Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University, Providence, RI.
Nicotine Tob Res. 2020 Oct 8;22(10):1851-1859. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntaa060.
Behavioral economic purchase tasks are used to estimate the reinforcing value of drugs by asking participants how much they would purchase across a range of increasing prices. We sought to validate such a task for e-cigarettes in experienced users of advanced generation, tank-style devices.
Dual users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes (N = 54) and exclusive e-cigarette users (N = 59) attended one session during which they completed assessments including two versions of the E-cigarette Purchase Task: one that asked how many puffs of their e-cigarette they would purchase in 24 hours at varying prices and one that asked how many mLs of e-liquid they would purchase. We correlated purchase task outcomes with other measures of e-cigarette use. We also compared the tasks across dual and exclusive users.
Indices derived from the mLs-based task were more likely to be correlated with self-reported use rates, e-cigarette dependence, and cotinine levels than the puffs-based task. Exclusive users showed greater demand on than dual users only on the mLs version when using an F-test comparison method, while multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) results showed that dual users showed greater demand only on the puffs task.
Results indicate that the mLs version had greater validity than the puffs version in terms of clinical indices. Dual users may still be on a trajectory to fully switching to e-cigarettes; thus, puffs as a measure may be more intuitive, as this measure is shared by cigarettes and e-cigarettes. For exclusive users, the unit they purchase their e-liquid in may be the most relevant unit and better capture their demand for that product.
Behavioral economic purchase tasks have been widely used to understand nicotine use. We have developed two versions of a purchase task for e-cigarette use and compared the two versions in users of advanced generation e-cigarette devices. We found that the mLs version of the task better-reflected use patterns relative to a puffs version, which suggests that participants struggle to place monetary value on a unit of consumption (ie, puffs). Validated measures of e-cigarette reinforcement will be important as researchers and regulators determine which features of these products contribute to reinforcing efficacy.
行为经济购买任务通过询问参与者在一系列递增价格下愿意购买多少来估计药物的强化价值。我们试图在使用先进一代罐式设备的电子烟经验丰富的用户中验证这种任务。
香烟和电子烟的双重使用者（N=54）和电子烟的单一使用者（N=59）参加了一次会议，在此期间他们完成了两项电子烟购买任务的评估：一项是询问他们在不同价格下 24 小时内会购买多少口电子烟，另一项是询问他们会购买多少毫升电子烟液。我们将购买任务的结果与其他电子烟使用测量指标进行了关联。我们还比较了双重使用者和单一使用者的任务。
基于毫升的任务得出的指标与自我报告的使用率、电子烟依赖和可替宁水平的相关性高于基于口数的任务。使用 F 检验比较方法，单一使用者比双重使用者在毫升版本上表现出更大的需求，而方差分析（MANOVA）的结果表明，只有在口数任务上，双重使用者表现出更大的需求。
结果表明，在临床指标方面，毫升版本比口数版本更有效。双重使用者可能仍在完全转向电子烟的轨道上；因此，作为一种衡量标准，口数可能更直观，因为这种衡量标准在香烟和电子烟中都有。对于单一使用者来说，他们购买电子烟液的单位可能是最相关的单位，并且可以更好地捕捉他们对该产品的需求。
行为经济购买任务已被广泛用于了解尼古丁使用。我们为电子烟使用开发了两种购买任务版本，并比较了两种版本在使用先进一代电子烟设备的用户中的表现。我们发现，毫升版本的任务更好地反映了使用模式，而口数版本则表明参与者难以对消费单位（即口数）进行货币化。验证电子烟强化的有效测量指标将非常重要，因为研究人员和监管机构需要确定这些产品的哪些特征有助于提高强化效果。
