Reasons for using e-cigarettes among adults who smoke: comparing the findings from the 2016 and 2020 ITC Korea Surveys.

INTRODUCTION: Dual use of e-cigarettes and cigarettes is a growing usage pattern in adults, but little is known about the motivations underlying this trend. We investigated the reasons for e-cigarette use among adults who smoke, considering variation in sociodemographic subgroups. METHODS: This repeated cross-sectional study analysed adults who smoked at least weekly and vaped at any frequency. Data were from the International Tobacco Control Korea Surveys conducted in 2016 (n=164) and 2020 (n=1088). Fourteen reasons for e-cigarette use were assessed in both waves. Subgroup analyses were performed by age, sex and educational level. RESULTS: The top reasons for e-cigarette use in 2020 were curiosity (62.8%), less harmful than smoking (45.4%) and taste (43.2%). Curiosity was the most cited across age, sex and education subgroups. Significant differences were observed in 2020 compared with 2016, with lower percentages in goal-oriented reasons: helping quit smoking (36.3% vs 48.9%; p=0.017), helping cut down smoking (35.3% vs 52.7%; p=0.001), less harmful to others (39.0% vs 54.6%; p=0.003) and more acceptable (31.6% vs 61.2%; p<0.001). By contrast, non-goal-oriented reasons showed higher percentages in 2020, such as curiosity (62.8% vs 27.9%; p<0.001), taste (43.2% vs 22.1%; p<0.001) and enjoyment (26.8% vs 8.6%; p<0.001). In 2020, a majority of adults who smoked and vaped (53.3%) reported no intention to quit or reduce smoking. CONCLUSIONS: E-cigarette use for curiosity and pleasure predominated among adults who smoked. The reasons for dual use in adults have shifted from goal-oriented to non-goal-oriented.

Public support for tobacco endgame policies in South Korea: Findings from the 2020 International Tobacco Control Korea Survey.

BACKGROUND: Strong public support can increase the likelihood of adopting tobacco control policies. We assessed support for six commercial tobacco endgame policies in South Korea: limiting the nicotine in cigarettes, banning all additives in cigarettes, restricting the number of places where cigarettes are sold, and banning the manufacture and sales of cigarettes (unconditionally, with the provision of cessation support and with alternative tobacco products available). METHODS: Data were obtained from 4740 adults who completed the 2020 International Tobacco Control Korea Survey. Participants were categorised based on their nicotine use: (1) did not use any products, (2) vaped and/or used heated tobacco products (HTPs) but did not smoke cigarettes, (3) smoked cigarettes only and (4) smoked cigarettes and vaped and/or used HTPs. Attitudes towards the policies were classified as supportive, undecided or opposed. Weighted multinomial logistic regression models assessed support levels according to nicotine use. RESULTS: Support was highest for limiting the nicotine content in cigarettes (68.4%; 95% CI 64.6% to 72.3%) and restricting the number of retailers (68.1%; 95% CI 64.5% to 71.7%), and lowest for banning cigarette sales if alternative products are made available (45.0%; 95% CI 40.9% to 49.1%). People who did not use any products were most likely to support endgame policies, except for banning cigarette sales with alternatives available. The proportion of undecided participants exceeded 10% (range 13%-25%) for all policies. CONCLUSION: There is a strong public support for tobacco endgame policies in South Korea. Further research should prioritise the development of strategies to ensure the effective implementation of highly supported policies.

Is Colorectal Cancer A Western Disease? Role of Knowledge and Influence of Misconception on Colorectal Cancer Screening among Chinese and Korean Americans: A Mixed Methods Study

Background: Chinese and Korean Americans have lower colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates than other racial/ ethnic groups, which may be explained by a low level of CRC knowledge and a high level of misconceptions. This study explores the role of knowledge in CRC screening among these groups. Methods: Chinese (N=59) and Korean (N=61) Americans older than 50 were recruited from the Washington D.C. Metropolitan area. They completed a detailed survey and participated in focus groups to discuss their knowledge on CRC and CRC screening. Seventeen physicians, community leaders, and patient navigators participated in key informant interviews. Using a mixed methods approach, data were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively. Results: Participants lacked knowledge about CRC and CRC screening. More than half did not know that screening begins at age 50 and there are several types of tests available. More than 30% thought CRC screening was not necessary if there were no symptoms or there was nothing they could do to prevent CRC. Focus group findings suggested understanding about CRC was limited by an inadequate source of linguistically and culturally relevant health information. For example, many participants considered CRC a western condition mainly caused by unhealthy diet. This led to under-estimations about their susceptibility to CRC. Knowledge was positively associated with self-reported screening. Participants who had higher knowledge scores were more likely to report ever having had a colonoscopy and confidence in ability to have CRC screening. Conclusions: Mixed-methods analysis provides multi-faceted perspectives on CRC knowledge and its influence on screening. Study findings can help inform interventions to increase CRC screening among Chinese and Korean Americans.