BACKGROUND

In response to health concerns about vaping devices (eg, youth nicotine use, lung injury), Apple removed 181 previously approved vaping-related apps from the App Store in November 2019. This policy change may lessen youth exposure to content that glamorizes vaping; however, it may also block important sources of information and vaping device control for adults seeking to use vaping devices safely.

OBJECTIVE

Understanding the types of nicotine and cannabis vaping–related apps still available in the competing Google Play Store can shed light on how digital apps may reflect information available to consumers.

METHODS

In December 2019, we searched the Google Play Store for vaping-related apps using the keywords "vape" and "vaping" and reviewed the first 100 apps presented in the results. We reviewed app titles, descriptions, screenshots, and metadata to categorize the intended substance (nicotine or cannabis/tetrahydrocannabinol) and the app’s purpose. The most installed apps in each purpose category were downloaded and evaluated for quality and usability with the Mobile App Rating Scale.

RESULTS

Of the first 100 apps, 79 were related to vaping. Of these 79 apps, 43 (54%) were specific to nicotine, 3 (4%) were specific to cannabis, 1 (1%) was intended for either, and for the remaining 31 (39%), the intended substance was unclear. The most common purposes of the apps were making do-it-yourself e-liquids (28/79, 35%) or coils (25/79, 32%), games/entertainment (19/79, 24%), social networking (16/79, 20%), and shopping for vaping products (15/79, 19%). Of the 79 apps, at least 4 apps (5%) paired with vaping devices to control temperature or dose settings, 8 apps (10%) claimed to help people quit smoking using vaping, and 2 apps (3%) had the goal of helping people quit vaping.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of vaping-related apps in the Google Play Store had features either to help users continue vaping, such as information for modifying devices, or to maintain interest in vaping. Few apps were for controlling device settings or assisting with quitting smoking or vaping. Assuming that these Google Play Store apps were similar in content to the Apple App Store apps that were removed, it appears that Apple’s ban would have a minimal effect on people who vape with the intention of quitting smoking or who are seeking information about safer vaping via mobile apps.

Purpose of review

This article aims to summarize current research on digital health for assessment and intervention targeting tobacco and cannabis co-use and to answer the following questions: Which digital tools have been used? Which populations have been targeted? And what are implications for future research?

Recent findings

Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) via text messages or interactive voice response calls has been used to capture co-use patterns within a time window or co-administration of both substances via blunts among young adults. Feasibility of multicomponent interventions targeting dual cessation of both substances among adult co-users with cannabis use disorder, delivered via smartphone apps, online, and computer modules has been demonstrated.

Summary

Digital tools, particularly those using EMAs and mobile sensors, should be expanded to assess co-use of emerging tobacco and cannabis products. Digital cessation interventions should be tailored to different groups of co-users and address specific mechanisms underlying different co-use patterns.

Background

In response to health concerns about vaping devices (eg, youth nicotine use, lung injury), Apple removed 181 previously approved vaping-related apps from the App Store in November 2019. This policy change may lessen youth exposure to content that glamorizes vaping; however, it may also block important sources of information and vaping device control for adults seeking to use vaping devices safely.

Objective

Understanding the types of nicotine and cannabis vaping-related apps still available in the competing Google Play Store can shed light on how digital apps may reflect information available to consumers.

Methods

In December 2019, we searched the Google Play Store for vaping-related apps using the keywords "vape" and "vaping" and reviewed the first 100 apps presented in the results. We reviewed app titles, descriptions, screenshots, and metadata to categorize the intended substance (nicotine or cannabis/tetrahydrocannabinol) and the app's purpose. The most installed apps in each purpose category were downloaded and evaluated for quality and usability with the Mobile App Rating Scale.

Results

Of the first 100 apps, 79 were related to vaping. Of these 79 apps, 43 (54%) were specific to nicotine, 3 (4%) were specific to cannabis, 1 (1%) was intended for either, and for the remaining 31 (39%), the intended substance was unclear. The most common purposes of the apps were making do-it-yourself e-liquids (28/79, 35%) or coils (25/79, 32%), games/entertainment (19/79, 24%), social networking (16/79, 20%), and shopping for vaping products (15/79, 19%). Of the 79 apps, at least 4 apps (5%) paired with vaping devices to control temperature or dose settings, 8 apps (10%) claimed to help people quit smoking using vaping, and 2 apps (3%) had the goal of helping people quit vaping.

