Alayna P Tackett, Samantha W Wallace, Caitlin E Smith, Elise Turner, David A Fedele, Irina Stepanov, William V Lechner, Jessica J Hale, Theodore L Wagener
{"title":"烟草/尼古丁产品的危害认知和儿童接触:非使用者、纯香烟使用者和纯电子香烟使用者之间的差异","authors":"Alayna P Tackett, Samantha W Wallace, Caitlin E Smith, Elise Turner, David A Fedele, Irina Stepanov, William V Lechner, Jessica J Hale, Theodore L Wagener","doi":"10.1177/1179173X21998362","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study examined caregiver perception of harm and child secondhand exposure to nicotine in a sample of e-cigarette-exclusive, cigarette-exclusive, and non-tobacco/nicotine users (non-users).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cigarette-exclusive (n = 19), e-cigarette-exclusive (n = 12), and non-users (n = 20) and their children (N = 51, <i>M<sub>age</sub></i> = 10.47) completed self-report questionnaires about perceptions of harm, child secondhand exposure, and provided urine to assess child nicotine exposure (cotinine). ANOVAs examined differences between caregiver use status on tobacco harm perceptions and child cotinine levels. Independent samples <i>t</i>-test compared differences in caregiver-reported child secondhand exposure in the home and car.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All 3 caregiver groups rated cigarettes as highly harmful (<i>P</i> = .14), but e-cigarette users rated all 3 types of e-cigarette products (Cartridge-based: <i>P</i> < .001; Tank: <i>P</i> < .001; Box Mod: <i>P</i> < .001) as less harmful than cigarette users and non-users. Caregivers from the e-cigarette user group reported greater child secondhand exposure than caregivers using cigarettes (past 7-day in-home exposure (<i>P</i> = .03); past 7-day exposure in-home + in-car exposure (<i>P</i> = .02); in-home exposure by caregivers and other people exposure (<i>P</i> = .02)). Children from the cigarette user group had significantly higher levels of cotinine (<i>M</i> = 16.6, SD = 21.7) compared to children from the Non-User group (<i>M</i> = .43, SD = .95; <i>P</i> = .001), but no significant difference when compared to children from the E-Cigarette User group (<i>M</i> = 6.5, SD = 13.5).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>In this sample, caregivers who used e-cigarettes perceived them as less harmful, reported using them more frequently at home and in the car, even when their children were present, compared to cigarette users. As a result, children appear to be exposed to nicotine at levels similar to children living with cigarette users. Future caregiver prevention and intervention efforts should target education around the potential harms of secondhand e-cigarette aerosol to children.</p>","PeriodicalId":43361,"journal":{"name":"Tobacco Use Insights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1179173X21998362","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Harm Perceptions of Tobacco/Nicotine Products and Child Exposure: Differences between Non-Users, Cigarette-Exclusive, and Electronic Cigarette-Exclusive Users.\",\"authors\":\"Alayna P Tackett, Samantha W Wallace, Caitlin E Smith, Elise Turner, David A Fedele, Irina Stepanov, William V Lechner, Jessica J Hale, Theodore L Wagener\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1179173X21998362\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study examined caregiver perception of harm and child secondhand exposure to nicotine in a sample of e-cigarette-exclusive, cigarette-exclusive, and non-tobacco/nicotine users (non-users).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Cigarette-exclusive (n = 19), e-cigarette-exclusive (n = 12), and non-users (n = 20) and their children (N = 51, <i>M<sub>age</sub></i> = 10.47) completed self-report questionnaires about perceptions of harm, child secondhand exposure, and provided urine to assess child nicotine exposure (cotinine). ANOVAs examined differences between caregiver use status on tobacco harm perceptions and child cotinine levels. Independent samples <i>t</i>-test compared differences in caregiver-reported child secondhand exposure in the home and car.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All 3 caregiver groups rated cigarettes as highly harmful (<i>P</i> = .14), but e-cigarette users rated all 3 types of e-cigarette products (Cartridge-based: <i>P</i> < .001; Tank: <i>P</i> < .001; Box Mod: <i>P</i> < .001) as less harmful than cigarette users and non-users. Caregivers from the e-cigarette user group reported greater child secondhand exposure than caregivers using cigarettes (past 7-day in-home exposure (<i>P</i> = .03); past 7-day exposure in-home + in-car exposure (<i>P</i> = .02); in-home exposure by caregivers and other people exposure (<i>P</i> = .02)). Children from the cigarette user group had significantly higher levels of cotinine (<i>M</i> = 16.6, SD = 21.7) compared to children from the Non-User group (<i>M</i> = .43, SD = .95; <i>P</i> = .001), but no significant difference when compared to children from the E-Cigarette User group (<i>M</i> = 6.5, SD = 13.5).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>In this sample, caregivers who used e-cigarettes perceived them as less harmful, reported using them more frequently at home and in the car, even when their children were present, compared to cigarette users. As a result, children appear to be exposed to nicotine at levels similar to children living with cigarette users. Future caregiver prevention and intervention efforts should target education around the potential harms of secondhand e-cigarette aerosol to children.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":43361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Tobacco Use Insights\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1179173X21998362\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Tobacco Use Insights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1179173X21998362\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tobacco Use Insights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1179173X21998362","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Harm Perceptions of Tobacco/Nicotine Products and Child Exposure: Differences between Non-Users, Cigarette-Exclusive, and Electronic Cigarette-Exclusive Users.
Objective: This study examined caregiver perception of harm and child secondhand exposure to nicotine in a sample of e-cigarette-exclusive, cigarette-exclusive, and non-tobacco/nicotine users (non-users).
Methods: Cigarette-exclusive (n = 19), e-cigarette-exclusive (n = 12), and non-users (n = 20) and their children (N = 51, Mage = 10.47) completed self-report questionnaires about perceptions of harm, child secondhand exposure, and provided urine to assess child nicotine exposure (cotinine). ANOVAs examined differences between caregiver use status on tobacco harm perceptions and child cotinine levels. Independent samples t-test compared differences in caregiver-reported child secondhand exposure in the home and car.
Results: All 3 caregiver groups rated cigarettes as highly harmful (P = .14), but e-cigarette users rated all 3 types of e-cigarette products (Cartridge-based: P < .001; Tank: P < .001; Box Mod: P < .001) as less harmful than cigarette users and non-users. Caregivers from the e-cigarette user group reported greater child secondhand exposure than caregivers using cigarettes (past 7-day in-home exposure (P = .03); past 7-day exposure in-home + in-car exposure (P = .02); in-home exposure by caregivers and other people exposure (P = .02)). Children from the cigarette user group had significantly higher levels of cotinine (M = 16.6, SD = 21.7) compared to children from the Non-User group (M = .43, SD = .95; P = .001), but no significant difference when compared to children from the E-Cigarette User group (M = 6.5, SD = 13.5).
Discussion: In this sample, caregivers who used e-cigarettes perceived them as less harmful, reported using them more frequently at home and in the car, even when their children were present, compared to cigarette users. As a result, children appear to be exposed to nicotine at levels similar to children living with cigarette users. Future caregiver prevention and intervention efforts should target education around the potential harms of secondhand e-cigarette aerosol to children.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
