduce risky substance use (illicit drugs and alcohol), and improve mental health, in young people in care. Methods We recruited young people in care aged 12–20 years, self-reporting substance use within the previous 12 months and residing in 1 of 6 participating local authority sites in the North East of England. Participants were randomised to either i. Motivational Enhancement Therapy (MET), ii. Social Behaviour and Network Therapy (SBNT) or iii. Control (usual care). All interventions were delivered by trained drug and alcohol workers. Follow-up data were collected 12 months post recruitment. Feasibility for trial progression was compared to pre-specified stop: go criteria (recruitment of 60% of eligible participants, 80% of participants attending 60% of offered sessions and retention of 70% of participants at 12 month follow up). Results Of 1450 eligible participants, 860 (59%) were screened for drug and alcohol use by social workers, 211 (24.5%) met inclusion criteria for the trial and 112 young people (7.7%) consented and were randomised. Sixty of these 112 participants (54%) completed 12-month follow-up questionnaires. Only 15 out of the 76 (20%) participants allocated to an intervention arm attended any of the offered MET or SBNT sessions. Conclusion By reference to pre-specified stop: go criteria it is not feasible to conduct a definitive trial for SOLID in its current format. Despite co-designing procedures with staff and young people in care, the screening, referral and treatment pathway did not work here. Future work may require dedicated clinically embedded research resource to evaluate effectiveness of new interventions in services.

Abstract Background Concerns have been raised that observing other people using e-cigarettes may undermine motivation to quit by renormalising smoking. This study aimed to explore associations between regular exposure to other people’s e-cigarette use and motivation to stop smoking and quit attempts in smokers. Methods Data were from 12,787 smokers in England who participated in the Smoking Toolkit Study between November 2014 and May 2018. At baseline, respondents were asked whether anyone other than themselves regularly used an e-cigarette in their presence, whether they had made a quit attempt in the past year and how motivated they were to stop. Data at 6-month follow-up were available for 1580 respondents, who reported on whether they had attempted to quit in the past 6 months. Results Smokers who reported regular exposure to e-cigarette use by others were more likely than those who did not to have tried to stop smoking in the past year (32.3% vs. 26.8%; unadjusted RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.11–1.31) and have high motivation to quit (16.6% vs. 14.2%; unadjusted RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.05–1.30) but were not significantly more or less likely to make a quit attempt over the subsequent 6 months (34.4% vs. 31.3%; unadjusted RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.88–1.38). In models that adjusted for participants’ own current e-cigarette use and unadjusted and adjusted models excluding current e-cigarette users from the sample, there were no significant associations between exposure to e-cigarette use by others and past quit attempts (RR 0.97–1.00), high current motivation to quit (RR 0.97–1.00) or prospective quit attempts (RR 0.94–1.12). In contrast, exposure to use of cigarettes was associated with low motivation to quit even after adjustment (RR 0.89) but not with quit attempts. Participants’ own use of e-cigarette was strongly associated with high motivation to quit (RR 1.95) and past quit attempts (RR 2.14) and appeared to account for the bivariate associations with reported exposure to e-cigarettes. Conclusion Smokers who report regular exposure to other people using e-cigarettes are more likely to report past quit attempts and high current motivation to quit, but there does not appear to be an independent association with motivation or quit attempts after adjustment for their own current use of e-cigarettes. In contrast, reported exposure to other people using cigarettes was independently and negatively associated with high motivation.

