Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although evidence shows that co-use of cigarettes and cannabis is common, there is little research examining if co-use patterns vary depending on the regulatory environment for cannabis. This study examined patterns of co-use and perceptions of relative harm among cigarette smokers in four countries with different histories, and at different stages of cannabis legalization.

METHODS: Data are from the 2018 International Tobacco Control 4CV Survey and included 10035 adult cigarette smokers from Canada, United States (US), Australia, and England. At the time of the survey, Canada and the US had relatively more permissive cannabis regulations compared to Australia and England.

RESULTS: Among this sample of 10035 cigarette smokers, Canada had the highest rate of cannabis co-use in the last 12 months (36.3%), followed by the US (29.1%), England (21.6%), and Australia (21.4%). Among past 12 month co-users (n = 3134), the US (40.2%) and Canada (35.2%) had the highest rates of daily cannabis use, followed by smokers in England (26.3%) and Australia (21.7%); Australian co-users had the highest rate of infrequent (<monthly) cannabis use. The highest proportion of co-users who smoked daily and used cannabis daily was in the US (34.8%), followed by Canada (30.6%), England (25.8%), and Australia (22.7%). More co-users in the US (78.3%) and Canada (73.6%) perceived smoked cannabis to be less harmful than cigarettes than in Australia (65.5%) and England (60.8%). The majority of co-users who used cannabis in the last 30 days had smoked it (92.3%), with those in England more likely to smoke cannabis (95.7%) compared to Canada (88.6%); there were no other differences between countries (US: 92.0%, Australia: 93.0%). Co-users in England (90.4%) and Australia (86.0%) were more likely to mix tobacco with cannabis than co-users in Canada (38.5%) and the US (22.3%).

CONCLUSION: Patterns of tobacco and cannabis co-use differed between countries. Smokers in Canada and the US had higher rates of co-use, daily cannabis use, dual-daily use of both cannabis and cigarettes, and were more likely to perceive smoked cannabis as less harmful than cigarettes compared to England and Australia.

Abstract

Background: Our study evaluated the short-term impact of introducing European Union’s tobacco pictorial health warnings (PHWs).

Methods: Longitudinal data were collected at two time-points from adult smokers, participating in the International Tobacco Control (ITC) surveys, conducted in the Netherlands, Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States. In the Netherlands, textual health warnings (THWs) were replaced by PHWs between both time-points. Health warning policies did not change in the other countries. Data from continuing smokers were used (N = 3,487) and analyzed using Generalized Estimating Equations.

Results: Between both time-points, only Dutch smokers showed increases in noticing health warnings (β = 0.712, p < 0.001), self-reports of health warnings leading to a cognitive response such as thinking about smoking health-risks (SHRs) (OR = 1.834, p < 0.001), knowledge about SHRs (β = 0.369, p < 0.001), and avoiding health warnings (OR = 9.869, p < 0.001). However, Dutch smokers showed no changes in attitude towards smoking (β = 0.035, p = 0.518), intention to quit smoking (OR = 0.791, p = 0.157), self-efficacy to quit smoking (β=-0.072, p = 0.286), or reporting that health warnings helped them to resist having a cigarette (OR = 1.091, p = 0.714).

Conclusions: Results suggest that introducing the European PHWs was effective in provoking changes closely related to health warnings, but there was no direct impact on variables more closely related to smoking cessation.

Abstract

Background: Our study evaluated the short-term impact of introducing European Union’s tobacco pictorial health warnings (PHWs).

Methods: Longitudinal data were collected at two time-points from adult smokers, participating in the International Tobacco Control (ITC) surveys, conducted in the Netherlands, Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States. In the Netherlands, textual health warnings (THWs) were replaced by PHWs between both time-points. Health warning policies did not change in the other countries. Data from continuing smokers were used (N = 3,487) and analyzed using Generalized Estimating Equations.

Results: Between both time-points, only Dutch smokers showed increases in noticing health warnings (β = 0.712, p < 0.001), self-reports of health warnings leading to a cognitive response such as thinking about smoking health-risks (SHRs) (OR = 1.834, p < 0.001), knowledge about SHRs (β = 0.369, p < 0.001), and avoiding health warnings (OR = 9.869, p < 0.001). However, Dutch smokers showed no changes in attitude towards smoking (β = 0.035, p = 0.518), intention to quit smoking (OR = 0.791, p = 0.157), self-efficacy to quit smoking (β=-0.072, p = 0.286), or reporting that health warnings helped them to resist having a cigarette (OR = 1.091, p = 0.714).

Conclusions: Results suggest that introducing the European PHWs was effective in provoking changes closely related to health warnings, but there was no direct impact on variables more closely related to smoking cessation.

