4.2 Article

The use of e-cigarettes among university students in Malaysia

Journal

TOBACCO INDUCED DISEASES
Volume 16, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

EUROPEAN PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.18332/tid/99539

Keywords

electronic cigarettes; smoking; university; students; Malaysia

Funding

  1. Ministry of Higher Education, Malaysia (MOHE) [FF-2016-301]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

INTRODUCTION E-cigarette use is an emerging phenomenon with increasing recognition and acceptance globally. This study aims to create a profile of e-cigarette users among university students in Malaysia. METHODS The study was conducted using a cross-sectional research involving six universities in Malaysia. A semi-structured questionnaire was distributed to 1302 randomly selected students, who either smoked cigarettes and/or e-cigarettes. The 2011 version of Global Adult Tobacco Surveys (GATS) tool was used to record the respondents' sociodemographic data. RESULTS The study revealed that 74.9% of the respondents smoked e-cigarettes; 40.3% used both cigarettes and e-cigarettes (dual users), and 34.5% were exclusive e-cigarette users. The exclusive use of e-cigarettes was related to gender (OR=0.18, 95% CI: 0.09-0.39). Also, male respondents were the majority users (95%). Of the respondents, 75.2 % were Malays, 98.0% single and most believed they have no health problems (92.1%). Further findings revealed the occurrence of adverse effects, dizziness 14.4%, cough 14.1%, and headaches 12.4%. Overall, 57.8% of the respondents used e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation tool, while others consider e-cigarettes a self-image enhancing tool or as part of social activities. CONCLUSIONS Further research on the use of e-cigarettes should be conducted on a large number of respondents in other settings to augment the findings of this study, and also guide policy making on and prevention practice of e-cigarette use, among the general student population in Malaysia.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available