使用电子尼古丁输送系统和口服尼古丁袋的成年人的口腔健康风险:对文献的批判性回顾和现有证据的定性综合

IF 4 2区 社会学 Q1 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Gerhard Scherer, Nikola Pluym, Max Scherer
{"title":"使用电子尼古丁输送系统和口服尼古丁袋的成年人的口腔健康风险:对文献的批判性回顾和现有证据的定性综合","authors":"Gerhard Scherer, Nikola Pluym, Max Scherer","doi":"10.1186/s12954-024-01147-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Use of combustible cigarettes (CCs) and smokeless oral tobacco products are well documented risk factors for a variety of oral diseases. However, the potential oral health risks of using recently introduced (since about 2000) non-combustible tobacco/nicotine products (NCPs: electronic cigarettes (ECs), heated tobacco products (HTPs) and oral nicotine pouches (ONPs), remain poorly established.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review evaluates published human studies on detrimental oral health effects in people who use NCPs compared to those smoking cigarettes and those not using any tobacco/nicotine product (NU). We identified 52 studies, predominantly focusing on adults who used electronic cigarettes as an NCP. The studies exhibited significant heterogeneity regarding design, populations, endpoints and quality. Reported outcomes, based on both single and grouped endpoints were qualitatively evaluated by comparing people who use NCPs with NU and with people smoking CCs. Significant increases (indicating a worsening in oral health), significant decreases (indicating a lower level of detrimental effects) and no significant difference between groups were assigned scores of + 1, -1 and 0, respectively. Scores from studies belonging to the same single or grouped endpoints were averaged to a summary score ranging from - 1 to + 1.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The qualitative meta-analysis revealed that comparisons of EC versus NU groups yielded mean scores of 0.29 for pre-cancerous lesions (N = 14 observations), 0.27 for inflammatory processes (N = 83), 0.43 for oral clinical parameters (N = 93) and 0.70 for shifts in the oral microbiome (N = 10). The corresponding values for the EC versus CC group comparisons amounted to -0.33 (N = 15), -0.14 (N = 76), -0.27 (N = 78) and 0.57 (N = 7). Most studies had significant limitations regarding group sizes, duration of NCP use (mostly only a few years) and validity of self-reported exclusive NCP use. Notably, the implications of dual use (EC + CC) and prior CC use were often not adequately considered.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The evaluated studies suggest that use of ECs is associated with relatively fewer detrimental oral health effects compared to smoking, yet oral health status remains poorer compared to not using any tobacco/nicotine products. These results have to be interpreted with caution due to a number of limitations and uncertainties in the underlying studies, particularly the potential biases and confounding factors inherent in cross-sectional study designs.</p>","PeriodicalId":12922,"journal":{"name":"Harm Reduction Journal","volume":"21 1","pages":"229"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11687081/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Oral health risks in adults who use electronic nicotine delivery systems and oral nicotine pouches: a critical review of the literature and qualitative synthesis of the available evidence.\",\"authors\":\"Gerhard Scherer, Nikola Pluym, Max Scherer\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12954-024-01147-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Use of combustible cigarettes (CCs) and smokeless oral tobacco products are well documented risk factors for a variety of oral diseases. However, the potential oral health risks of using recently introduced (since about 2000) non-combustible tobacco/nicotine products (NCPs: electronic cigarettes (ECs), heated tobacco products (HTPs) and oral nicotine pouches (ONPs), remain poorly established.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review evaluates published human studies on detrimental oral health effects in people who use NCPs compared to those smoking cigarettes and those not using any tobacco/nicotine product (NU). We identified 52 studies, predominantly focusing on adults who used electronic cigarettes as an NCP. The studies exhibited significant heterogeneity regarding design, populations, endpoints and quality. Reported outcomes, based on both single and grouped endpoints were qualitatively evaluated by comparing people who use NCPs with NU and with people smoking CCs. Significant increases (indicating a worsening in oral health), significant decreases (indicating a lower level of detrimental effects) and no significant difference between groups were assigned scores of + 1, -1 and 0, respectively. Scores from studies belonging to the same single or grouped endpoints were averaged to a summary score ranging from - 1 to + 1.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The qualitative meta-analysis revealed that comparisons of EC versus NU groups yielded mean scores of 0.29 for pre-cancerous lesions (N = 14 observations), 0.27 for inflammatory processes (N = 83), 0.43 for oral clinical parameters (N = 93) and 0.70 for shifts in the oral microbiome (N = 10). The corresponding values for the EC versus CC group comparisons amounted to -0.33 (N = 15), -0.14 (N = 76), -0.27 (N = 78) and 0.57 (N = 7). Most studies had significant limitations regarding group sizes, duration of NCP use (mostly only a few years) and validity of self-reported exclusive NCP use. Notably, the implications of dual use (EC + CC) and prior CC use were often not adequately considered.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The evaluated studies suggest that use of ECs is associated with relatively fewer detrimental oral health effects compared to smoking, yet oral health status remains poorer compared to not using any tobacco/nicotine products. These results have to be interpreted with caution due to a number of limitations and uncertainties in the underlying studies, particularly the potential biases and confounding factors inherent in cross-sectional study designs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12922,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Harm Reduction Journal\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"229\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11687081/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Harm Reduction Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12954-024-01147-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SUBSTANCE ABUSE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harm Reduction Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12954-024-01147-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:使用可燃香烟和无烟口腔烟草制品是多种口腔疾病的危险因素。然而,使用最近推出的(大约自2000年以来)不燃烟草/尼古丁产品(ncp)的潜在口腔健康风险:电子烟(ECs)、加热烟草产品(HTPs)和口服尼古丁袋(ONPs)仍未得到充分确认。方法:本综述评估了已发表的关于使用ncp的人与吸烟和不使用任何烟草/尼古丁产品(NU)的人相比对口腔健康有害影响的人类研究。我们确定了52项研究,主要集中在使用电子烟作为NCP的成年人身上。这些研究在设计、人群、终点和质量方面表现出显著的异质性。报告的结果,基于单终点和分组终点,通过比较使用ncp和NU的人和吸烟cc的人来进行定性评估。显著增加(表明口腔健康恶化)、显著减少(表明有害影响水平较低)和组间无显著差异的得分分别为+ 1、-1和0。属于相同单一终点或分组终点的研究得分被平均为- 1至+ 1的总得分。结果:定性荟萃分析显示,EC组与NU组比较,癌前病变(N = 14)的平均得分为0.29,炎症过程(N = 83)的平均得分为0.27,口腔临床参数(N = 93)的平均得分为0.43,口腔微生物群变化(N = 10)的平均得分为0.70。EC组与CC组比较的相应值分别为-0.33 (N = 15)、-0.14 (N = 76)、-0.27 (N = 78)和0.57 (N = 7)。大多数研究在群体规模、使用NCP的持续时间(大多数只有几年)和自我报告的独家使用NCP的有效性方面存在显著的局限性。值得注意的是,双重使用(EC + CC)和先前使用CC的影响往往没有得到充分考虑。结论:经评估的研究表明,与吸烟相比,使用ECs对口腔健康的有害影响相对较小,但与不使用任何烟草/尼古丁制品相比,口腔健康状况仍较差。由于基础研究中存在许多局限性和不确定性,特别是横断面研究设计中固有的潜在偏差和混杂因素,因此必须谨慎解释这些结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Oral health risks in adults who use electronic nicotine delivery systems and oral nicotine pouches: a critical review of the literature and qualitative synthesis of the available evidence.