Abstract

Introduction: This study aimed to systematically examine whether having health conditions or concerns related to smoking are associated with quitting activities among smokers across four western countries.

Methods: Data came from the 2016 International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey conducted in Australia, Canada, England and US. We asked smokers and recent quitters (n=11838) whether they had a medical diagnosis for heart disease, cancer, chronic lung disease, depression, anxiety, alcohol problems, diabetes, severe obesity and chronic pain (nine conditions), and whether they believed smoking had harmed/would harm their health, along with questions on quitting activities.

Results: General concerns about smoking harming health and all specific health conditions, except for alcohol problems, were positively associated with quit attempts, but the relationships between health conditions and other quitting measures (being abstinent, planning to quit, use of quitting medications) were less consistent. Positive associations between conditions and use of quitting medications were only significant for depression, anxiety and chronic pain (adjusted odds ratios ranged from 1.4 to 1.5). There was a general tendency to report lower self-efficacy for quitting among those with the health conditions.

Conclusions: While those with smoking related conditions are somewhat more aware of the links to their smoking, and are largely taking more action, the extent of this is lower than one might reasonably expect. Enhanced awareness campaigns are needed and health professionals need to do more to use health conditions to motivate quit attempts and to ensure they are made with the most effective forms of help.

Abstract

Background: The 2018 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Report found substantial evidence that electronic cigarette use (vaping) by youth is strongly associated with an increased risk of ever using cigarettes (smoking) and moderately associated with progressing to more established smoking. However, the Report also noted that recent increases in vaping have been associated with declining rates of youth smoking. This paper examines the temporal relationship between vaping and youth smoking using multiple data sets to explore the question of whether vaping promotes smoking initiation in the USA.

Methods: Using publicly available, nationally representative data on smoking and vaping among youth and young adults, we conducted a trend line analysis of deviations from long-term trends in smoking starting from when vaping became more prevalent.

Results: There was a substantial increase in youth vaping prevalence beginning in about 2014. Time trend analyses showed that the decline in past 30-day smoking prevalence accelerated by two to four times after 2014. Indicators of more established smoking rates, including the proportion of daily smokers among past 30-day smokers, also decreased more rapidly as vaping became more prevalent.

Conclusions: The inverse relationship between vaping and smoking was robust across different data sets for both youth and young adults and for current and more established smoking. While trying electronic cigarettes may causally increase smoking among some youth, the aggregate effect at the population level appears to be negligible given the reduction in smoking initiation during the period of vaping’s ascendance.

No abstract is available.

Abstract

Aims: To examine whether norms towards nicotine vaping product (NVP) use varied between Australia, Canada, England and the United States and by socio‐demographics, smoking and NVP status.

Design: Cross‐sectional data from the 2016 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey.

Setting: Four countries with distinct regulatory policies relating to the sale and advertising of NVPs: Australia (most restrictive), Canada (restrictive), England and the United States (least restrictive).

Participants: A total of 10900 adult (age 18+) current smokers, former smokers, or at least weekly NVP users. Respondents were from Australia (n = 1366), Canada (n = 3309), England (n = 3835) and the United States (n = 2390).

Measurements: Questions permitted the categorization of respondents as current smokers, former smokers, NVP users and socio‐demographic categories (sex, age, country, ethnicity, income and education). Further questions were asked regarding the frequency of exposure to NVPs in public, whether they had a partner or close friends who vaped and whether they believed society or those considered important to them approved of NVPs.

Findings: Adjusting for relevant covariates, compared with Australian respondents, those in England, Canada and the United States were more likely to report frequent exposure to NVPs in public (83.1%, 57.3% and 48.3%, respectively, compared to 19.8% in Australia; P < 0.0001), having a partner who vaped (13.8%, 7.1% and 7.7%, respectively, compared to 2.1% in Australia; P < 0.0001) and having close friend(s) who vaped (31.7%, 25.3%, 20.9%, respectively, compared to 10.0% in Australia; P < 0.0001). Compared with Australian respondents, respondents from England were more likely to report that society (27.6% compared to 12.3% in Australia; P < 0.0001) and people important to them approved of NVP use (28.9% compared to 14.3% in Australia; P < 0.0001).

Conclusions: Norms towards nicotine vaping product (NVP) use appear to vary among countries with different regulatory contexts regarding sales and advertising.

Abstract

Background and Aims: It has been proposed that many smokers switch to vaping because their nicotine addiction makes this their only viable route out of smoking. We compared indicators of prior and current cigarette smoking dependence and of relapse in former smokers who were daily users of nicotine vaping products (‘vapers’) or who were not vaping at the time of survey (‘non‐vapers’).

