PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Hardie, Iain
AU  - Green, Michael J.
TI  - Vaping and Socioeconomic Inequalities in Smoking Cessation and Relapse: A Longitudinal Analysis of the UK Household Longitudinal Study
AID  - 10.1101/2022.08.30.22279385
DP  - 2022 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2022.08.30.22279385
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/31/2022.08.30.22279385.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/08/31/2022.08.30.22279385.full
AB  - Background Smoking is a key cause of socioeconomic health inequalities. Vaping is considered less harmful than smoking and has become a popular smoking cessation aid. However, there is currently limited evidence on the impact of vaping on inequalities in smoking.Methods We used longitudinal data from 25,102 participants in waves 8-10 (2016-2020) of the UK Household Longitudinal Study to examine how vaping affects socioeconomic inequalities in smoking cessation and relapse. Marginal structural models were used to investigate whether vaping mediates or moderates associations between educational attainment and smoking cessation and relapse over time. Multiple Imputation and weights were used to adjust for missing data.Results Respondents without degrees were less likely to stop smoking than those with a degree (OR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.54-0.77), and more likely to relapse (OR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.26-2.23) but regular vaping eliminated the inequality in smoking cessation (OR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.54-1.82). Sensitivity analyses suggested that this finding did not hold when comparing those with or without any qualifications. Inequalities in smoking relapse did not differ by vaping status.Conclusions Vaping may help reduce inequalities in smoking cessation between those with and without degree-level education and policy should favour vaping as a smoking cessation aid. Nevertheless, other supports or aids may be needed to reach the most disadvantaged (i.e. those with no qualifications) and to help people avoid relapse after cessation.What is already known on this topic?Socioeconomic inequalities in smoking cessation have narrowed in recent years since e-cigarettes have become more widely available as a cessation aid.It is not clear whether this was as a result of increased vaping or other due to other confounding factors.Existing research on vaping and socioeconomic inequalities in smoking cessation have been limited to using cross-sectional data.What this study adds?Using longitudinal data, over 2 years of follow-up, our study suggests that increased vaping among those of lower SEP (i.e. without degrees) is likely to have reduced socioeconomic inequalities in smoking cessation.However, the positive impact of vaping on inequalities is focused around the upper to middle end of the educational distribution, and does not appear to help the most disadvantaged, or help with inequalities in smoking relapse.How this study might affect research, practice or policyVaping can most likely have a net positive impact on inequalities in smoking. Policy should favour vaping, although other aids may be needed for the most disadvantaged and to help people avoid smoking relapse.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Protocols https://osf.io/e3z8q Funding StatementThis work was supported by the Medical Research Council (grant number: MC_UU_00022/2) and the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office (grant number: SPHSU17).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences (MVLS) ethics committee waived ethical approval for this study. This is because the study used secondary data accessed via the UK Data Service, and the MVLS ethical committee stated that the UK Data Service have a suitable governance process that must be gone through before they release the data to researchers.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe dataset used for this analysis, the UK Household Longitudinal Study, aka Understanding Society, is an initiative funded by the Economic and Social Research Council and various Government Departments, with scientific leadership by the Institute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, and survey delivery by NatCen Social Research and Kantar Public. The research data are distributed by the UK Data Service (SN 6614). https://beta.ukdataservice.ac.uk/datacatalogue/series/series?id=2000053#!/abstract