Conclusions

The majority of vaping-related apps in the Google Play Store had features either to help users continue vaping, such as information for modifying devices, or to maintain interest in vaping. Few apps were for controlling device settings or assisting with quitting smoking or vaping. Assuming that these Google Play Store apps were similar in content to the Apple App Store apps that were removed, it appears that Apple's ban would have a minimal effect on people who vape with the intention of quitting smoking or who are seeking information about safer vaping via mobile apps.

Objectives

Despite extensive research into the determinants of electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) uptake, few studies have examined the psychosocial benefits ENDS users seek and experience. Using a consumer ritual framework, we explored how ENDS users recreated or replaced smoking practices, and considered implications for smoking cessation.

Design

In-depth interviews; data analysed using thematic analysis.

Setting

Dunedin, New Zealand.

Participants

16 young adult ENDS users (age M=21.4, SD=1.9; 44% female).

Results

Participants reported using different ENDS to achieve varying outcomes. Some used 'cigalikes' to recreate a physically and visually similar experience to smoking; they privileged device appearance over nicotine delivery. In contrast, others used personally crafted mods to develop new rituals that differentiated them from smokers and showcased their technical expertise. Irrespective of the device they used, several former smokers and dual users of cigarettes and ENDS experienced strong nostalgia for smoking attributes, particularly the elemental appeal of fire and the finiteness of a cigarette. Non-smoking participants used ENDS to maintain social connections with their peers.

Conclusions

Participants used ENDS to construct rituals that recreated or replaced smoking attributes, and that varied in the emphasis given to device appearance, nicotine delivery, and social performance. Identifying how ENDS users create new rituals and the components they privilege within these could help promote full transition from smoking to ENDS and identify those at greatest risk of dual use or relapse to cigarette smoking.

Background

Historically, smoking cessation was thought to negatively impact substance use outcomes among smokers who use other substances. We sought to synthesize recent reports on this association.

Methods

Google Scholar, PubMed, and Cinahl were searched for studies published from 2006 to March 29, 2016 that reported impact of smoking cessation treatment or quitting smoking on substance use or substance use disorder treatment outcomes in the general population and among those in substance abuse treatment. Studies were grouped by reported impact as follows: "positive" (i.e. improved), "null" (i.e. no change), or "negative" (i.e. worsened).

Results

Twenty-four studies were included. Eighteen reported the impact of quitting smoking and six reported the impact of smoking cessation treatment intervention, independent of quitting, on substance use outcomes. Eleven studies (46%) reported solely positive impact; four (17%) reported solely null impact; eight (33%) reported mixed positive and null impact by analysis (combined and subgroup, n=1); substance (n=4); length of follow-up (n=2); and comparison group (n=1). One study (4%) reported mixed negative and null impact by ethnic group. No studies reported increased substance use.

Conclusion

Smoking cessation does not appear to have a negative effect, and often has a positive effect on substance use outcomes. Smoking cessation advice should be offered, without hesitation, to smokers who report substance use and those in treatment for substance use disorder.

Tobacco use is increasingly concentrated within marginalized groups, including LGBTQ+ young adults. Developing tailored interventions to reduce tobacco-related health disparities requires understanding the mechanisms linking individual and contextual factors associated with tobacco use to behavior. This paper presents an in-depth exploration of three cases from a novel mixed method study designed to identify the situational factors and place-based practices of substance use among high-risk individuals. We combined geographically explicit ecological momentary assessment (GEMA) with an adapted travel diary-interview method. Participants (young adult bisexual smokers, ages 18-26) reported on non-smoking and smoking situations for 30 days with a smartphone app. GEMA surveys captured internal and external situational factors (e.g., craving intensity, location type, seeing others smoking). Continuous locational data was collected via smartphone GPS. Subsequently, participants completed in-depth interviews reviewing maps of their own GEMA data. GEMA data and transcripts were analyzed separately and integrated at the case level in a matrix. Using GEMA maps to guide the interview grounded discussion in participants' everyday smoking situations and routines. Interviews clarified participant interpretation of GEMA measures and revealed experiences and meanings of smoking locations and practices. The GEMA method identified the most frequent smoking locations/times for each participant (e.g., afternoons at university). Interviews provided description of associated situational factors and perceptions of smoking contexts (e.g., peer rejection of bisexual identity) and the roles of smoking therein (e.g., physically escape uncomfortable environments). In conclusion, this mixed method contributes to advancing qualitative GIS and other hypothesis-generating approaches working to reveal the richness of individuals' experiences of the everyday contexts of health behavior, while also providing reliable measures of situational predictors of behaviors of interest, such as substance use. Limitations of and future directions for the method are discussed.

