Choice of smoking cessation products among people with substance use problems in the US: Findings from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study Wave 6

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Addictive behaviors Pub Date : 2024-07-19 DOI:10.1016/j.addbeh.2024.108104
{"title":"Choice of smoking cessation products among people with substance use problems in the US: Findings from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study Wave 6","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.addbeh.2024.108104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The aim of this study was to compare past 12-month use of cigarette smoking cessation aids (e.g., Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved cessation products or e-cigarettes for smoking cessation) among people with substance use problems (PWSUPs) who currently smoke to people without substance use problems (SUPs) who currently smoke cigarettes in a nationally representative US sample.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We used the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Wave 6 Study [n = 30,516]. Our sample comprised adult (18+) established cigarette smokers (100+ lifetime-sticks with daily/non-daily use) [n = 5,895]. The independent variable was SUP status (no, moderate, and high). The dependent variables were past-year use of: nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs), cessation medications [i.e., varenicline or bupropion], or e-cigarettes [for cigarette cessation and reduction]. Weighted multivariable logistic regression models for each dependent variable examined the associations between SUP status and each cessation aid, adjusting for cigarette dependence, daily cigarette smoking, and demographic factors.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Among people who smoke, a higher proportion of respondents with high SUP severity used NRTs, cessation medications, and e-cigarettes for cigarette cessation, respectively (12.3%, 8.4%, 15.7%), compared to those with no/low SUP severity (9.8%, 6.0%, 8.9%). In the multivariable models, respondents with high SUPs had 63% (95% CI:1.16–2.29) higher odds of using e-cigarettes for cessation than those without SUPs. No significant differences were seen between high (vs. no/low SUPs) in the past-year use of NRTs and cessation medications.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Our findings indicate that cigarette smokers with high SUPs had higher odds of using e-cigarettes for cessation and reduction compared to smokers without SUPs<em>.</em></p></div>","PeriodicalId":7155,"journal":{"name":"Addictive behaviors","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Addictive behaviors","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306460324001539","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare past 12-month use of cigarette smoking cessation aids (e.g., Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved cessation products or e-cigarettes for smoking cessation) among people with substance use problems (PWSUPs) who currently smoke to people without substance use problems (SUPs) who currently smoke cigarettes in a nationally representative US sample.

Methods

We used the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Wave 6 Study [n = 30,516]. Our sample comprised adult (18+) established cigarette smokers (100+ lifetime-sticks with daily/non-daily use) [n = 5,895]. The independent variable was SUP status (no, moderate, and high). The dependent variables were past-year use of: nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs), cessation medications [i.e., varenicline or bupropion], or e-cigarettes [for cigarette cessation and reduction]. Weighted multivariable logistic regression models for each dependent variable examined the associations between SUP status and each cessation aid, adjusting for cigarette dependence, daily cigarette smoking, and demographic factors.

Results

Among people who smoke, a higher proportion of respondents with high SUP severity used NRTs, cessation medications, and e-cigarettes for cigarette cessation, respectively (12.3%, 8.4%, 15.7%), compared to those with no/low SUP severity (9.8%, 6.0%, 8.9%). In the multivariable models, respondents with high SUPs had 63% (95% CI:1.16–2.29) higher odds of using e-cigarettes for cessation than those without SUPs. No significant differences were seen between high (vs. no/low SUPs) in the past-year use of NRTs and cessation medications.

Conclusion

Our findings indicate that cigarette smokers with high SUPs had higher odds of using e-cigarettes for cessation and reduction compared to smokers without SUPs.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国有药物使用问题的人群对戒烟产品的选择:烟草与健康人群评估(PATH)第 6 波研究结果
本研究旨在比较美国全国代表性样本中目前吸烟的有药物使用问题者(PWSUPs)与目前不吸烟的无药物使用问题者(SUPs)在过去 12 个月中使用戒烟辅助工具(如食品与药物管理局(FDA)批准的戒烟产品或用于戒烟的电子烟)的情况。我们的样本包括成年(18 岁以上)已吸烟者(100 支以上终身吸烟者,每天/非每天吸烟)[n = 5,895] 。自变量为 SUP 状态(无、中度和高度)。因变量为过去一年中尼古丁替代疗法(NRTs)、戒烟药物[即伐尼克兰或安非他明]或电子烟[用于戒烟和减少吸烟]的使用情况。针对每个因变量的加权多变量逻辑回归模型考察了SUP状态与每种戒烟辅助工具之间的关联,并对香烟依赖、每日吸烟量和人口统计学因素进行了调整。结果在吸烟人群中,与无/低SUP严重程度的人群(9.8%、6.0%、8.9%)相比,SUP严重程度高的受访者中使用非抗烟药物、戒烟药物和电子烟戒烟的比例分别更高(12.3%、8.4%、15.7%)。在多变量模型中,SUP 严重的受访者使用电子烟戒烟的几率比无 SUP 的受访者高 63% (95% CI:1.16-2.29) 。结论我们的研究结果表明,与无 SUP 的吸烟者相比,SUP 高的吸烟者使用电子烟戒烟和减少吸烟的几率更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Addictive behaviors
Addictive behaviors 医学-药物滥用
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
4.50%
发文量
283
审稿时长
46 days
期刊介绍: Addictive Behaviors is an international peer-reviewed journal publishing high quality human research on addictive behaviors and disorders since 1975. The journal accepts submissions of full-length papers and short communications on substance-related addictions such as the abuse of alcohol, drugs and nicotine, and behavioral addictions involving gambling and technology. We primarily publish behavioral and psychosocial research but our articles span the fields of psychology, sociology, psychiatry, epidemiology, social policy, medicine, pharmacology and neuroscience. While theoretical orientations are diverse, the emphasis of the journal is primarily empirical. That is, sound experimental design combined with valid, reliable assessment and evaluation procedures are a requisite for acceptance. However, innovative and empirically oriented case studies that might encourage new lines of inquiry are accepted as well. Studies that clearly contribute to current knowledge of etiology, prevention, social policy or treatment are given priority. Scholarly commentaries on topical issues, systematic reviews, and mini reviews are encouraged. We especially welcome multimedia papers that incorporate video or audio components to better display methodology or findings. Studies can also be submitted to Addictive Behaviors? companion title, the open access journal Addictive Behaviors Reports, which has a particular interest in ''non-traditional'', innovative and empirically-oriented research such as negative/null data papers, replication studies, case reports on novel treatments, and cross-cultural research.
期刊最新文献
From individual motivation to substance use initiation: A longitudinal cohort study assessing the associations between reward sensitivity and subsequent risk of substance use initiation among US adolescents Similarities and differences in core symptoms of problematic smartphone use among Chinese students enrolled in grades 4 to 9: A large national cross-sectional study Online social support and problematic Internet Use—a meta-analysis Adult attachment, social anxiety, and problematic social media use: A meta-analysis and meta-analytic structural equation model Not always as advertised: Different effects from viewing safer gambling (harm prevention) adverts on gambling urges
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1