Display options
Share it on

Tob Induc Dis. 2019 May 21;17:44. doi: 10.18332/tid/106089. eCollection 2019.

Use of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) by pregnant women I: Risk of small-for-gestational-age birth.

Tobacco induced diseases

Victor M Cardenas, Ruiqi Cen, Melissa M Clemens, Heather L Moody, Uwemedimbuk S Ekanem, Anuradha Policherla, Lori A Fischbach, Hari Eswaran, Everett F Magann, Robert R Delongchamp, Gunnar Boysen

Affiliations

  1. Department of Epidemiology, Fay W. Boozman College of Public Health, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, United States.
  2. The Winthrop P. Rockefeller Cancer Institute, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, United States.
  3. Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, Fay W. Boozman College of Public Health, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, United States.
  4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Medicine, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, United States.
  5. Department of Community Health, Faculty of Clinical Sciences, University of Uyo, Uyo, Nigeria.
  6. Arkansas Department of Health, Little Rock, United States.

PMID: 31516487 PMCID: PMC6662791 DOI: 10.18332/tid/106089

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The 2016 US Surgeon General's Report suggests that the use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) is a fetal risk factor. However, no previous study has estimated their effect on adverse pregnancy outcomes. We assessed the prevalence of current ENDS use in pregnant women and explored the effect on birth weight and smallness-for-gestational-age (SGA), correcting for misclassification from nondisclosure of smoking status.

METHODS: We conducted a cohort study with 248 pregnant women using questionnaire data and biomarkers (salivary cotinine, exhaled carbon monoxide, and hair nicotine). We evaluated the association between birth weight and the risk of SGA by applying multivariate linear and log-binomial regression to reproductive outcome data for 232 participants. Participants who did not disclose their smoking status were excluded from the referent group. Sensitivity analysis corrected for misclassification of smoking/ENDS use status.

RESULTS: The prevalence of current ENDS use among pregnant women was 6.8% (95% CI: 4.4-10.2%); most of these (75%) were concurrent smokers. Using self-reports, the estimated risk ratio of SGA for ENDS users was nearly two times the risk in the unexposed (RR=1.9, 95% CI: 0.6-5.5), and over three times that for ENDS-only users versus the unexposed (RR=3.1, 95% CI: 0.8-11.7). Excluding from the referent group smokers who did not disclose their smoking status, the risk of SGA for ENDS-only use was 5 times the risk in the unexposed (RR=5.1, 95% CI: 1.1- 22.2), and almost four times for all types of ENDS users (RR=3.8, 95% CI: 1.3-11.2). SGA risk ratios for ENDS users, corrected for misclassification due to self-report, were 6.5-8.5 times that of the unexposed.

CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that ENDS use is associated with an increased risk of SGA.

Keywords: USA; cohort studies; electronic nicotine delivery systems; nicotine; pregnancy

Conflict of interest statement

Authors have completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest and none was reported.

References

  1. Addiction. 1999 Feb;94(2):283-92 - PubMed
  2. Drug Saf. 2001;24(4):277-322 - PubMed
  3. Nicotine Tob Res. 2004 Apr;6 Suppl 2:S125-40 - PubMed
  4. Am J Epidemiol. 2005 Aug 1;162(3):199-200 - PubMed
  5. Nicotine Tob Res. 2007 Oct;9(10):1005-13 - PubMed
  6. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991 Aug;165(2):409-13 - PubMed
  7. Am J Epidemiol. 2011 Feb 1;173(3):355-9 - PubMed
  8. Nicotine Tob Res. 2011 May;13(5):328-35 - PubMed
  9. Tob Control. 2013 May;22(3):164-71 - PubMed
  10. Epidemiol Rev. 2014;36:148-64 - PubMed
  11. Pediatrics. 2014 May;133(5):844-53 - PubMed
  12. Circulation. 2014 May 13;129(19):1945-52 - PubMed
  13. Circulation. 2014 May 13;129(19):1972-86 - PubMed
  14. Circulation. 2014 May 13;129(19):e490-2 - PubMed
  15. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Dec;211(6):695.e1-7 - PubMed
  16. Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Jul;124(1):16-22 - PubMed
  17. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2014 Jun 27;63(25):542-7 - PubMed
  18. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014 Aug 15;11(8):8368-82 - PubMed
  19. Bull Menninger Clin. 2014 Summer;78(3):243-52 - PubMed
  20. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2014 Nov 28;63(47):1108-12 - PubMed
  21. J Addict Med. 2015 Jul-Aug;9(4):266-72 - PubMed
  22. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015 Nov 13;64(44):1233-40 - PubMed
  23. BMC Public Health. 2015 Dec 21;15:1273 - PubMed
  24. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2016 Jul 15;65(27):685-91 - PubMed
  25. Nurs Res. 2016 Sep-Oct;65(5):408-14 - PubMed
  26. Prev Med Rep. 2016 Sep 07;4:481-5 - PubMed
  27. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2017 Jan;72:176-189 - PubMed
  28. Public Health Rep. 2017 Mar/Apr;132(2):210-219 - PubMed
  29. Health Educ Res. 2017 Feb 1;32(1):22-32 - PubMed
  30. Nicotine Tob Res. 2017 May 1;19(5):585-590 - PubMed
  31. Ann Intern Med. 2017 Aug 15;167(4):268-274 - PubMed
  32. Prev Med. 2017 Nov;104:50-56 - PubMed
  33. Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Oct;130(4):929-930 - PubMed
  34. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017 Nov 10;66(44):1209-1215 - PubMed
  35. Tob Control. 2019 Jan;28(1):115-116 - PubMed
  36. Alcohol. 2018 Aug;70:43-49 - PubMed
  37. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2018 Sep;73(9):544-549 - PubMed
  38. Biometrics. 1985 Mar;41(1):55-68 - PubMed
  39. Am J Public Health. 1998 Jan;88(1):120-4 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support