Patterns of Use of e-Cigarettes and Their Respiratory Effects: A Critical Umbrella Review.

IF 2.1 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Tobacco Use Insights Pub Date : 2025-03-11 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/1179173X251325421
Giusy Rita Maria La Rosa, Riccardo Polosa, Renée O'Leary
{"title":"Patterns of Use of e-Cigarettes and Their Respiratory Effects: A Critical Umbrella Review.","authors":"Giusy Rita Maria La Rosa, Riccardo Polosa, Renée O'Leary","doi":"10.1177/1179173X251325421","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>E-cigarettes (ECs) are a well-established consumer product. To study their respiratory health effects, there is the issue of heterogenous patterns of use: concurrently with cigarette smoking (dual use), exclusive use after smoking cessation (exclusive use), or use initiated without any prior or current use of cigarettes (naïve use). Our primary goal was to synthesize the evidence on the respiratory effects of ECs use in adults, categorized by their pattern of use. Additionally, we identified the highest quality systematic reviews and critically evaluated the current literature on this topic. The review was developed with published umbrella review guidelines. The database searches were Medline, Scopus, Cochrane, Epistemonikos, LILACS, and grey literature databases. The criterion for inclusion of systematic reviews was analyses of respiratory tests from randomized controlled trials or cohort studies. Quality assessments were performed with AMSTAR2 and a checklist of reporting biases. A narrative analysis was synthesized by test method: spirometry, impulse oscillometry, breath gasses, biomarkers, and clinical serious adverse events. Twelve systematic reviews were included. The findings on respiratory functioning were statistically non-significant across all patterns of use. Reporting bias was frequently observed. Based on the current research, there is no evidence of significant change in the short or medium term in respiratory function with any pattern of ECs use. We attribute the null findings to the weaknesses of acute studies, the participants' smoking history masking testing, and the inclusion of participants with a low frequency of use.</p>","PeriodicalId":43361,"journal":{"name":"Tobacco Use Insights","volume":"18 ","pages":"1179173X251325421"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11898095/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tobacco Use Insights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1179173X251325421","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

E-cigarettes (ECs) are a well-established consumer product. To study their respiratory health effects, there is the issue of heterogenous patterns of use: concurrently with cigarette smoking (dual use), exclusive use after smoking cessation (exclusive use), or use initiated without any prior or current use of cigarettes (naïve use). Our primary goal was to synthesize the evidence on the respiratory effects of ECs use in adults, categorized by their pattern of use. Additionally, we identified the highest quality systematic reviews and critically evaluated the current literature on this topic. The review was developed with published umbrella review guidelines. The database searches were Medline, Scopus, Cochrane, Epistemonikos, LILACS, and grey literature databases. The criterion for inclusion of systematic reviews was analyses of respiratory tests from randomized controlled trials or cohort studies. Quality assessments were performed with AMSTAR2 and a checklist of reporting biases. A narrative analysis was synthesized by test method: spirometry, impulse oscillometry, breath gasses, biomarkers, and clinical serious adverse events. Twelve systematic reviews were included. The findings on respiratory functioning were statistically non-significant across all patterns of use. Reporting bias was frequently observed. Based on the current research, there is no evidence of significant change in the short or medium term in respiratory function with any pattern of ECs use. We attribute the null findings to the weaknesses of acute studies, the participants' smoking history masking testing, and the inclusion of participants with a low frequency of use.

电子烟的使用模式及其对呼吸系统的影响:一项重要的综述。
电子烟是一种成熟的消费产品。为了研究它们对呼吸系统健康的影响,存在异质性使用模式的问题:与吸烟同时使用(双重使用),戒烟后专门使用(专门使用),或在没有任何先前或目前使用香烟的情况下开始使用(naïve使用)。我们的主要目标是综合成人使用ECs对呼吸系统影响的证据,并按其使用方式进行分类。此外,我们确定了最高质量的系统综述,并对有关该主题的当前文献进行了批判性评估。该审查是根据已出版的总括性审查指南制定的。检索数据库为Medline、Scopus、Cochrane、Epistemonikos、LILACS和灰色文献数据库。纳入系统评价的标准是对随机对照试验或队列研究的呼吸试验进行分析。使用AMSTAR2和报告偏差清单进行质量评估。通过肺活量测定法、脉冲振荡测定法、呼吸气体、生物标志物和临床严重不良事件等测试方法进行叙述性分析。纳入了12项系统评价。在所有使用模式中,呼吸功能的发现在统计上无显著性。报告偏差经常被观察到。根据目前的研究,没有证据表明任何使用ECs的模式在短期或中期对呼吸功能有显著改变。我们将无效发现归因于急性研究的弱点,参与者的吸烟史掩盖测试,以及纳入使用频率较低的参与者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Tobacco Use Insights
Tobacco Use Insights PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
自引率
4.50%
发文量
32
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信