Design: Cross‐sectional survey‐based comparison between vaping and non‐vaping former smokers, including a weighted logistic regression of vaping status onto predictor variables, adjusting for covariates specified below.

Setting: United States, Canada, Australia and England.

Participants: A total of 1070 people aged 18+ years from the 2016 International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Smoking and Vaping Wave 1 Survey who reported having ever been daily smokers but who stopped less than 2 years ago and who were currently vapers or non‐vapers.

Measurements: Dependent variable was current vaping status. Predictor variables were self‐reported: (1) smoking within 5 minutes of waking and usual daily cigarette consumption, both assessed retrospectively; (2) current perceived addiction to smoking, urges to smoke and confidence in staying quit. Covariates: country, sample sources, sex, age group, ethnicity, income, education, current nicotine replacement therapy use and time since quitting.

Findings: Vapers were more likely than non‐vapers to report: (1) having smoked within 5 minutes of waking [34.3 versus 15.9%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 3.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.99, 7.03), χ2 = 16.92, P < 0.001]; having smoked > 10 cigarettes/day (74.4 versus 47.2%, aOR = 4.39, 95% CI = 2.22, 8.68), χ2 = 18.18, P < 0.001); (2) perceiving themselves to be still very addicted to smoking (41.3 versus 26.2%, aOR = 2.89, 95% CI = 1.58, 5.30, χ2 = 11.87, P < 0.001) and feeling extremely confident about staying quit (62.1 versus 36.6%, aOR = 3.22, 95% CI = 1.86, 5.59, χ2 = 17.36, P < 0.001). Vapers were not more likely to report any urges to smoke than non‐vapers (27.7 versus 38.8%, aOR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.44, 1.65, χ2 = 0.21, P = 0.643).

Conclusions: While former smokers who currently vape nicotine daily report higher levels of cigarette smoking dependence pre‐ and post‐cessation compared with former smokers who are current non‐vapers, they report greater confidence in staying quit and similar strength of urges to smoke.

Abstract

Background and Aims: The regulatory environment for nicotine vaping products (NVPs) varies widely across countries and this will probably affect the devices used, nicotine content and usage, and hence the ability of NVPs to substitute for cigarettes. We aimed to describe the types of NVPs used by current vapers in four countries with varying regulatory and enforcement approaches toward the marketing and sale of NVPs.

Methods: Data are from wave 1 (July–November 2016) of the ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey (4CV1), conducted among a cohort of current and former smokers, and current NVP users (n = 5147 adults; ≥ 18 years) in Australia (AU), Canada (CA), England (EN) and the United States (US) reporting either current daily, weekly or occasional NVP use. Devices were described by type, brand, voltage variability and refill capacity. Refill solutions were described by flavour and nicotine content. Descriptive statistics and bivariate analyses were conducted on the overall sample and stratified by country. A multinomial logistic regression examined factors associated with device preference across the whole sample.

Results: The types of NVPs used differed by pattern of use and country. Exclusive, daily vapers were more likely to use refillable pen‐shaped devices [odds ratio (OR) = 10.0] or refillable box‐shaped devices (OR = 5.4) than disposable cigalike devices, when compared with other (non‐daily/dual) users. Nearly all respondents reported using flavoured NVPs, fruit (28.3%) being the most common flavour. Refillable devices were the most popular: refillable box‐shaped devices were more commonly reported by vapers in AU (36.8%) and US (31.4%), whereas in EN (47.4%) and CA (29.7%), vapers more often reported using refillable pen‐style devices. Most users also reported that their products contained nicotine, even in CA (87.8%) and AU (91.2%), where vaping products containing nicotine were technically illegal.

Conclusions: In Australia, Canada, England and the United States in 2016, refillable nicotine vaping products were the most common type of nicotine vaping products used by daily vapers. Most daily vapers reported using flavoured e‐liquids/refills (with variance across countries) and most reported using products that contain nicotine, even where vaping products with nicotine were banned.

Abstract

Aims: To examine rules about smoking and vaping in the home in relation to beliefs about the relative harm of second-hand vapor (SHV) compared with second-hand smoke (SHS) in four countries: Canada, United States, England and Australia.

Design: Data were available from 12 294 adults (18+) who participated in the 2016 (wave 1) International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping (ITC 4CV1) Survey.

Participants: All participants were current or recent former adult smokers.

Measurements: Data were analyzed by weighted logistic regression on rules about smoking and vaping in the home; odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were reported, adjusted for demographic and behavioral variables.

