4.6 Article

Electronic Cigarettes As a Smoking-Cessation Tool Results from an Online Survey

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PREVENTIVE MEDICINE
卷 40, 期 4, 页码 472-475

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2010.12.006

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are battery-powered devices that deliver nicotine without any combustion or smoke. These devices have generated much publicity among the smoking-cessation community and support from dedicated users; however, little is known about the efficacy of the device as a smoking-cessation tool. Purpose: This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation using a survey of smokers who had tried e-cigarettes. Methods: Using as a sampling frame a cohort of all first-time purchasers of a particular brand of e-cigarettes during a 2-week period, a cross-sectional, online survey was conducted in 2010 to describe e-cigarette use patterns and their effectiveness as a smoking-cessation tool. There were 222 respondents, with a survey response rate of 4.5%. The primary outcome variable was the point prevalence of smoking abstinence at 6 months after initial e-cigarette purchase. Results: The primary finding was that the 6-month point prevalence of smoking abstinence among the e-cigarette users in the sample was 31.0% (95% CI=24.8%, 37.2%). A large percentage of respondents reported a reduction in the number of cigarettes they smoked (66.8%) and almost half reported abstinence from smoking for a period of time (48.8%). Those respondents using e-cigarettes more than 20 times per day had a quit rate of 70.0%. Of respondents who were not smoking at 6 months, 34.3% were not using e-cigarettes or any nicotine-containing products at the time. Conclusions: Findings suggest that e-cigarettes may hold promise as a smoking-cessation method and that they are worthy of further study using more-rigorous research designs. (Am J Prev Med 2011;40(4):472-475) (C) 2011 American Journal of Preventive Medicine

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