Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Polytobacco use among young adult smokers: prospective association with cigarette consumption
  1. Angela Petersen1,2,
  2. Mark G Myers1,2,
  3. Lyric Tully1,
  4. Kristin Brikmanis3,
  5. Neal Doran1,2
  1. 1 Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, California, USA
  2. 2 Psychology Service, VA San Diego Healthcare System, San Diego, California, USA
  3. 3 Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, Chicago, Illinois, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Neal Doran, Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, CA 92161, USA; nmdoran{at}


Background. The risks of polytobacco use among young adults are unclear because we know relatively little about the consistency of multiproduct patterns over time and how these patterns impact cigarette smoking. The purpose of this study was to examine changes in multiple tobacco product use over time and associations with cigarette smoking quantity.

Methods. Participants (n=335; 55% male) were 18–24 years old non-daily cigarette smokers living in California. Polytobacco use patterns were assessed quarterly for 2 years.

Results. Transition analyses showed that while the number of products that had been used recently was volatile, the most common pattern was stability between timepoints. A longitudinal negative binomial regression model indicated that those who used more non-cigarette products also reported greater cigarette quantity. The strength of this relationship increased over time.

Conclusions. Findings suggest that individuals who use more tobacco products are at greater risk for increased cigarette smoking and maintaining a multiple product use pattern.

  • nicotine
  • non-cigarette tobacco products
  • priority/special populations

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Contributors AP, MGM and ND conceptualised the study together. AP wrote the first draft, and MGM wrote the final draft. KB and LT collected data and conducted analyses. ND obtained funding and oversaw data analyses. All authors provided feedback and edited the manuscript.

  • Funding Funding for this study was provided by NIDA grant R01 DA037217.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Not required.

  • Ethics approval UC San Diego IRB.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data sharing statement All data from this study are available for sharing. Requests should be directed to ND at