Findings: Of all respondents, 37.4% allowed smoking inside their home. Among a subset who were current vapers (n = 6135), 60.4% allowed vaping in their homes. After controlling for demographic and behavioral characteristics, beliefs about the harm of SHV compared with SHS was not associated with allowing smoking in the home, but was associated with allowing vaping in the home [odds ratio (OR) = 2.86 in Canada, OR = 1.82 in the United States and OR = 1.68 in England]. Characteristics that were associated with rules about vaping inside the home included daily vaping (OR = 2.95, 2.04-4.26; OR = 7.00, 4.12-11.87; OR = 5.50, 3.40-8.88; OR = 7.78, 1.90-31.80), living with a spouse who vapes (OR = 2.48, 1.54-3.98; OR = 2.69, 1.42-5.11; OR = 4.67, 2.74-7.95; OR = 21.82, 2.16-220.9) and living with children aged under 18 years (OR = 0.50, 0.37-0.68; OR = 0.89, 0.48-1.65; OR = 0.76, 0.53-1.09; OR = 0.26, = 0.11-0.61) in Canada, the United States, England and Australia, respectively. Similar characteristics were associated with rules about smoking inside the home.

Conclusions: Among current and former smokers in 2016 in Canada, the United States, England and Australia, 37.4% allowed smoking in the home; 60.4% of current vapers allowed vaping. Both concurrent users and exclusive vapers were more likely to allow vaping than smoking inside the home. Allowing vaping inside the home was correlated with the belief that second-hand vapor is less harmful than second-hand smoke.

Abstract

Objective: To assess trends in daily smokers' social norms and opinions of smoking between 2002 and 2015 in Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia.

Method: Data were from wave 1 (2002) to wave 9 (2013–2015) of the longitudinal International Tobacco Control Four Country Survey (Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia), involving 23 831 adult daily smokers. Generalized estimating equation logistic regression models, adjusted for demographics and survey design effects, assessed associations of wave and country with outcomes: (A) over half of five closest friends smoke, (B) agreeing that people important to you believe you should not smoke, (C) agreeing that society disapproves of smoking, and (D) negative opinion of smoking.

Results: Between 2002 and 2015, adjusting for covariates, (A) over half of five closest friends smoke did not change (56% vs. 55%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.95 [95% Confidence Interval = 0.85–1.07]), (B) agreeing that people important to you believe you should not smoke generally decreased (89% vs. 82%; AOR = 0.54 [0.46–0.64]) despite an increase around 2006–2007, (C) agreeing that society disapproves of smoking increased between 2002 and 2006–2007 (83% vs. 87%; AOR = 1.38 [1.24–1.54]) then decreased until 2013–2015 (78%; AOR = 0.74 [0.63–0.88]), and (D) negative opinion of smoking decreased between 2002 and 2010–2011 (54% vs. 49%; AOR = 0.83 [0.75–0.91]) despite an increase around 2005–2006 and at the final wave (2013–2015). Except friend smoking, Canada had the greatest, and the United Kingdom the lowest, antismoking social norms and opinions.

Conclusions: Except friend smoking and opinion of smoking, daily smokers' social norms became less antismoking between 2002 and 2015 despite increases around 2006–2007. Several potential explanations are discussed yet remain undetermined.

Implications: Increasingly comprehensive tobacco control policies alongside decreasing smoking prevalence in Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia have led to the assumption that smoking has become denormalized in these countries. Absent from the literature is any formal assessment of social norms towards smoking over time. Contrary to our hypotheses, this study found that the injunctive social norms of daily smokers became less antismoking between 2002 and 2015, despite increases around 2006–2007. There was no change over time in the proportion of daily smokers who report that over half of their five closest friends smoke.

No abstract is available.

Abstract

Countries have adopted various regulations to limit youth exposure to vaping product advertising. This study aims to examine youth exposure to and perceptions of vaping ads in Canada, England, and the US, three countries with varying vaping product advertising regulations. Data were analyzed from the 2017 ITC Youth Tobacco and Vaping Survey, an online survey of youth aged 16 to 19 years from a consumer panel (n = 12,064). The survey assessed vaping product ad exposure in the prior month, including channels, perceived appeal, and perceived target audience. Most young people reported some vaping product ad exposure in the past 30 days (Canada = 74%, England = 83%, US = 81%). Among those exposed to vaping product ads, more than one-third found them appealing (Canada = 36%, England = 38%, US = 43%). Stores that sell cigarettes were the most common venue for vaping ad exposure, although it was less common in Canada (46%) than in England (60%) or the US (60%), both of which had less restrictive regulatory environments. Ad exposure through websites or social media did not differ by country (Canada = 38%, England = 40%, US = 41%). Compared to those who never smoked or used vaping products, youth who reported smoking and/or vaping were more likely to report ad exposure through most channels. More than one-third of youth perceived that vaping product ads target non-smokers (Canada = 47%, England = 36%, US = 48%). Our study suggests most youth are exposed to vaping product ads, which may promote product use. Except for online channels, cross-country differences in the channels of ad exposure may reflect contrasting regulatory environments.

