Cargando…

Development and testing of relative risk-based health messages for electronic cigarette products

BACKGROUND: Health messages on e-cigarette packs emphasise nicotine addiction or harms using similar wording to warnings on cigarette packs. These may not be appropriate for e-cigarettes which constitute a reduced risk alternative for smokers. This research aimed to (1) develop and test a selection...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kimber, Catherine, Cox, Sharon, Frings, Daniel, Albery, Ian P., Dawkins, Lynne
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8424813/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34496865
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12954-021-00540-1
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Health messages on e-cigarette packs emphasise nicotine addiction or harms using similar wording to warnings on cigarette packs. These may not be appropriate for e-cigarettes which constitute a reduced risk alternative for smokers. This research aimed to (1) develop and test a selection of relative risk messages for e-cigarette products; (2) compare these to the two current EU Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) nicotine addiction messages; and (3) explore differences between smokers, non-smokers and dual users. METHOD: Twenty-six messages focusing on either harm-reduction or cessation were developed and rated by multidisciplinary experts for accuracy, persuasiveness and clarity. The eight highest ranking messages were compared alongside the TPD messages in a sample of 983 European residents (316 smokers, 327 non-smokers, 340 dual users) on understandability, believability and convincingness. RESULTS: On all three constructs combined, the two TPD messages rated the highest, closely followed by four relative risk messages “Completely switching to e-cigarettes lowers your risk of smoking related diseases”, “Use of this product is much less harmful than smoking”, “Completely switching to e-cigarettes is a healthier alternative to smoking”, and “This product presents substantially lower risks to health than cigarettes” which did not differ statistically from the TPD messages. Non-smokers rated TPD1 significantly higher overall than dual users. Dual users rated “This product is a safer alternative to smoking” significantly higher than non-smokers. Messages did not differ on understandability. CONCLUSIONS: These alternative messages provide a useful resource for future research and for policy makers considering updating e-cigarette product labelling. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12954-021-00540-1.