You are here

  • Home
  • Online First
  • NRT use as a vaping cessation aid among youth and young adults

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Letter
NRT use as a vaping cessation aid among youth and young adults
  1. Michael O Chaiton1,2,3,
  2. Siddharth Seth1,4,
  3. Jolene Dubray3,
  4. Robert Schwartz1,2,3
  1. 1Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  2. 2Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  3. 3Ontario Tobacco Research Unit, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  4. 4Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
  1. Correspondence to Mr Michael O Chaiton; michael.chaiton{at}utoronto.ca

https://doi.org/10.1136/tc-2024-058823

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    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.

    Background

    Vaping has remained a large public health concern among youth and young adults. Notably, e-cigarette use has increased to pre-pandemic levels among youth and adolescents, with individuals above the age of 21 being more likely to use e-cigarettes than individuals of the same age surveyed pre-pandemic.1 However, despite this increase in prevalence, it has been reported that a large majority of users want to quit and thus, are looking for support to quit vaping.2 The use of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) has gained interest as a vaping cessation tool but needs more research on feasibility to inform clinical guidelines.3 4 Its use as a vaping cessation aid is not currently endorsed by the government or public health organisations due to the limited available evidence of its efficacy. Thus, this study aimed to assess the use of NRT as a vaping cessation aid within a large Canadian …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • X @michaelchaiton

    • Contributors MOC: conceptualisation, contributed to drafting, funding, data analysis, final evaluation. SS: conceptualisation, contributed to drafting, final evaluation. JD: conceptualisation, contributed to drafting, data analysis, final evaluation. RS: conceptualisation, contributed to drafting, funding, final evaluation.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests No, there are no competing interests.

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