Purpose

Use of multiple tobacco products is increasing, particularly among young adults. Latent class analysis of substance-use patterns provides a framework for understanding the heterogeneity of use. We sought to identify different patterns of cigarette, e-cigarette, hookah, cigarillo, and smokeless tobacco use among young adult bar patrons.

Methods

We conducted repeated cross-sectional surveys of randomized time location samples of young adult California bar patrons in 2013 and 2014. Latent class analysis was used to examine patterns of use among current (past 30-day) tobacco users. Classes were compared on demographic characteristics and tobacco use correlates.

Results

Overall 84.4% of the current tobacco users were cigarette smokers, 38.7% used electronic cigarettes, 35.9% used hookah, 30.1% smoked cigars/cigarillos, and 15.4% used smokeless tobacco in the past 30 days. We extracted six latent classes: "Cigarette only" (n = 1690), "Hookah mostly" (n = 479), "High overall use" (n = 528), "Smokeless mostly" (n = 95), "E-cigarette mostly" (n = 439), "Cigars mostly" (n = 435). These classes differed in their risk profiles on both current use compared to no use, and number of days they used each tobacco product. Differences between classes emerged on demographics (age, sex, race/ethnicity) and tobacco correlates including perceived peer smoking, antitobacco industry attitudes, prioritizing social activities, and advertising receptivity.

Conclusions

Understanding different patterns of multiple tobacco product use may inform both prevention and cessation programming for young adults. It may be efficient to tailor messages to different latent classes and address the distinct demographic and attitudinal profiles of groups of multiple tobacco product users.

Introduction

Even though many adolescent smokers want to quit, it is difficult to recruit them into smoking cessation interventions. Little is known about which adolescent smokers are currently reached by these measures. In this study we compare participants of a group-based, cognitive behavioral smoking cessation intervention with adolescent smokers who decided against participating.

Methods

Within a non-randomized controlled trial, data of 1053 smokers (aged 11-19) from 42 German secondary schools were analyzed. Of these smokers, 272 were recruited into 47 courses of the intervention. An in-class information session, individually addressing potential participants, and incentives were used as means of recruitment. Personal predictors of participation were analyzed using regression analyses and multivariate path analyses to test for mediation.

Results

In the path analysis model, nicotine dependence, quit motivation, and a previous quit attempt were directly positively related to participation. Heavier smoking behavior was indirectly positively associated with participation through nicotine dependence and negatively through quit motivation, yielding an overall positive indirect effect. The positive effect of a previous quit attempt on participation was partially mediated through nicotine dependence and quit motivation. The proportion of smoking friends were indirectly positively related to participation, mediated through nicotine dependence.

Conclusions

Since adolescents with heavier smoking behavior and stronger nicotine dependence are less likely to undertake a successful unassisted quit attempt, the reach of these young smokers with professional cessation interventions is desirable. Further measures to improve the recruitment of those currently not motivated to quit have to be examined in future studies.

Purpose

Use of other tobacco products (smokeless tobacco, hookah, cigarillo, and e-cigarettes) is increasing, particularly among young adults, and there are few regulations on marketing for these products. We examined the associations between tobacco marketing receptivity and other tobacco product (OTP) use among young adult bar patrons (aged 18-26 years).

Methods

Time-location sampling was used to collect cross-sectional surveys from 7,540 young adult bar patrons from January 2012 through March of 2014. Multivariable logistic regression analyses in 2015 examined if tobacco marketing receptivity was associated (1) with current (past 30 day) OTP use controlling for demographic factors and (2) with dual/poly use among current cigarette smokers (n = 3,045), controlling for demographics and nicotine dependence.

Results

Among the entire sample of young adult bar patrons (Mean_age = 23.7, standard deviation = 1.8; 48.1% female), marketing receptivity was consistently associated with current use of all OTP including smokeless tobacco (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]= 2.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.08-3.16, p < .001), hookah (AOR = 1.97, 95% CI 1.58-2.43, p < .001), cigarillos (AOR = 3.00, 95% CI 2.21-4.08, p < .001), electronic cigarettes (AOR = 2.43, 95% CI 1.93-3.04, p < .001), and multiple tobacco products (AOR = 2.93, 95% CI 2.45-3.51, p < .001). Among current smokers, marketing receptivity was significantly associated with use of smokeless tobacco (AOR = 1.63, 95% CI 1.22-2.18, p < .01), cigarillos (AOR = 1.81, 95% CI 1.22-2.70, p < .01), and multiple tobacco products (AOR = 1.58, 95% CI 1.27-1.97, p < .001).

Conclusions

OTP use is common among young adult bar patrons, and it is associated with tobacco marketing receptivity. Efforts to limit tobacco marketing should address OTP in addition to cigarettes.