4.6 Article

First-versus second-generation electronic cigarettes: predictors of choice and effects on urge to smoke and withdrawal symptoms

期刊

ADDICTION
卷 110, 期 4, 页码 669-677

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/add.12807

关键词

Electronic cigarette; ENDS; urge to smoke; withdrawal symptoms

资金

  1. University of East London (UEL)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims To (1) estimate predictors of first-versus second-generation electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) choice; and (2) determine whether a second-generation device was (i) superior for reducing urge to smoke and withdrawal symptoms (WS) and (ii) associated with enhanced positive subjective effects. Design Mixed-effects experimental design. Phase 1: reason for e-cigarette choice was assessed via questionnaire. Phase 2: participants were allocated randomly to first-or second-generation e-cigarette condition. Urge to smoke and WS were measured before and 10 minutes after taking 10 e-cigarette puffs. Setting University of East London, UK. Participants A total of 97 smokers (mean age 26; standard deviation 8.7; 54% female). Measurements Single-item urge to smoke scale to assess craving and the Mood and Physical Symptoms Scale (MPSS) to assessWS. Subjective effects included: satisfaction, hit, 'felt like smoking' and 'would use to stop smoking' (yes versus no response). Findings Equal numbers chose each device, but none of the predictor variables (gender, age, tobacco dependence, previous e-cigarette use) accounted for choice. Only baseline urge to smoke/WS predicted urge to smoke/WS 10 minutes after use (B = 0.38; P< 0.001 and B = 0.53; P< 0.001). E-cigarette device was not a significant predictor. Those using the second-generation device were more likely to report satisfaction and use in a quit attempt (chi(2)= 12.10, P = 0.001 and chi(2)= 5.53, P = 0.02). Conclusions First-and second-generation electronic cigarettes appear to be similarly effective in reducing urges to smoke during abstinence, but second-generation devices appear to be more satisfying to users.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据