Summary: Background: Socioeconomic inequalities in smoking cessation have led to development of interventions that are specifically tailored for smokers from disadvantaged groups. We aimed to assess whether the effectiveness of interventions for disadvantaged groups is moderated by tailoring for socioeconomic position. Methods: For this systematic review and meta-regression, we searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, Cochrane Central Register, and Tobacco Addiction Register of Clinical Trials and the IC-SMOKE database from their inception until Aug 18, 2019, for randomised controlled trials of socioeconomic-position-tailored or non-socioeconomic-position-tailored individual-level behavioural interventions for smoking cessation at 6 months or longer of follow-up in disadvantaged groups. Studies measured socioeconomic position via income, eligibility for government financial assistance, occupation, and housing. Studies were excluded if they were delivered at the community or population level, did not report differential effects by socioeconomic position, did not report smoking cessation outcomes from 6 months or longer after the start of the intervention, were delivered at a group level, or provided pharmacotherapy with standard behavioural support compared with behavioural support alone. Individual patient-level data were extracted from published reports and from contacting study authors. Random-effects meta-analyses and mixed-effects meta-regression analyses were done to assess associations between tailoring of the intervention and effectiveness. Meta-analysis outcomes were summarised as risk ratios (RR). Certainty of evidence was assessed within each study using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool version 2 and the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation approach. The study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42018103008. Findings: Of 2376 studies identified by our literature search, 348 full-text articles were retrieved and screened for eligibility. Of these, 42 studies (26 168 participants) were included in the systematic review. 30 (71%) of 42 studies were done in the USA, three (7%) were done in the UK, two (5%) each in the Netherlands and Australia, and one (2%) each in Switzerland, Sweden, Turkey, India, and China. 26 (62%) of 42 studies were trials of socioeconomic-position-tailored interventions and 16 (38%) were non-socioeconomic-position-tailored interventions. 17 (65%) of 26 socioeconomic-position-tailored interventions were in-person or telephone-delivered behavioural interventions, four (15%) were digital interventions, three (12%) involved financial incentives, and two (8%) were brief interventions. Individuals who participated in an intervention, irrespective of tailoring, were significantly more likely to quit smoking than were control participants (RR 1·56, 95% CI 1·39–1·75; I2=54·5%). Socioeconomic-position-tailored interventions did not yield better outcomes compared with non-socioeconomic-position-tailored interventions for disadvantaged groups (adjusted RR 1·01, 95% CI 0·81–1·27; β=0·011, SE=0·11; p=0·93). We observed similar effect sizes in separate meta-analyses of non-socioeconomic-position-tailored interventions using trial data from participants with high socioeconomic position (RR 2·00, 95% CI 1·36–2·93; I2=82·7%) and participants with low socioeconomic position (1·94, 1·31–2·86; I2=76·6%), although certainty of evidence from these studies was graded as low. Interpretation: We found evidence that individual-level interventions can assist disadvantaged smokers with quitting, but there were no large moderating effects of tailoring for disadvantaged smokers. Improvements in tailored intervention development might be necessary to achieve equity-positive smoking cessation outcomes. Funding: Cancer Research UK.

Background: Smoking prevalence remains significantly higher among individuals with mental health conditions compared with the general population. Tobacco harm reduction (THR) in the form of replacing cigarettes for electronic cigarettes (ECs) is an alternative approach which may prove useful for these smokers who find it difficult to quit. Exploring how mental health professionals' (MHPs) perceive ECs, and how these influence decision making regarding their use in clinical settings is essential to determine the feasibility of incorporating ECs into the treatment pathway. Methods: We conducted six focus groups between March and August 2017. A total of 39 MHPs were recruited from mental healthcare services in England. Discussions were guided by a semi-structured guide, and responses were recorded, transcribed and coded using thematic framework analysis. Results: MHPs generally adopt a risk-averse approach when judging the safety and suitability of ECs. Risk-aversion was influenced by perceived obscurity surrounding ECs and THR, as well as high exposure to adverse and unreliable information regarding ECs, and perceived analogies between ECs and conventional cigarettes. Some MHPs adopt a pragmatic approach when making decisions based on THR and EC use in daily practice by considering the context of treatment and patient circumstances. However, this is often accompanied by a high degree of caution and misconceptions which limits the potential benefit this intervention could have in mental healthcare settings. Conclusion: Improved dissemination of national guidance and scientific literature regarding THR and ECs is essential in mental healthcare to eliminate misconceptions and better inform MHPs evidence-based decision-making practices. Keywords: Tobacco harm reduction, Electronic cigarettes, E-cigarettes, Mental healthcare, Qualitative research

COVID-19-related restrictions impacted weight and weight-related factors during the initial months of the pandemic. However, longitudinal analyses are scarce. An online, longitudinal study was conducted among self-selected UK adults (n = 1818), involving three surveys (May–June, August–September, November–December 2020), covering anthropometric, sociodemographic, COVID-19-related and behavioural measures. Data were analysed using generalised estimating equations. Self-reported average weight/body mass index (BMI) significantly increased between the May–June period and the August–September period (74.95 to 75.33 kg/26.22 kg/m2 to 26.36kg/m2, p < 0.001, respectively), and then significantly decreased to November–December (to 75.06 kg/26.27 kg/m2, p < 0.01), comparable to May–June levels (p = 0.274/0.204). However, there was great interindividual variation, 37.0%/26.7% increased (average 3.64 kg (95% confidence interval: 3.32, 3.97)/1.64 kg/m2 (1.49, 1.79)), and 34.5%/26.3% decreased (average 3.59 kg (3.34, 3.85)/1.53 kg/m2 (1.42, 1.63)) weight/BMI between May–June and November–December. Weight/BMI increase was significantly negatively associated with initial BMI, and positively associated with monthly high fat, salt and sugar (HFSS) snacks intake and alcohol consumption, and for BMI only, older age. Associations were time-varying; lower initial BMI, higher HFSS snacks intake and high-risk alcohol consumption were associated with maintaining weight/BMI increases between August–September and November–December. The average weight/BMI of UK adults fluctuated between May–June and November–December 2020. However, the substantial interindividual variation in weight/BMI trajectories indicates long-term health impacts from the pandemic, associated with food and alcohol consumption.

