Initial puffing behaviors and subjective responses differ between an electronic nicotine delivery system and traditional cigarettes

Abstract

BackgroundElectronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) present an emerging issue for tobacco control and data on product use behaviors are limited.MethodsParticipants (N = 38 enrolled; N = 16 compliant) completed three lab visits over 5 days and were asked to abstain from regular cigarettes for 72 hours in favor of ENDS (Smoke 51 TRIO – 3 piece, First Generation with 11 mg/ml filters). Lab visits included measurement of exhaled carbon monoxide (CO) and salivary cotinine concentration, questionnaire measures of regular cigarette craving after the 72 hour abstinence, and subjective product effects. Participants used a topography device to record puff volume, duration, flow rate, and inter-puff interval.ResultsAnalyses revealed significant differences across products in puff count, average volume, total volume and inter-puff interval, with ENDS broadly showing a more intensive smoking pattern. Cigarette craving scores dropped significantly after smoking regular cigarettes, but not ENDS (p = .001), and subjective measures showed ENDS rated less favorably. CO boost, after ENDS use, decreased significantly (p < .001), and saliva cotinine significantly dropped between visits 1 and 3 (p < 0.001) after ENDS use relative to after cigarette smoking. For compliant and non-compliant participants, there was an average 82.0% [V1 - 16.1 cpd; V3 - 2.9 cpd] and average 73.9% [V1 - 20.3 cpd; V3 - 5.3 cpd] reduction in regular cigarette use per day during the ENDS trial period, respectively.ConclusionsThe ENDS were smoked more intensively than own brand cigarettes, but delivered significantly less nicotineand were less satisfying. These findings have implications for the viability of certain ENDS as alternatives to cigarettes.

A Naturalistic, Randomized Pilot Trial of E-Cigarettes: Uptake, Exposure, and Behavioral Effects

“…Participants generally rated cigarettes and ENDS similarly. These results are likely product-specific, but they stand in contrast to prior studies, similarly powered, showing favorability of cigarettes over e-cigarettes (44). …”

Overview of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems: A Systematic Review

“…153,197,239,271,513,538,556,564,580,583 Puff duration 197,538 and volume 197,239 are higher for ENDS products than for cigarettes, but flow rate 197 (among experienced vapers) and puff counts 239 (upon initial use in naïve vapers) have been found to be lower than for cigarettes. Higher liquid nicotine concentration has been associated with shorter puffs, 271,564 but puff velocity shows no effect on nicotine yield.…”

“…Laboratory studies find modest increases in nicotine biomarkers after vaping. 169,195,197,203,206,209–211,215,222,223,232,233,239,246,248,264,271,284,300 Vaping has no or minimal impact on other physiologic measures (i.e., exhaled carbon monoxide, complete blood count, body weight), 142,202,203,230,237,239,242,257,265,272,274,276,282,285,292,303 with improvements in outcomes seen for smokers switching to ENDS, such as reduced blood pressure, improved lung function, and improved disease symptoms (i.e., asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease). 214,230,273,287 Some studies have examined cardiovascular measures associated with vaping, 195,197,209,222,223,226,232,246,248,257,273,300,301 with the majority finding an increase in heart rate, 195,223,232,246,248,300 but three finding no change after use.…”

“…Two hundred and fifty articles 153,192–194,197,203,239,265,271,304,323–326,329,332,333,335–339,341–344,346,348,350,351,353–362,365,367–369,372,374–376,378–381,384,388,390,393–396,404–406,408,414–416,418,420–422,425,426,432,434,436,440,441,444–450,453–456,459–462,465,468,472,475,476,478,488,489,491,494,496–498,500,502,504,506–646 have been published on vaping patterns.…”

A decade of e-cigarettes: Limited research & unresolved safety concerns

“…Unfortunately, (for research purposes) the vaping proficiency of the users and the e-cigarette response to the user vaping (vacuum needed to activate the atomizer) vary widely. Usually smoke density remains unaltered throughout the entire burning of a conventional cigarette, while for e-cigarette aerosol density decreases with continued use (Norton et al, 2014; Trtchounian et al, 2010). Addressing this variance is of crucial importance for the preparation of experimental samples to be used for toxicological testing (Behar et al, 2015; Farsalinos et al, 2013b).…”