Abstract

Introduction: Accurate estimates of e-cigarette use are needed to gauge its impact on public health. We compared the results of online and traditional, large scale surveys and provide additional estimates from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) survey, with the aim of assessing the extent of variation in prevalence estimates.

Materials and Methods: We searched the peer-reviewed literature for nationally representative estimates of U.S. adult e-cigarette prevalence, and developed our own estimates from waves one, two, and three of the PATH survey. We compared estimates by age, gender, cigarette smoking status, and e-cigarette use intensity both between online and traditional surveys and among the traditional surveys.

Results: For specific years, online surveys generally yielded higher adult use rates than most traditional surveys, but considerable variation was found among traditional surveys. E-cigarette prevalence was greater for less intensive than for more intensive use. Levels of use were higher among current and recent former cigarette smokers than among former smokers of longer quit duration and never smokers, and by those of younger ages.

Conclusions: Considerable variation in e-cigarette use estimates was observed even for a specific year. Further study is needed to uncover the source of variation in e-cigarette prevalence measures, with a view towards developing measures that best explain regular use and transitions between the use of e-cigarettes and other tobacco products.

Abstract

Cigarette affordability measures the price smokers pay for cigarettes in relation to their incomes. Affordability can be measured using the relative income price of cigarettes (RIP), or the price smokers pay to purchase 100 packs of 20 cigarettes divided by their per capita household income. Using longitudinal data from 7046 smokers participating in the International Tobacco Control (ITC) US Survey, the purpose of this study was to test whether affordability significantly changed following the US federal tax increase implemented on 1 April 2009. This study also estimated temporal trends in affordability from 2003–2015 at state and national levels using small area estimation methods and segmented linear mixed effects regression models. RIP increased slightly during 2003–2008. This was followed by a 30% increase during 2008–2010, indicating cigarettes were less affordable after the federal tax increase. RIP continued to increase during 2010–2013 but decreased during 2013–2015, suggesting cigarettes have recently become more affordable for US smokers. State-level trends in RIP were consistent with overall national trends. Controlling for other factors, a $1 increase in the state excise tax was significantly associated with a 9% increase in RIP, indicating state taxes reduced affordability. Tax-induced price increases must keep pace with underlying economic conditions to ensure cigarettes do not become more affordable over time.

Abstract

Purpose: To examine the awareness of low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) lung cancer screening among a population of current and former smokers using a nationally representative sample from the United States.

Methods: Data for this study come from Wave 9 of the International Tobacco Control (ITC) United States Survey, conducted between 2013 and 2015. Among respondents age ≥ 40 (n = 1145), a 50% random sample were asked a series of questions pertaining to lung cancer screening. This study examines awareness and screening behaviors in relationship to demographic characteristics of respondents, health beliefs, psychosocial behaviors, and smoking behaviors. Descriptive tables and χ2 tests were used to examine the association between those who were aware and unaware. Logistic regression analyses were conducted, stratified on respondents’ smoking status. Data were weighed to be representative of the current smoking population in the US.

Results: Overall, 52% of current and former smokers reported being aware of lung cancer screening. Among the group with no prior screening, 80.6% said they would take a lung cancer screening exam if recommended by their physician. In the multivariate models, former smokers had significantly greater awareness of lung cancer screening compared to current smokers [odds ratio 1.42 (95% confidence interval 1.03, 1.97)].

Conclusions: Awareness of LDCT lung cancer screening was lower among current smokers compared to former smokers. Most smokers who had not ever been screened said they would have lung cancer screening if it were recommended by their physician, demonstrating the need for healthcare providers to encourage those eligible for screening to

Abstract

Objective: To examine differences in vaping and smoking prevalence among adolescents in Canada, England, and the United States.

Design: Repeat cross sectional surveys.

Setting: Online surveys in Canada, England, and the US.

Participants: National samples of 16 to 19 year olds in 2017 and 2018, recruited from commercial panels in Canada (n=7891), England (n=7897), and the US (n=8140).

Main outcome measures: Prevalence of vaping and smoking was assessed for use ever, in the past 30 days, in the past week, and on 15 days or more in the past month. Use of JUUL (a nicotine salt based electronic cigarette with high nicotine concentration) and usual vaping brands were also assessed. Logistic regression models examined differences in vaping and smoking between countries and over time.