Abstract Background The prevalence of tobacco smoking in Germany is high (~27%). Monitoring of national patterns of smoking behaviour and data on the “real-world” effectiveness of cessation methods are needed to inform policies and develop campaigns aimed at reducing tobacco-related harm. In England, the Smoking Toolkit Study (STS) has been tracking such indicators since 2006, resulting in the adaptation of tobacco control policies. However, findings cannot be directly transferred into the German health policy context. The German Study on Tobacco Use (DEBRA: “Deutsche Befragung zum Rauchverhalten”) aims to provide such nationally representative data. Methods/Design In June 2016, the study started collecting data from computer-assisted, face-to-face household interviews in people aged 14 years and older. Over a period of 3 years, a total of ~36,000 respondents will complete the survey with a new sample of ~2000 respondents every 2 months (=18 waves). This sample will report data on demographics and the use of tobacco and electronic (e-)cigarettes. Per wave, about 500–600 people are expected to be current or recent ex-smokers (

Introduction: Verifying abstinence remotely in trials of digital cessation interventions remains a major challenge. This study reports on using personal carbon monoxide (CO) monitors to assess abstinence in a pragmatic trial of a standalone cessation app involving automated recruitment with no researcher contact. Methods: The study involved secondary data analysis of remote CO testing in a randomized trial (ISRCTN10548241) comparing two versions of a cessation app (BupaQuit). Trial participants were adult UK-based smokers interested in quitting, who were recruited online (02/2015–03/2016). Participants were followed-up through the app, email or phone at 4 weeks. Fifty-nine participants reporting not smoking were posted a personal CO monitor with instructions, and emailed two reminders. The monitors required installing software on a Windows PC. Participants were not reimbursed but retained the device. We recorded the proportion of CO tests returned, test results, self-reported ease of use, correct use, acceptability, and reasons for missing results. Results: Fifteen (25.4%) CO results were returned, of which 86.6% were

ObjectivesTo help implement behaviour change interventions (BCIs) in practice it is important to be able to characterize their key components. This study compared broad features of cost-effective BCIs that addressed smoking, diet, physical activity, alcohol and sexual health. It also assessed the association of these with the magnitude of the cost-effectiveness estimates.MethodsA content analysis of 79 interventions based on 338 intervention descriptions was conducted, using the Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) to classify intervention content in terms of intervention functions, and the BCT taxonomy to identify and categorise component Behaviour Change Techniques (BCT). Regression analysis identified the association of these with upper (pessimistic) and lower (optimistic) cost-effectiveness estimates.ResultsThe most and least common functions and BCT clusters were education (82.3%) and shaping knowledge (79.7%), and coercion (3.8%) and covert learning (2.5%). Smoking interventions contained the largest ([Formula: see text] = 12) number of BCTs and were most cost-effective. Several other factors were associated with worse (coercionfunction βupper = 36551.24; shaping knowledgeBCT βlower = 2427.78; comparison of outcomesBCT βupper = 9067.32; repetition and substitutionBCT βupper = 7172.47) and better (modellingfunction βlower = -2905.3; environmental restructuringfunction βupper = -8646.28; reward and threatBCT βupper = -5577.59) cost-effectiveness (pDiscussionCost-effective BCIs rely heavily on education with smoking interventions exhibiting the most comprehensive range of BCTs. Providing an example to aspire to, restructuring the environment and rewarding positive behaviour may be associated with greater cost-effectiveness.

