Twenty-four-hour subjective and pharmacological effects of ad-libitum electronic and combustible cigarette use among dual users
Twenty-four-hour subjective and pharmacological effects of ad-libitum electronic and combustible cigarette use among dual users
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/add.14931
复制
发表时间：
2020-02-06
期刊：
影响因子：
6
通讯作者：
Benowitz, Neal L.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Harvanko, Arit M.;St Helen, Gideon;Benowitz, Neal L.
背景和目的未描述电子烟和香烟在临时使用24小时内的相对药理作用。在这项研究中，测量了两个使用者的24小时血浆尼古丁浓度和48小时使用电子烟和电子烟的主观影响。设计双臂内交叉设计，优先使用电子烟或香烟随意使用超过48小时。设置在美国加利福尼亚州旧金山的医院研究病房。参与者36名健康的电子烟和电子烟双重使用者(n=8，结果分析采用基于方差分析(ANOVA)的混合模型，以产品顺序(电子烟或香烟)和产品类型(可燃香烟或电子烟类型)为固定效应，受试者为重复效应。在24小时内，对于大多数使用者来说，电子烟产生的尼古丁暴露比香烟低，尽管25%的人从电子烟中获得了更多的尼古丁，这是因为更频繁地使用电子烟或更大的依赖。与吸烟相比，可变能量罐吸烟者的尼古丁暴露相似，而类香烟(t((30))=2.71，P=0.011，d=0.745)和固定能量罐吸烟者(t((30))=3.37，P=0.002，d=0.993)的尼古丁暴露更少。在一些理想的主观效果上，香烟的评分高于电子烟(例如，心理奖励，t((322)=7.24P<；0.001，d=0.432)，但戒断症状的减少与电子烟相当。电子烟类型之间没有发现差异，但贝叶斯因子表明这些措施是不敏感的。结论在美国的医院环境中，在24小时内，电子烟和香烟的双重使用者在仅使用香烟或可变功率油箱装置时尼古丁暴露相似，但仅使用雪茄或固定功率装置的人尼古丁暴露较低。尽管尼古丁水平较低，但所有类型的电子烟在预防戒断症状方面都很有效。人们对电子烟的评价不如香烟。
Background and Aims Relative pharmacological effects of e-cigarettes and cigarettes during 24 hours of ad-libitum use have not been described. In this study, 24-hour blood plasma nicotine concentrations and 48-hour subjective effects with use of cigarettes and e-cigarettes were measured among dual users.Design Two-arm within-subject cross-over design with preferred e-cigarette or cigarette ad-libitum use over 48 hours.Setting Hospital research ward in San Francisco, California, USA.Participants Thirty-six healthy dual users of e-cigarettes and cigarettes (n = 8, 25% females).Measurements Twenty-four-hour blood plasma nicotine and cotinine concentrations and 48-hour self-reported nicotine withdrawal symptoms and rewarding effects.Findings Analyses used analysis of variance (ANOVA)-based mixed models with order of product (e-cigarette or cigarette) and product type (combustible cigarette or type of e-cigarette) as fixed effects, and subject as a repeated effect. During a 24-hour period, e-cigarettes produced lower nicotine exposure than cigarettes for the majority of users, although 25% received more nicotine from e-cigarettes, which was predicted by more frequent e-cigarette use or greater dependence. Compared to cigarette smoking, nicotine exposure for variable-power tank users was similar, while cig-a-like (t((30)) = 2.71, P = 0.011, d = 0.745) and fixed-power tank users (t((30)) = 3.37, P = 0.002, d = 0.993) were exposed to less nicotine. Cigarettes were rated higher than e-cigarettes on some desirable subjective effects (e.g. psychological reward, t((322)) = 7.24 P < 0.001, d = 0.432), but withdrawal symptom reduction was comparable. No differences were found between e-cigarette types, but Bayes factors indicate that these measures were insensitive.Conclusions During a 24-hour period in a hospital setting in the United States, nicotine exposure for dual users of e-cigarettes and cigarettes was similar when using cigarettes or variable-power tank devices only but was lower for those using cig-a-like or fixed-power devices only. Despite lower nicotine levels, all types of e-cigarette were effective in preventing withdrawal symptoms. E-cigarettes were rated less rewarding than cigarettes.