Results: The prevalence of vaping in the past 30 days, in the past week, and on 15 days or more in the past month increased in Canada and the US between 2017 and 2018 (P<0.001 for all), including among non-smokers and experimental smokers, with no changes in England. Smoking prevalence increased in Canada (P<0.001 for all measures), with modest increases in England, and no changes in the US. The percentage of ever vapers who reported more frequent vaping increased in Canada and the US (P<0.01 for all), but not in England. The use of JUUL increased in all countries, particularly the US and Canada—for example, the proportion of current vapers in the US citing JUUL as their usual brand increased threefold between 2017 and 2018.

Conclusions: Between 2017 and 2018, among 16 to 19 year olds the prevalence of vaping increased in Canada and the US, as did smoking in Canada, with little change in England. The rapidly evolving vaping market and emergence of nicotine salt based products warrant close monitoring.

Abstract

Objective: To compare exposure to and use of certain cigarette and vaping product marketing among adult smokers and vapers in four countries with contrasting regulations—Australia (AU), Canada, England and the USA.

Data sources: Adult smokers and vapers (n=12 294) from the 2016 International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey (4CV1).

Analysis: Self-reported exposure to cigarette and vaping product advertising through point-of-sale, websites/social media, emails/texts, as well as exposure to and use of price offers were assessed for country differences using logistic regression models adjusted for multiple covariates.

Results: Reported exposure to cigarette advertising exposure at point-of-sale was higher in the USA (52.1%) than in AU, Canada and England (10.5%–18.5%). Exposure to cigarette advertising on websites/social media and emails/texts was low overall (1.5%–10.4%). Reported exposure to vaping ads at point-of-sale was higher in England (49.3%) and USA (45.9%) than in Canada (32.5%), but vaping ad exposure on websites/social media in Canada (15.1%) was similar with England (18.4%) and the USA (12.1%). Exposure to vaping ads via emails/texts was low overall (3.1%–9.9%). Exposure to, and use of, cigarette price offers was highest in the USA (34.0 % and 17.8 %, respectively), but the use rate among those exposed was highest in AU (64.9%). Exposure to, and use of, price offers for vaping products was higher in the USA (42.3 % and 21.7 %) than in AU, Canada and England (25.9%–31.5 % and 7.4%–10.3 %).

Conclusions: Patterns of cigarette and vaping product marketing exposure generally reflected country-specific policies, except for online vaping ads. Implications for research and policy are discussed.

Abstract

This study examines whether having health conditions or concerns related to smoking is associated with use of vaping products. Data came from the 2016 wave of the International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey. Smokers and recent quitters (n = 11,344) were asked whether they had a medical diagnosis for nine health conditions (i.e., depression, anxiety, alcohol problems, severe obesity, chronic pain, diabetes, heart disease, cancer, and chronic lung disease) and concerns about past and future health effects of smoking, and their vaping activities. Respondents with depression and alcohol problems were more likely to be current vapers both daily (Adjusted odds ratio, AOR = 1.42, 95% confidence interval, CI 1.09–1.85, p < 0.05 for depression; and AOR = 1.52, 95% CI 1.02–2.27, p < 0.05 for alcohol) and monthly (AOR = 1.32, 95% CI 1.11–1.57 for depression, p < 0.01; and AOR = 1.43, 95% CI 1.06–1.90, p < 0.05 for alcohol). Vaping was more likely at monthly level for those with severe obesity (AOR = 1.77, 95% CI 1.29–2.43, p < 0.001), cancer (AOR = 5.19, 95% CI 2.20–12.24, p < 0.001), and concerns about future effects of smoking (AOR = 1.83, 95% CI 1.47–2.28, p < 0.001). Positive associations were also found between chronic pain and concerns about past health effects of smoking and daily vaping. Only having heart disease was, in this case negatively, associated with use of vaping products on their last quit attempt (AOR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.43–0.91, p < 0.05). Self-reported health condition or reduced health associated with smoking is not systematically leading to increased vaping or increased likelihood of using vaping as a quitting strategy.

Abstract

Although increasing taxes has been established as the most effective tobacco control policy, it is not clear whether these policies reduce cigarette consumption equally among women and men. In this study, we examine whether the association between taxation/taxation structure and cigarette consumption differs by gender. The data is from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation (ITC) Projects in 17 countries. Cigarette consumption was measured by gender for each ITC country. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) were employed to investigate gender differences in the association between cigarette consumption and tax structures, while controlling for time-variant demographic characteristics such as unemployment rates, proportions of adults, and percent of female population. Tiered tax structures are associated with higher cigarette consumption among both males and females. Female smokers are more responsive to an average tax increase than male smokers. Among males, higher ad valorem share in excise taxes is associated with lower cigarette consumption, but it is not the case for females. Females may not be as responsive to the prices raised by ad valorem taxes, despite being responsive to average taxes, suggesting that smokers by gender may face different prices.