Country-level differences in nicotine vaping products used and biomarkers of exposure among long-term e-cigarette users and dual users remain understudied. This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2014 in the United States (n = 166), United Kingdom (n = 129), and Poland (n = 161). We compared patterns of tobacco product use and nicotine and toxicant exposure among cigarette-only smokers (n = 127); e-cigarette-only users (n = 124); dual users of tobacco cigarettes and e-cigarettes (n = 95); and non-users (control group, n = 110) across three countries using mixed-effects linear regression. Compared with cigarette smokers, e-cigarette-only users had lower levels of toxicant biomarkers, but higher levels of nicotine biomarkers. Dual users had higher levels of toxicant biomarkers than e-cigarette-only users but similar levels to cigarette-only smokers. E-cigarette users in Poland, who overwhelmingly used refillable tank devices, exhibited greater levels of nicotine, and toxicant biomarkers relative to e-cigarette users in US/UK. Despite smoking fewer cigarettes, dual users from Poland exhibited similar levels of nicotine biomarkers compared with UK dual users, but higher than US dual users. Country-level differences in e-cigarette devices used and smoking behaviors (e.g., intensity) may contribute to differences in biomarker levels among users of the same products residing in different countries.

Background Future developments in tobacco control are likely to involve personalisation of treatment to improve efficiency. Pharmacotherapy provision based on Nicotine Metabolite Ratio (NMR) status has been shown to improve outcomes in clinical trials: normal relative to slow metabolisers benefit more from varenicline than nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) treatment. However, it is unknown whether this effect translates to other settings. Methods Data come from 1,563 participants attending English Stop Smoking Services in 2012/13. Sociodemographic, mental/physical health, smoking (dependence, determination to quit) and treatment characteristics (varenicline vs. NRT; group vs. one-to-one behavioural support) were assessed at baseline. Baseline salivary nicotine metabolites were measured and NMR (3-hydroxycotinine/cotinine) status computed, characterising smokers as slow (NMR< 0.31, N=454) or normal (NMR≥0.31, N=1,109) metabolisers. Carbon-monoxide verified 2-week and 50-week continuous abstinence was assessed at 4-week and 52-week follow-up post-quit, respectively. The association between abstinence rates and predictor variables was determined using log-binomial generalised linear models that included a pharmacotherapy by NMR status interaction term and controlled for all covariates. All analyses were intention-to-treat. Results Of participants, 44.2% (95% confidence interval (CI) 41.8-46.7%) and 8.0% (95%CI 6.8-9.5%) were continuously abstinent at 4-week and 52-week follow-up, respectively. There was no evidence of a pharmacotherapy by NMR status interaction on either outcome in adjusted analysis (see Figure). Higher abstinence rates were independently associated with higher socio-economic group, treatment with varenicline, lower dependence and greater age at both follow-ups and with greater determination to quit and group support at 4-week follow-up, only. [Figure] Conclusions Our study did not replicate clinical trial data, indicating that NMR status does not substantially contribute to differential pharmacotherapy effectiveness in Stop Smoking Services. As this was an observational study, self-selection or unmeasured confounders may have influenced results. However, this suggests the effect of NMR in real-world settings is likely to be small, context-dependent and therefore may not translate globally.

Background Only a few digital interventions have been developed for pregnant smokers, and little is known about the acceptability and usability of smartphone apps to aid cessation in pregnancy. This study aimed to explore pregnant smokers’ views on the design, content and usability of a pregnancy-specific smoking cessation app in order to inform intervention development and optimisation. Methods Ten interviews were conducted and the ‘think-aloud’ protocol was used in order to explore participants’ views about a smoking cessation smartphone app (‘SmokeFree Baby’). The data were subsequently thematically analysed. Participants were 18 and over, pregnant, and daily or weekly cigarette smokers. Results Three main themes were identified: views about the design elements, mode of delivery and content of the intervention. App design was considered as an important element that might influence potential users’ engagement with the intervention. Participants felt that the intervention content was educational, motivational and non-judgemental. However, it was emphasised that the app should provide further options for personalisation and include more practical features. Conclusions Delivering smoking cessation support via a smartphone app can be feasible and acceptable for pregnant smokers. They appear to value content that is motivational, educational and personalised, and meeting these requirements may be important for user experience and promoting engagement with the intervention.

