Dataset Information

Validation of an E-cigarette Purchase Task in Advanced Generation Device Users.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Behavioral economic purchase tasks are used to estimate the reinforcing value of drugs by asking participants how much they would purchase across a range of increasing prices. We sought to validate such a task for e-cigarettes in experienced users of advanced generation, tank-style devices.

Methods

Dual users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes (N = 54) and exclusive e-cigarette users (N = 59) attended one session during which they completed assessments including two versions of the E-cigarette Purchase Task: one that asked how many puffs of their e-cigarette they would purchase in 24 hours at varying prices and one that asked how many mLs of e-liquid they would purchase. We correlated purchase task outcomes with other measures of e-cigarette use. We also compared the tasks across dual and exclusive users.

Results

Indices derived from the mLs-based task were more likely to be correlated with self-reported use rates, e-cigarette dependence, and cotinine levels than the puffs-based task. Exclusive users showed greater demand on than dual users only on the mLs version when using an F-test comparison method, while multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) results showed that dual users showed greater demand only on the puffs task.

Conclusions

Results indicate that the mLs version had greater validity than the puffs version in terms of clinical indices. Dual users may still be on a trajectory to fully switching to e-cigarettes; thus, puffs as a measure may be more intuitive, as this measure is shared by cigarettes and e-cigarettes. For exclusive users, the unit they purchase their e-liquid in may be the most relevant unit and better capture their demand for that product.

Implications

Behavioral economic purchase tasks have been widely used to understand nicotine use. We have developed two versions of a purchase task for e-cigarette use and compared the two versions in users of advanced generation e-cigarette devices. We found that the mLs version of the task better-reflected use patterns relative to a puffs version, which suggests that participants struggle to place monetary value on a unit of consumption (ie, puffs). Validated measures of e-cigarette reinforcement will be important as researchers and regulators determine which features of these products contribute to reinforcing efficacy.

SUBMITTER: Cassidy RN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7542643 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Limited research exists about the possible cardiovascular effects of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). We therefore sought to compare exposure to known or potentially cardiotoxic volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in ENDS users, smokers, and dual users. METHODS:A total of 371 individuals from the Cardiovascular Injury due to Tobacco Use study, a cross-sectional study of healthy participants aged 21-45 years, were categorized as nonusers of tobacco (n = 87), sole ENDS users (n = 17), cigarette smokers (n = 237), and dual users (n = 30) based on 30-day self-reported tobacco product use patterns. Participants provided urine samples for VOC and nicotine metabolite measurement. We assessed associations between tobacco product use and VOC metabolite measures using multivariable-adjusted linear regression models. RESULTS:Mean (SD) age of the population was 32 (±6.8) years, 55% men. Mean urinary cotinine level in nonusers of tobacco was 2.6 ng/mg creatinine, whereas cotinine levels were similar across all tobacco product use categories (851.6-910.9 ng/mg creatinine). In multivariable-adjusted models, sole ENDS users had higher levels of metabolites of acrolein, acrylamide, acrylonitrile, and xylene compared with nonusers of tobacco, but lower levels of most VOC metabolites compared with cigarette smokers or dual users. In direct comparison of cigarettes smokers and dual users, we found lower levels of metabolites of styrene and xylene in dual users. CONCLUSION:Although sole ENDS use may be associated with lower VOC exposure compared to cigarette smoking, further study is required to determine the potential health effects of the higher levels of certain reactive aldehydes, including acrolein, in ENDS users compared with nonusers of tobacco. IMPLICATIONS:ENDS use in conjunction with other tobacco products may not significantly reduce exposure to VOC, but sole use does generally reduce some VOC exposure and warrants more in-depth studies.