Abstract

Aims: To examine current and ex‐ smokers’ reasons for continuing or discontinuing regular use of nicotine vaping products (NVPs).

Design and participants: Cross‐sectional study of 2,722 current daily/weekly, and 921 ex‐daily/weekly, adult vapers who were either current or ex‐cigarette smokers when surveyed.

Setting: 2016 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Wave 1 (4CV1) surveys conducted in the United States (n=1159), England (n=1269), Canada (n=964), and Australia (n=251).

Measurements: Current vapers were asked about the following reasons for regular NVP use: less harmful to others, social acceptance, enjoyment, use in smoke‐free areas, affordability, and managing smoking behaviour. Ex‐vapers were asked about the following reasons for discontinuing regular NVP use: addiction concerns, affordability, negative experiences, perceived social unacceptability, safety concerns, product dissatisfaction, inconvenience, unhelpfulness for quitting, unhelpfulness for managing cravings, and not needed for smoking relapse prevention. Possible correlates of NVP use and discontinuation, including smoking status, smoking/vaping frequency, quit duration (ex‐smokers only), country, age, and type of NVP device used, were examined using multivariate logistic regression models.

Findings: For current smokers, the top three reasons for current regular NVP use were: helpful for cutting down smoking (86%), less harmful to others (78%), and helpful for quitting smoking (77%). The top three reasons for discontinuing vaping were: not being satisfying (78%), unhelpfulness for cravings (63%), and unhelpfulness for quitting smoking (52%). For ex‐smokers, the top three reasons for current vaping were: enjoyment (91%), less harmful to others (90%) and affordability (90%); and for discontinuing were: not needed to stay quit (77%), not being satisfying (50%) and safety concerns (44%). Reported reasons varied by user characteristics, including age, country and NVP device‐type.

Conclusions: Regular use of nicotine vaping products is mainly motivated by its perceived benefits, especially for reducing or quitting smoking, whereas its discontinuation is motivated by perceived lack of such benefits, with some variation by user characteristics.

Abstract

Aims: To determine whether a simple combination of level of smoking and level of vaping results in a useful typology for characterising smoking and vaping behaviours.

Methods: Cross‐sectional data from adults (≥18 years) in the 2016 Wave 1 ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey in the United States (n=2291), England (n=3591), Australia (n=1376), and Canada (n=2784) were used. Participants who either smoked, vaped or concurrently used both at least monthly were included and divided into 8 groups based on use frequency of each product (daily, non‐daily, no current use). This resulted in 4 concurrent use groups (predominant smokers, dual daily users, predominant vapers and concurrent non‐daily users). These groups were compared with each other and with the 4 exclusive use groups, on socio‐demographics, nicotine dependence, beliefs and attitudes about both products, and quit‐related measures using data weighted to reference population surveys in each country.

Results: 10.8% of the sample were concurrent users, with daily smokers vaping non‐daily (predominant smokers) constituting 51.6% of this group. All 8 categories differed from other categories on at least some measures. Concurrent daily nicotine users reported higher levels of indicators of nicotine dependence, and generally more positive attitudes toward both smoking and vaping than concurrent non‐daily users. Among daily nicotine users, compared with exclusive daily smokers, reports of interest in quitting were higher in all concurrent use groups. Dual daily users had the most positive attitudes about smoking overall, and saw it as the least denormalised, and at the same time were equally interested in quitting as other concurrent users and were most likely to report intending to continue vaping.

Conclusions: In Australia, Canada, England and the United States in 2016, daily nicotine users differed considerably from non‐daily nicotine users. Among daily nicotine users, dual daily users (those who smoke and vape concurrently) should be treated as a distinct grouping when studying relationships between smoking and vaping. The 8 level typology characterising concurrent and exclusive use of smoking and vaping should be considered when studying both products.

Abstract

Aims: To determine if there are associations between changes in the explicit (i.e., price) and implicit (i.e., use restrictions in public places) costs of cigarettes and nicotine vaping products (NVPs) and their use patterns in the United States.

Methods: Data came from the Wave 1 (2016) US data of the ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey (ITC US 4CV1) and Nielsen Scanner Track database. A multiple logistic regression model was applied to estimate the likelihoods of NVP use (vaping at least monthly), cigarette/NVP concurrent use (vaping and smoking at least monthly), and switch from cigarettes to NVPs (had quit smoking < 24 months and currently vape) among ever smokers, conditioning upon cigarette/NVP prices, use restrictions and socio‐demographics.

