Online Patient-Provider E-cigarette Consultations: Perceptions of Safety and Harm
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Introduction: E-cigarettes are popular and unregulated. Patient-provider communications concerning e-cigarettes were characterized to identify patient concerns, provider advice and attitudes, and research needs.
Methods: An observational study of online patient-provider communications was conducted January 2011-June 2015 from a network providing free medical advice, and analyzed July 2014-May 2016. Patient and provider themes, and provider attitudes toward e-cigarettes (positive, negative, or neutral) were coded qualitatively. Provider attitudes were analyzed with cumulative logit modeling to account for clustering. Patient satisfaction with provider responses was expressed via a Thank function.
Results: An increase in e-cigarette-related questions was observed over time. Patient questions (N=512) primarily concerned specific side effects and harms (34%); general safety (27%); e-cigarettes as quit aids (19%); comparison of e-cigarette harms relative to combusted tobacco (18%); use with pre-existing medical conditions (18%); and nicotine-free e-cigarettes (14%). Half of provider responses discussed e-cigarettes as a harm reduction option (48%); 26% discussed them as quit aids. Overall, 47% of providers' responses represented a negative attitude toward e-cigarettes; 33% were neutral (contradictory or non-committal); and 20% were positive. Attitudes did not differ statistically by medical specialty; provider responses positive toward e-cigarettes received significantly more Thanks.
Conclusions: Examination of online patient-provider communications provides insight into consumer health experience with emerging alternative tobacco products. Patient concerns largely related to harms and safety, and patients preferred provider responses positively inclined toward e-cigarettes. Lacking conclusive evidence of e-cigarette safety or efficacy, healthcare providers encouraged smoking cessation and recommended first-line cessation treatment approaches.
Westmaas J, Kates I, Makaroff L, Henson R Public Health Pract (Oxf). 2023; 6:100409.
PMID: 37554288 PMC: 10405087. DOI: 10.1016/j.puhip.2023.100409.
Dunn D, Leavens E, Lopez S, Warner E, Brett E, Cole A J Am Coll Health. 2021; 71(5):1479-1485.
PMID: 34242540 PMC: 10186273. DOI: 10.1080/07448481.2021.1942003.
Koprivnikar H, Zupanic T, Farkas J Tob Prev Cessat. 2020; 6:3.
PMID: 32548340 PMC: 7291891. DOI: 10.18332/tpc/115029.
Gallegos-Carrillo K, Barrientos-Gutierrez I, Arillo-Santillan E, Zavala-Arciniega L, Cho Y, Thrasher J Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020; 17(2).
PMID: 31936477 PMC: 7013470. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17020442.
Braciszewski J, Vose-ONeal A, Gamarel K, Colby S Child Youth Serv Rev. 2019; 96:231-236.
PMID: 31571706 PMC: 6768414. DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.11.054.