Project description:IntroductionThis study examined user behavior, e-cigarette dependence, and device characteristics on nicotine intake among users of pod-mod e-cigarettes.Aims and methodsIn 2019-2020, people who use pod-mods in the San Francisco Bay Area completed questionnaires and provided a urine sample for analysis of total nicotine equivalents (TNE). The relationship between TNE and e-cigarette use, e-cigarette brands, e-liquid nicotine strength, e-cigarette dependence, and urine 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol (NNAL), as a measure of combustible cigarette exposure, were examined.ResultsOf 100 participants (64% male, 71% in the 18-34 age group, 45% white), 53 used JUUL primarily, 12 used Puff Bar primarily, and 35 used other brands, including Suorin; 48 participants reported current cigarette smoking. Participants most often reported use of e-liquid with 4.5%-6.0% nicotine (68%), fruit (35%), tobacco (28%), and menthol or mint flavors (26%), used e-cigarettes on 25.5 (SD = 6.3) days a month, 10.2 (SD = 14.2) times a day, and 40% used 1-2 pods/cartridges per week. In bivariate analysis, urinary TNE was higher with greater frequency (days used) and intensity (number of pods used) of e-cigarette use, e-cigarette dependence, and combustible cigarette use. In multivariable analysis, days of e-cigarette use in the last 30 days, number of pods used per week, and NNAL levels were significantly associated with TNE. There was no significant impact of e-liquid nicotine strength on TNE.ConclusionsNicotine intake among people who used pod-mod e-cigarettes increased with e-cigarette consumption and e-cigarette dependence, but not with e-liquid nicotine strength. Our findings may inform whether FDA adopts a nicotine standard for e-cigarettes.ImplicationsThe study examined how device and user characteristics influence nicotine intake among pod-mod e-cigarette users. Nicotine intake increased with frequency (days of e-cigarette use in past 30 days) intensity of use (number of pods used per day) and e-cigarette dependence but not with the flavor or nicotine concentration of the e-liquids. Regulation of nicotine concentration of e-liquids is unlikely to influence nicotine exposure among adult experienced pod-mod users.

Project description:IntroductionExclusive e-cigarette use has been shown to be associated with reduced levels of respiratory symptoms relative to smoking combustible cigarettes; this association has been less frequently studied in smokers using advanced-generation e-cigarette devices. Advanced-generation devices generate denser vapor than either early generation or pod-style devices, and engender longer inhalations; these vaping topography patterns may contribute to respiratory symptoms.MethodsIn a single-session, cross-sectional study of exclusive e-cigarette users (N = 59) and dual users of e-cigarettes and cigarettes (N = 54), participants completed questionnaires, including the American Thoracic Society Questionnaire (ATSQ) and were videotaped vaping their own device in the lab for 1 hour. Using a hierarchical regression method, we examined whether topography variables, level of nicotine concentration used in their e-cigarette device in the past month, e-cigarette dependence, amount of e-cigarette use in the past month, and smoking status (any smoking in the last month vs. none) predicted ATSQ score severity.ResultsThere was a significant mean difference in ATSQ score across smoking status, with greater ATSQ scores for vapers who also smoked cigarettes (19.0, SD = 6.7) than for exclusive vapers (13.4, SD = 5.3). In the final model, of the predictors of interest, only cigarette smoking status predicted significantly greater ATSQ scores (overall F = 2.51, p = .006; R2 = .26; smoking status β = 0.39, p < .0001).ConclusionsFindings suggest that differences in respiratory symptoms between dual and exclusive e-cigarette users appear to be attributable to combustible cigarette smoking, rather than more intense or frequent e-cigarette use across groups.ImplicationsIn this comparison of exclusive advanced-generation vape device users (N = 59) versus dual users of these devices and combustible cigarettes (N = 54), we set out to determine the extent to which smoking status and e-cigarette use variables predicted self-reported respiratory symptom severity. We found that dual users showed greater respiratory symptom severity (ATSQ scores) than exclusive vapers. Despite examining vaping topography and other variables, smoking status and race were the only significant predictor of respiratory symptoms. We conclude that combustible cigarette use, not individual vaping topography, likely accounts for differences in respiratory symptoms between dual users and exclusive vapers.