Young adult e-cigarette use: A latent class analysis of device and flavor use, 2018-2019. (1st November 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Lanza, H. Isabella; Leventhal, Adam M.; Cho, Junhan; Braymiller, Jessica L.; Krueger, Evan A.; McConnell, Rob; Barrington-Trimis, Jessica L.
• Is Part Of: Drug and alcohol dependence. Volume 216(2020)
• Publication Date: 2020-11-01
• Subjects: Cigarette smoking -- Device -- Flavor -- E-cigarette use -- Nicotine vaping -- Young adults; Drug abuse -- Periodicals; Alcoholism -- Periodicals; 616.86
• DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2020.108258
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0376-8716

Abstract

Highlights: Distinct patterns of young adult e-cigarette device and flavor use were identified. Associations between tobacco use frequency and device-flavor classes were evaluated. Greater tobacco use was associated with the Poly-Device–Poly-Flavor Users class. Regulatory policies may need to target a wide spectrum of device and flavor use. Abstract: Objective: The myriad of e-cigarette devices and flavors used by young adults (YAs) complicates identification of the particular e-cigarette products that are associated with more frequent tobacco use and merit consideration for regulation. The current study used latent class analysis to identify distinct patterns of e-cigarette device and flavor use and evaluate their association with vaping and smoking frequency. Methods: Cross-sectional survey data (2018–2019) from a Southern California cohort were analyzed. YAs reporting past 30-day nicotine vaping (N = 550; M age = 19.2 years) self-reported e-cigarette device type/brand and flavor. Six device (e-cig/vape pen, mech mod, box mod, JUUL, non-JUUL pod, disposable) and three flavor (tobacco, mint/menthol, sweet/fruit) indicators were included in a latent class analysis. Past 30-day nicotine vaping and cigarette smoking frequency were assessed as correlates of device and flavor class membership. Results: Three classes were identified: Any Pod–Mint/Menthol or Sweet/Fruit Flavor Users (prevalance:47%); Non-JUUL–Sweet/Fruit Flavor Users (28%); and Poly-Device–Poly-Flavor Users (25%). Greater frequency of vaping and smoking were associated with higher odds of belonging to the Poly-Device–Poly-Flavor Users class vs. the Any Pod–Mint/Menthol or Sweet/Fruit Flavor Users (vaping: aOR[95%CI] = 1.36[1.16, 1.59], p < .001; smoking: aOR[95%CI] = 1.25[1.02, 1.54], p = .03) and Non-JUUL–Sweet/Fruit Flavor Users (vaping: aOR[95%CI] = 1.30[1.10, 1.53], p < .01; smoking: aOR[95%CI] = 1.42[1.07, 1.88], p = .02) classes. Conclusions: Although YAs that predominately used pod devices alongside non-tobacco flavors were most common, YAs characterized by a proclivity toward using many different devices and flavors were appreciably prevalent and smoked and vaped more frequently. Regulations targeting a wide spectrum of vaping products may be optimal in protecting YA health.