TY - JOUR
T1 - Switching from Cigarettes to E-Cigarettes and Oral Nicotine Pouches in Adults with Low-Income Who Smoke
T2 - Qualitative Findings from a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
AU - Maglalang, Dale Dagar
AU - Avila, Jaqueline C.
AU - Malone, Mona H.
AU - Suh, Riley
AU - Binjrajka, Urvi
AU - Lee, Sangah Clara
AU - Beheshtian, Kiana
AU - Murphy, Cara M.
AU - Nollen, Nicole L.
AU - Ahluwalia, Jasjit S.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2025. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact [email protected] for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact [email protected].
PY - 2026/5
Y1 - 2026/5
N2 - Introduction: Adults with low-income (LI) are more likely to smoke. Alternative Nicotine Delivery Systems (ANDS) like electronic cigarettes (EC) and oral nicotine pouches (ONP) are less harmful options that may help reduce the use, and ultimately risk, of combustible cigarettes (CC). This study examined facilitators and barriers to switching from CC to either EC or ONP among LI adults who smoked daily, enrolled in a randomized controlled trial. Methods: Thematic analysis of semi-structured one-on-one interviews with experimental group participants (n = 26) was implemented to identify themes related to the facilitators and barriers to switching from CC to EC or ONP. Results: Facilitators of switching to EC and ONP were the convenience of using these products in public and private spaces, their effectiveness at satisfying cravings for nicotine, and the perceived belief that ANDS are less harmful than CC. Barriers to switching to ANDS included delayed nicotine delivery, preferring the sensory experience of smoking to ANDS, and limited knowledge and misconceptions about ONP compared to EC. Conclusion: Participants indicated that both EC and ONP helped them cut down on CC use due to their convenience and ability to satisfy nicotine cravings. However, while participants believed that ANDS are less harmful than CC, more information is needed, specifically on the safety of ONP. Implications: This study presents compelling evidence that ANDS products are acceptable among LI populations who smoke, suggesting they could be used for reducing health disparities and mortality. However, public health education and messaging regarding ONP may be needed to facilitate switching.
AB - Introduction: Adults with low-income (LI) are more likely to smoke. Alternative Nicotine Delivery Systems (ANDS) like electronic cigarettes (EC) and oral nicotine pouches (ONP) are less harmful options that may help reduce the use, and ultimately risk, of combustible cigarettes (CC). This study examined facilitators and barriers to switching from CC to either EC or ONP among LI adults who smoked daily, enrolled in a randomized controlled trial. Methods: Thematic analysis of semi-structured one-on-one interviews with experimental group participants (n = 26) was implemented to identify themes related to the facilitators and barriers to switching from CC to EC or ONP. Results: Facilitators of switching to EC and ONP were the convenience of using these products in public and private spaces, their effectiveness at satisfying cravings for nicotine, and the perceived belief that ANDS are less harmful than CC. Barriers to switching to ANDS included delayed nicotine delivery, preferring the sensory experience of smoking to ANDS, and limited knowledge and misconceptions about ONP compared to EC. Conclusion: Participants indicated that both EC and ONP helped them cut down on CC use due to their convenience and ability to satisfy nicotine cravings. However, while participants believed that ANDS are less harmful than CC, more information is needed, specifically on the safety of ONP. Implications: This study presents compelling evidence that ANDS products are acceptable among LI populations who smoke, suggesting they could be used for reducing health disparities and mortality. However, public health education and messaging regarding ONP may be needed to facilitate switching.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105036494488
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105036494488#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1093/ntr/ntaf250
DO - 10.1093/ntr/ntaf250
M3 - Article
C2 - 41294715
AN - SCOPUS:105036494488
SN - 1462-2203
VL - 28
SP - 841
EP - 847
JO - Nicotine and Tobacco Research
JF - Nicotine and Tobacco Research
IS - 5
ER -