INTRODUCTION:Despite cigarette-like adverse health outcomes associated with waterpipe tobacco smoking and increase in its use among youth, it is a much underexplored research area. We aimed to measure the prevalence and patterns of waterpipe tobacco use and evaluate tobacco control policy with respect to waterpipe tobacco, in several universities across the UK. We also aimed to measure stop smoking practitioners' encounter of waterpipe tobacco smoking. METHODS:We distributed an online survey to six UK universities, asking detailed questions on waterpipe tobacco. Multivariable logistic regression models, adjusted for age, gender, ethnicity, graduate status, university and socioeconomic status (SES) assessed associations between waterpipe tobacco smoking (single use and dual use with cigarettes) and sociodemographic variables. SES was ascertained by average weekly self-spend on non-essentials. We also descriptively analysed data from a 2012 survey of stop smoking practitioners to assess the proportion of clients that used waterpipe regularly. RESULTS:f 2217 student responses, 66.0% (95% CI 63.9-68.0%) had tried waterpipe tobacco smoking; 14.3% (95% CI 12.8-15.8%) reported past-30 day use, and 8.7% (95% CI 7.6-9.9%) reported at least monthly users. Past-30 day waterpipe-only use was associated with being younger (AOR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91-0.99), male (AOR 1.44, 95% CI 1.08-1.94), higher SES (AOR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06-1.28) and belonging to non-white ethnicities (vs. white, AOR 2.24, 95% CI 1.66-3.04). Compared to less than monthly users, monthly users were significantly more likely to have urges to smoke waterpipe (28.1% vs. 3.1%, p

Background: NHS Stop Smoking Services (SSSs) provide free at the point of use treatment for smokers who would like to stop. Since their inception in 1999 they have evolved to offer a variety of support options. Given the changes that have happened in the provision of services and the ongoing need for evidence on effectiveness, the Evaluating Long-term Outcomes for NHS Stop Smoking Services (ELONS) study was commissioned. Objectives: The main aim of the study was to explore the factors that determine longer-term abstinence from smoking following intervention by SSSs. There were also a number of additional objectives. Design: The ELONS study was an observational study with two main stages: secondary analysis of routine data collected by SSSs and a prospective cohort study of service clients. The prospective study had additional elements on client satisfaction, well-being and longer-term nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) use. Setting: The setting for the study was SSSs in England. For the secondary analysis, routine data from 49 services were obtained. For the prospective study and its added elements, nine services were involved. The target population was clients of these services. Participants: There were 202,804 cases included in secondary analysis and 3075 in the prospective study. Interventions: A combination of behavioural support and stop smoking medication delivered by SSS practitioners. Main outcome measures: Abstinence from smoking at 4 and 52 weeks after setting a quit date, validated by a carbon monoxide (CO) breath test. Results: Just over 4 in 10 smokers (41%) recruited to the prospective study were biochemically validated as abstinent from smoking at 4 weeks (which was broadly comparable with findings from the secondary analysis of routine service data, where self-reported 4-week quit rates were 48%, falling to 34% when biochemical validation had occurred). At the 1-year follow-up, 8% of prospective study clients were CO validated as abstinent from smoking. Clients who received specialist one-to-one behavioural support were twice as likely to have remained abstinent than those who were seen by a general practitioner (GP) practice and pharmacy providers [odds ratio (OR) 2.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2 to 4.6]. Clients who received group behavioural support (either closed or rolling groups) were three times more likely to stop smoking than those who were seen by a GP practice or pharmacy providers (OR 3.4, 95% CI 1.7 to 6.7). Satisfaction with services was high and well-being at baseline was found to be a predictor of abstinence from smoking at longer-term follow-up. Continued use of NRT at 1 year was rare, but no evidence of harm from longer-term use was identified from the data collected. Conclusions: Stop Smoking Services in England are effective in helping smokers to move away from tobacco use. Using the 52-week CO-validated quit rate of 8% found in this study, we estimate that in the year 2012–13 the services supported 36,249 clients to become non-smokers for the remainder of their lives. This is a substantial figure and provides one indicator of the ongoing value of the treatment that the services provide. The study raises a number of issues for future research including (1) examining the role of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) in smoking cessation for service clients [this study did not look at e-cigarette use (except briefly in the longer-term NRT study) but this is a priority for future studies]; (2) more detailed comparisons of rolling groups with other forms of behavioural support; (3) further exploration of the role of practitioner knowledge, skills and use of effective behaviour change techniques in supporting service clients to stop smoking; (4) surveillance of the impact of structural and funding changes on the future development and sustainability of SSSs; and (5) more detailed analysis of well-being over time between those who successfully stop smoking and those who relapse. Further research on longer-term use of non-combustible nicotine products that measures a wider array of biomarkers of smoking-related harm such as lung function tests or carcinogen metabolites. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme. The UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies provided funding for the longer-term NRT study.