|
|
| Line 464: |
Line 464: |
| =Studies - Not Catagorized= | | =Studies - Not Catagorized= |
|
| |
|
|
| |
| ===2020: [https://academic.oup.com/ntr/article/23/4/625/5906696?login=true Effectiveness of Electronic Cigarettes in Smoking Cessation: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis]===
| |
| *Our results suggest that nicotine-ECs may be more effective in smoking cessation when compared to placebo ECs or NRT.
| |
| *[https://sci-hub.st/10.1093/ntr/ntaa181 PDF Version]
| |
| *Citation: Igor Grabovac, MD, DSc, Moritz Oberndorfer, MSc, Jismy Fischer, Winfried Wiesinger, Sandra Haider, PhD, Thomas Ernst Dorner, MD, MPH, Effectiveness of Electronic Cigarettes in Smoking Cessation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis, Nicotine & Tobacco Research, Volume 23, Issue 4, April 2021, Pages 625–634, doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntaa181
| |
| *Acknowledgement: This study was funded by the Health Insurance Group of Styria (Steiermärkische Gebietskrankenkasse).
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| ===2020: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7301047/ Highlights of Studies in Cardiovascular Disease Prevention Presented at the 2020 American College of Cardiology Annual Scientific Session]===
| |
| *In E3, nicotine e-cigarettes plus counseling was superior to counseling alone for smoking cessation. Non-nicotine e-cigarettes plus counseling was also more effective compared with counseling alone though its effects on cessation were modest. This trial demonstrates the efficacy of e-cigarettes as a tool for smoking cessation compared with counseling alone.
| |
| *[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7301047/pdf/11883_2020_Article_856.pdf PDF Version]
| |
| *Citation: Jia X, Al Rifai M, Liu J, Agarwala A, Gulati M, Virani SS. Highlights of Studies in Cardiovascular Disease Prevention Presented at the 2020 American College of Cardiology Annual Scientific Session. Curr Atheroscler Rep. 2020;22(8):32. Published 2020 Jun 18. doi:10.1007/s11883-020-00856-6
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| ===2020: [https://academic.oup.com/ntr/article-abstract/23/4/654/5895499 A magic bullet? The potential impact of e-cigarettes on the toll of cigarette smoking]===
| |
| *The combination of assumptions produces 360 possible scenarios. 357 (99%) yield positive estimates of life-years saved (LYS) due to vaping by 2100, from 143,000 to 65 million.
| |
| *The impact of vaping is greatest when it most helps smokers who otherwise have the greatest difficulty quitting smoking.
| |
| *Vaping is highly likely to reduce smoking-produced mortality. Still, vaping is not “the” answer to the public health crisis created by smoking. Rather, it may well be a tool to add to the armamentarium of effective tobacco control measures.
| |
| *Harm reduction can, and many would say should, be a part of the complex formula that will eventually bring about the demise of smoking.
| |
| *[https://sci-hub.se/10.1093/ntr/ntaa160 PDF Version]
| |
| *Citation: Mendez, D., & Warner, K. E. (2020). A magic bullet? The potential impact of e-cigarettes on the toll of cigarette smoking. Nicotine & Tobacco Research. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntaa160
| |
| *Acknowledgement: Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and FDA Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) (Award Number U54CA229974).
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| ===2020: [https://academic.oup.com/ntr/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/ntr/ntaa182/5906689?redirectedFrom=fulltext Patterns of e-cigarette use and subsequent cigarette smoking cessation over two years (2013/2014 to 2015/2016) in the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study]===
| |
| *Smoking cessation was more likely among frequent e-cigarette users, users of e-cigarettes in last quit attempt, and users of flavored and rechargeable devices.
| |
| *In this study, the proportion of US adults who incorrectly perceived e-cigarettes as equal to, or more, harmful than cigarettes increased steadily regardless of smoking or vaping status. Current adult smokers appear to be poorly informed about the relative risks of e-cigarettes yet have potentially the most to gain from transitioning to these products. The findings of this study emphasise the urgent need to accurately communicate the reduced relative risk of e-cigarettes compared to continued cigarette smoking and clearly differentiate absolute and relative harms.
| |
| *The lack of accurate and consistent messaging from both public health agencies and the media may be contributing to public, and more specifically adult smokers’, perceptions about the relative risk of nicotine when decoupled from combustion and tobacco smoke.
| |
| *Confusion may potentially be discouraging adult smokers from using alternative, less hazardous products which may ultimately result in a missed opportunity to positively impact health at both an individual and population level.
| |
| *[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7501702/pdf/12954_2020_Article_410.pdf PDF Version]
| |
| *Citation: Allison M Glasser, MPH, Mahathi Vojjala, MPH, Jennifer Cantrell, DrPH, MPA, David T Levy, PhD, Daniel P Giovenco, PhD, MPH, David Abrams, PhD, Raymond Niaura, PhD, Patterns of E-cigarette Use and Subsequent Cigarette Smoking Cessation Over 2 Years (2013/2014–2015/2016) in the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study, Nicotine & Tobacco Research, , ntaa182, doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntaa182
| |
| *Acknowledgement: The paper was funded by Imperial Brands Plc.
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| ===2020: [https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1757913920912436 Using e-cigarettes for smoking cessation: evaluation of a pilot project in the North West of England]===
| |
| *Of the 1022 participants who engaged with the pilot 614 were still engaged at 4 weeks, of whom 62% had quit smoking. Of those who still smoked tobacco at week 4, smoking had reduced from a baseline of 19.1 cigarettes/day to 8.7. Overall, 37% of those initially enrolled were confirmed to be using an e-cigarette on its own at follow-up. Successful quit was associated with occupation (unemployed, 33% vs intermediate, 47%) and residing in the less deprived quintiles of deprivation (50% vs 34% in the most deprived quintile.
| |
| *E-cigarettes appear to be an effective nicotine replacement therapy
| |
| *[https://sci-hub.st/10.1093/ntr/ntaa182 PDF Version]
| |
| *Citation: OUP accepted manuscript. (2020). Nicotine & Tobacco Research. doi:10.1093/ntr/ntaa182
| |
| *Acknowledgement: This work was funded internally by NYU School of Global Public Health. DTL was also funded in part by the National Cancer Institute (P01CA200512).
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| ===2020: [https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/DAT-02-2020-0007/full/html Tobacco harm reduction in the 21st century]===
| |
| *Covers Snus and smokeless tobacco, Heat not burn, and e-cigarettes
| |
| *In conclusion, to reduce smoking and to save millions of lives, tobacco harm reduction in the form of cigarette substitution with low-risk products appears to be a promising path. These products, although not completely risk-free, offer an alternative to quit or die. In consideration of the available evidence, advice to tobacco smokers should include trying substitute products. The obvious fact so often overlooked is that smoking is rewarding and people like to do it. Giving smokers an alternative with efficient nicotine delivery means that they might prefer one of these products over cigarettes.
| |
| *[https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/DAT-02-2020-0007/full/pdf?title=tobacco-harm-reduction-in-the-21st-century PDF Version] and [https://safernicotine.wiki/mediawiki/index.php/File:Ren%C3%A9e_O%E2%80%99Leary_and_Riccardo_Polosa.pdf PDF2]
| |
| *Citation: O'Leary, R. and Polosa, R. (2020), "Tobacco harm reduction in the 21st century", Drugs and Alcohol Today, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 219-234. doi: 10.1108/DAT-02-2020-0007
| |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|