Electronic cigarettes (ECIGs), also referred to as electronic nicotine delivery systems or “e-cigarettes,” generally consist of a power source (usually a battery) and heating element (commonly referred to as an atomizer) that vaporizes a solution (e-liquid). The user inhales the resulting vapor. Electronic cigarettes have been increasing in popularity since they were introduced into the US market in 2007. Many questions remain about these products, and limited research has been conducted. This review describes the available research on what ECIGs are, effects of use, survey data on awareness and use, and the utility of ECIGs to help smokers quit using tobacco cigarettes. This review also describes arguments for and against ECIGs and concludes with steps to move research on ECIGs forward.

Electronic cigarette (ECIG) nicotine delivery and other effects can be influenced by device and/or liquid characteristics and user puffing behavior. One class of ECIGs includes "sub-ohm" devices that incorporate heating coils with resistance less than 1 ohm (Ω), lower than that observed in conventional devices (e.g., ≥1.5 Ω). Relative to conventional ECIGs that operate at ≤10 W, low-resistance coils can be used to increase device power (e.g., 40-300 W). However, little is known about the individual and combined effects of ECIG power, manipulated by coil resistance, and liquid nicotine concentration on ECIG acute effects. Experienced ECIG users (N = 32) completed 4 sessions that differed by ECIG power and coil resistance (40.5 W, 0.5 Ω or 13.5 W, 1.5 Ω) and liquid nicotine concentration (3 or 8 mg/ml). In each session, participants used a 4.5-V Kanger SUBOX ECIG in a 10-puff directed and 60-min ad libitum bout. Nicotine delivery, heart rate, subjective effects, puff topography, and liquid consumption were measured. Nicotine delivery was greatest in the 8mg/ml+0.5Ω condition and lowest in the 3mg/ml+1.5Ω condition. The greatest reduction in abstinence symptoms were observed in the 8mg/ml+0.5Ω condition, although the highest ratings for satisfaction and liking were reported in the 3mg/ml+0.5Ω condition. Use of ECIGs containing 3 mg/ml nicotine liquid resulted in longer and larger puffs and increased puff frequency, though high-power/low-resistance ECIGs resulted in greater consumption of ECIG liquid. ECIG device and liquid characteristics and user puff topography should be considered simultaneously when making regulatory decisions aimed at protecting public health. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Background JUUL is an electronic cigarette that aerosolises a nicotine-containing liquid, while IQOS heats tobacco to produce an aerosol. Both are marketed to smokers, but their effects have seldom been examined in this population. Methods Eighteen cigarette smokers (13 men) with no JUUL or IQOS experience completed a within-subject, laboratory study assessing nicotine delivery and subjective effects after controlled (10 puffs, ~30 s interpuff interval) and ad libitum (90 min) use of JUUL, IQOS or own-brand (OB) cigarettes. Results JUUL increased mean plasma nicotine concentration significantly from 2.2 (SD=0.7) ng/mL to 9.8 (4.9) ng/mL after 10 puffs and to 11.5 (9.3) ng/mL after ad libitum use. IQOS increased mean plasma nicotine significantly from 2.1 (0.2) ng/mL to 12.7 (6.2) ng/mL after 10 puffs and to 11.3 (8.0) ng/mL after ad libitum use. OB increased mean plasma nicotine significantly from 2.1 (0.2) ng/mL to 20.4 (11.4) ng/mL after 10 puffs and to 21.0 (10.2) ng/mL after ad libitum use. Mean OB plasma nicotine concentration was significantly higher than JUUL and IQOS. OB increased expired carbon monoxide concentration, but IQOS and JUUL did not. ‘Craving a cigarette/nicotine’ and ‘Urges to smoke’ were reduced significantly for all products following the directed bout. Conclusions Among smokers, JUUL and IQOS delivered less nicotine than cigarettes. Also, in this sample, IQOS and OB reduced abstinence symptoms more effectively than JUUL. Additional work with experienced JUUL and IQOS users is needed, as their nicotine delivery profiles and subjective experiences may differ.

Background: COVID-19 has caused health impacts and disruptions globally. Electronic cigarette (ECIG) users may face additional impacts. This study examined impacts of COVID-19 on ECIG users. Methods: Concept mapping, a mixed-methods approach, was used to identify COVID-19 impacts on adult ECIG users. ECIG users (n = 93) provided statements completing a prompt: “A specific way Coronavirus/COVID-19 has affected my vaping/e-cigarette use, my vaping/e-cigarette related purchasing, or other vaping/e-cigarette related behaviors or issues is…”. Participants generated 85 unique statements, sorted statements into groups of similar content and rated each statement on how true they were. Multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis identified thematic clusters. Mean cluster ratings were compared between sample subgroups. Results: Ten clusters were identified: Stocking up and Bulk Purchasing, Challenges in Obtaining ECIG Supplies, Alternative Purchasing Procedures, Increased ECIG use, Disruption of Routine and ECIG Use, Efforts to Decrease ECIG Use, Improving ECIG Skills, COVID-19 Health Concerns, Perceptions of ECIG Use and COVID-19, and COVID-19 Protection. More dependent ECIG users and dual users of ECIGs and cigarettes rated clusters higher than less dependent ECIG users and non-dual users. Conclusions: ECIG users may experience or perceive they face additional COVID-19 impacts, such as increased exposure, financial burdens, stress, and health risks.