Research paper
CC-BY-NC 4.0

Satisfactory throat-hit is needed to switch from tobacco to e-cigarettes: a lesson from an e-liquid blind test

Céline Kayal 1, 2,  
École d'ingénieurs ECE Paris, France
University College London, London, United Kingdom
Tabacologie, Pitié-Salpêtrière, APHP, Paris France
Paris Sans Tabac, Paris, France
Tob. Prev. Cessation 2016;2(April):60
Publish date: 2016-04-27
The aim of the study was to confirm or reject the hypothesis that variation in throat-hit depends on the nicotine concentration and the voltage applied to the resistance. A secondary aim was to assess the influence of throat-hit on the willingness of subjects to switch from tobacco to e-cigarette use.

In this experimental blind test participants were 35 students (aged 22.0±7.7), current smokers, who tested five e-liquids with a nicotine concentration between 0 to 18mg/mL, at 3.5 or 4.5 volts (at 1.8Ω) powered by EGO type e-cigarettes . After describing their smoking habits (heaviness smoking index (HSI), and signing consent, participants smoked 1 puff every 5 minutes, inhaling for 3 seconds, for each of the 10 conditions and rated their subjective experience.

Analysis of the 350 puffs from the 35 smokers,indicated a learning process of 5 puffs. Within this population a nicotine concentration of 12.6mg/mL combined to 3.5volts and 10.9mg/mL combined to 4.5volts was associated with OTH. Our results indicated a link between tobacco dependence and nicotine concentration of the e-liquid that provided an optimal throat-hit (OTH), with an +1.6mg/mL increase in nicotine content needed for the OTH for each one point increase in HSI. A link between the desire to switch from tobacco to e-cigarettes and the score of throat-hit was identified (r2=0.94). This desire is <1/10 when throat-hit is unpleasant (score 0-3) and exceeds 7/10 when throat-hit is optimal (score 7-10).

The present data justify the need to further develop e-cigarettes so that an optimal OTH is identified quickly. Further research is needed to confirm the above results in other populations and to assess the specific influence of flavour on throat hit.

Bertrand Dautzenberg   
Service Pneumologie et Réanimation GHU Pitié-Salpêtrière-Charles Foix APHP 47-81 Bd de l’Hôpital 75651 Paris cedex 13 Bureau +33 1 42 17 67 70 (72)
1. A- Trevizol AP, Cordeiro Q, Cook IA, Barros MD, Shiozawa P. Trigeminal Nerve Stimulation (TNS) for the Treatment of Irritable Bowel Syndrome in an Elderly Patient with Major Depressive Disorder: A Case Study. Brain Stimul. 2015,8:1235-6. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2015.09.001.
2. Pritchard WS, obinson JH, Guy TD, Davis RA, Stiles MF. Assessing the sensory role of nicotine in cigarette smoking. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 1996,127:55-62. Erratum in: Psychopharmacology (Berl) 1996,128:432. doi: 10.1007/s002130050154.
3. Strasser AA, Ashare RL, Kaufman M, Tang KZ, Mesaros AC, Blair IA. The effect of menthol on cigarette smoking behaviors, biomarkers and subjective responses. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2013,22:382-9. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-12-1097.
4. Dawkins, L; Turner, J; Roberts, A; Soar, K “Vaping” profiles and preferences: An online survey of electronic cigarette users. Addiction 2013,108:1115–25. doi: 10.1111/add.12150.
5. Farsalinos KE, Romagna G, Tsiapras D, Kyrzopoulos S, Spyrou A, Voudris V.Impact of flavour variability on electronic cigarette use experience: an internet survey. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2013,17:7272-82. doi:10.3390/ijerph10127272.
6. Walker N, Howe C, Bullen C, Grigg M, Glover M, McRobbie H, Laugesen M, Jiang J, Chen MH, Whittaker R, Rodgers A. Does improved access and greater choice of nicotine replacement therapy affect smoking cessation success? Findings from a randomized controlled trial. Addiction. 2011,106:1176-85. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2011.03419.x.
7. Lechner WV, Tackett AP, Grant DM, Tahirkheli NN, Driskill LM, Wagener TL. Effects of duration of electronic cigarette use. Nicotine Tob Res. 2015,17:180-5. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntu061. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntu061.
8. Dawkins L, Corcoran O. Acute electronic cigarette use: nicotine delivery and subjective effects in regular users. Psychopharmacology 2014,231.2: 401-7. doi: 10.1007/s00213-013-3249-8.
9. Schneider, NG, Olmstead, RE, Nides, M, Mody, FV, Otte-Colquette, P, Doan, K, et al. Comparative testing of 5 nicotine systems: Initial use and preferences. American Journal of Health Behavior 2004,28:72-86. doi: 10.5993/ajhb.28.1.8.
10. Steinberg MB, Zimmermann MH, Delnevo CD, Lewis MJ, Shukla P, Coups EJ, Foulds J. E-cigarette versus nicotine inhaler: comparing the perceptions and experiences of inhaled nicotine devices. J Gen Intern Med. 2014,29:1444-50. doi: 10.1007/s11606-014-2889-7.
11. Schneider, NG, Terrace, S, Koury, MA, Patel, S, Vaghaiwalla, B, Pendergrass, R, et al. Comparison of three nicotine treatments: Initial reactions and preferences with guided use. Psychopharmacology 2005,182:545–50. doi: 10.1007/s00213-005-0123-3.
12. Dautzenberg B, Bricard D. Real-Time Characterization of E-Cigarettes Use: The 1 Million Puffs Study. J Addict Res Ther 2015,6:229. doi: 10.4172/2155-6105.1000229.
13. Polosa R, Caponnetto P, Cibella F, Le-Houezec J. Quit and smoking reduction rates in vape shop consumers: a prospective 12-month survey. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2015,12:3428-38. doi: 10.3390/ijerph120403428.
14. Etter JF Throat hit in users of the electronic cigarette: An exploratory study. Psychol Addict Behav. 2016,30:93-100. doi: 10.1037/adb0000137.