Table 2.
EVALI knowledge and perceived impact on e-cigarette interest among smokers aware of EVALI (n=542), by e-cigarette use status
|
|
|||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Among all smokers aware of EVALI (n=542) |
By E-cigarette Use Status |
||||||||
| Never E-cigarette Users | Former E-cigarette Users/Triers | Current, Past 30 Day E-cig Users | |||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| % | (95% CI) | % | (95% CI) | % | (95% CI) | % | (95% CI) | p-values | |
|
|
|||||||||
| E-cigarettes used to vape nicotine, like JUUL | 37.3 | (32.2–42.3) | 37.9 | (30.5–45.4) | 40.0 | (32.5–47.4) | 22.4 | (6.6–38.1) | <.0001 |
| Vaping products used for vaping marijuana/THC | 16.6 | (12.6–20.6) | 10.0 | (5.8–14.2) | 15.7 | (10.0–21.3) | 47.8 | (29.1–66.5) | |
| Both were responsible | 25.9 | (21.6–30.2) | 30.8 | (24.0–37.5) | 24.3 | (18.2–30.4) | 14.5 | (1.4–27.7) | |
| I don’t know | 20.2 | (16.4–24.0) | 21.3 | (15.5–27.2) | 20.0 | (14.5–25.6) | 15.3 | (4.3–26.4) | |
| Heard of Vitamin E Acetate as associated with EVALI | |||||||||
| Yes | 29.4 | (24.5–34.2) | 25.0 | (18.1–31.9) | 25.4 | (19.0–31.9) | 67.4 | (52.3–82.6) | <.0001 |
| No | 48.7 | (43.6–53.8) | 52.3 | (44.8–59.8) | 49.8 | (42.3–57.2) | 27.7 | (13.7–41.7) | |
| Not sure | 22.0 | (17.7–26.2) | 22.7 | (16.3–29.0) | 24.9 | (18.3–31.4) | 4.9 | (0.0–10.9) | |
| Perceived impact of EVALI on e-cigarette interest | |||||||||
| Less interested in using e-cigarettes in future | 50.9 | (45.8–56.0) | 51.1 | (43.6–58.6) | 53.9 | (46.4–61.3) | 33.4 | (15.5–51.3) | 0.04 |
| More interested in using e-cigarettes in future | 3.9 | (1.5–6.3) | 2.9 | (0.1–5.8) | 2.8 | (0.0—5.5) | 13.5 | (0.0–29.0) | |
| No effect on interest in using e-cigarettes in future | 45.2 | (40.1–50.3) | 46.0 | (38.5–53.4) | 43.4 | (36.0–50.8) | 53.1 | (34.3–71.9) | |
Note: p-values are based on bivariate Chi-square tests of association between EVALI knowledge/impact variable and e-cigarette use