Background: Use of combustible cigarettes (CCs) and smokeless oral tobacco products are well documented risk factors for a variety of oral diseases. However, the potential oral health risks of using recently introduced (since about 2000) non-combustible tobacco/nicotine products (NCPs: electronic cigarettes (ECs), heated tobacco products (HTPs) and oral nicotine pouches (ONPs), remain poorly established.

Methods: This review evaluates published human studies on detrimental oral health effects in people who use NCPs compared to those smoking cigarettes and those not using any tobacco/nicotine product (NU). We identified 52 studies, predominantly focusing on adults who used electronic cigarettes as an NCP. The studies exhibited significant heterogeneity regarding design, populations, endpoints and quality. Reported outcomes, based on both single and grouped endpoints were qualitatively evaluated by comparing people who use NCPs with NU and with people smoking CCs. Significant increases (indicating a worsening in oral health), significant decreases (indicating a lower level of detrimental effects) and no significant difference between groups were assigned scores of + 1, -1 and 0, respectively. Scores from studies belonging to the same single or grouped endpoints were averaged to a summary score ranging from - 1 to + 1.

Results: The qualitative meta-analysis revealed that comparisons of EC versus NU groups yielded mean scores of 0.29 for pre-cancerous lesions (N = 14 observations), 0.27 for inflammatory processes (N = 83), 0.43 for oral clinical parameters (N = 93) and 0.70 for shifts in the oral microbiome (N = 10). The corresponding values for the EC versus CC group comparisons amounted to -0.33 (N = 15), -0.14 (N = 76), -0.27 (N = 78) and 0.57 (N = 7). Most studies had significant limitations regarding group sizes, duration of NCP use (mostly only a few years) and validity of self-reported exclusive NCP use. Notably, the implications of dual use (EC + CC) and prior CC use were often not adequately considered.

Conclusions: The evaluated studies suggest that use of ECs is associated with relatively fewer detrimental oral health effects compared to smoking, yet oral health status remains poorer compared to not using any tobacco/nicotine products. These results have to be interpreted with caution due to a number of limitations and uncertainties in the underlying studies, particularly the potential biases and confounding factors inherent in cross-sectional study designs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Harm Reduction Journal
Harm Reduction Journal Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
9.10%
发文量
126
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊介绍: Harm Reduction Journal is an Open Access, peer-reviewed, online journal whose focus is on the prevalent patterns of psychoactive drug use, the public policies meant to control them, and the search for effective methods of reducing the adverse medical, public health, and social consequences associated with both drugs and drug policies. We define "harm reduction" as "policies and programs which aim to reduce the health, social, and economic costs of legal and illegal psychoactive drug use without necessarily reducing drug consumption". We are especially interested in studies of the evolving patterns of drug use around the world, their implications for the spread of HIV/AIDS and other blood-borne pathogens.
×
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