Results: Living in places where vaping is allowed in smoke‐free areas was significantly associated with an increase in the likelihood of vaping (Marginal Effect, M.E. = 0.17; p<0.05) and the concurrent use of cigarettes and NVPs (M.E. = 0.11; p<0.05). Higher NVP prices were associated with decreased likelihood of NVP use, concurrent use, and complete switch (P>0.05). Higher cigarette prices were associated with greater likelihood of cigarette and NVP concurrent use (P>0.05). Working in places where vaping is banned is associated with lower likelihood of vaping and NVP and cigarette concurrent use (P>0.05).

Conclusions: Higher prices for nicotine vaping products (NVPs) and vaping restrictions in public places are associated with less NVP use and less concurrent use of vaping and smoking. Public policies that increase prices for vaping devices and supplies (i.e., regulations, taxes) and restrict where vaping is allowed are likely to suppress vaping.

Abstract

Aim: This study examines where vapers purchase their vaping refills in countries having different regulations over such devices, Canada (CA), the United States (US), England (EN), and Australia (AU).

Methods: Data were available from 1899 current adult daily and weekly vapers who participated in the 2016 (Wave 1) International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping. The outcome was purchase location of vaping supplies (online, vape shop, other). Adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were reported for between country comparisons.

Results: Overall, 41.4% of current vapers bought their vaping products from vape shops, 27.5% bought them online, and 31.1% from other retail locations. The vast majority of vapers (91.1%) reported using nicotine-containing e-liquids. In AU, vapers were more likely to buy online vs other locations compared to CA (OR = 6.4, 2.3–17.9), the US (OR = 4.1, 1.54–10.7), and EN (OR = 7.9, 2.9–21.8). In the US, they were more likely to buy from vape shops (OR = 3.3, 1.8–6.2) or online (OR = 1.9, 1.0–3.8) vs other retail locations when compared to those in EN. In CA, vapers were more likely to purchase at vape shops than at other retail locations when compared to vapers in EN (5.9, 3.2–10.9) and the US (1.87, 1.0–3.1).

Conclusions: The regulatory environment and enforcement of such regulations appear to influence the location where vapers buy their vaping products. In AU, banning the retail sale of nicotine vaping products has led vapers to rely mainly on online purchasing sources, whereas the lack of enforcement of the same regulation in CA has allowed specialty vape shops to flourish.

Abstract

Aims: This paper presents updated prevalence estimates of awareness, ever‐use, and current use of nicotine vaping products (NVPs) from 14 International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project (ITC Project) countries that have varying regulations governing NVP sales and marketing.

Design, setting, participants and measurements: A cross‐sectional analysis of adult (≥18 years) current smokers and ex‐smokers from 14 countries participating in the ITC Project. Data from the most recent survey questionnaire for each country were included, which spanned the period 2013 to 2017. Countries were categorized into four groups based on regulations governing NVP sales and marketing (allowable or not), and level of enforcement (strict or weak where NVPs are not permitted to be sold): (1) most restrictive policies (MRPs): not legal to be sold or marketed with strict enforcement: Australia, Brazil, Uruguay; (2) restrictive policies (RPs): not approved for sale or marketing with weak enforcement: Canada, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand (NZ); (3) less restrictive policies (LRPs): legal to be sold and marketed with regulations: England, Netherlands, Republic of Korea, United States (US); (4) no regulatory policies (NRPs): Bangladesh, China, Zambia. Countries were also grouped by World Bank Income Classifications. Country‐specific weighted logistic regression models estimated adjusted NVP prevalence estimates for: awareness, ever/current use, and frequency of use (daily vs. non‐daily).

Findings: NVP awareness and use were lowest in NRP countries. Generally, ever‐ and current use of NVPs were lower in MRP countries [ever‐use: 7.1% to 48.9%; current use: 0.3% to 3.5%] relative to LRP countries [ever‐use: 38.9% to 66.6%; current use: 5.5% to 17.2%] and RP countries [ever‐use: 10.0% to 62.4%; current use: 1.4% to 15.5%]. NVP use was highest among high income countries, followed by upper‐middle income countries, and then by lower‐middle income countries.

Conclusions: With a few exceptions, awareness and use of nicotine vaping products (NVPs) varies by the strength of national regulations governing NVP sales/marketing, and by country income. In countries with no regulatory policies, use rates were very low, suggesting that there was little availability, marketing and/or interest in NVPs in these countries where smoking populations are predominantly poorer. The higher awareness and use of NVPs in high income countries with moderately (e.g., Canada, NZ) and less (e.g., England, US) restrictive policies, is likely due to the greater availability and affordability of NVPs.