Self-rated health differences between exclusive e-cigarette users and exclusive cigarette smokers: evidence from the 2017-2019 Scottish Health Survey
- PMID: 39888483
- PMCID: PMC12009220
- DOI: 10.1007/s11739-025-03873-y
Self-rated health differences between exclusive e-cigarette users and exclusive cigarette smokers: evidence from the 2017-2019 Scottish Health Survey
Abstract
The comparative health implications of e-cigarette use versus traditional cigarette smoking remain a critical focus in public health research. This cross-sectional study examined differences in self-rated general health between exclusive e-cigarette users and exclusive cigarette smokers, using data from the 2017-2019 Scottish Health Survey. A total of 2484 adults (aged 16 and above) were included and categorized as exclusive e-cigarette users (n = 565) or exclusive cigarette smokers (n = 1919). Self-rated health was assessed using a single-item measure with five response categories: "very bad," "bad," "fair," "good," and "very good". Generalized ordinal logistic regression models were used to estimate the association between nicotine product use and self-rated health, adjusting for age, sex, Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation, marital status, ethnicity, alcohol consumption frequency, physical activity, presence of longstanding physical or mental health conditions, and age of smoking initiation. In the fully adjusted model, exclusive e-cigarette users had higher odds of reporting better self-rated health compared to exclusive cigarette smokers overall (OR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.05-1.51, p = 0.012). A graded relationship was also observed in the fully adjusted model, with progressively lower odds of reporting better self-rated health as smoking intensity increased, using exclusive e-cigarette users as the reference group. Heavy smokers (≥ 20 cigarettes/day) had the lowest odds of reporting better self-rated health (OR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.49-0.80, p < 0.001), followed by moderate smokers (10 to < 20 cigarettes/day) (OR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.66-0.99, p = 0.047). In contrast, light smokers (< 10 cigarettes/day) showed no significant difference in self-rated health compared to exclusive e-cigarette users (OR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.75-1.18, p = 0.614). These findings indicate that exclusive e-cigarette use is associated with better self-rated health compared to exclusive cigarette smoking, particularly among moderate and heavy smokers. Additional analyses revealed no significant differences in self-rated health among exclusive e-cigarette users based on prior smoking history (OR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.43-2.08, p = 0.882) or among exclusive cigarette smokers based on prior e-cigarette use (OR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.69-1.09, p = 0.219). These findings suggest that prior use is unlikely to explain the observed association between exclusive e-cigarette use and better self-rated health compared to exclusive cigarette smoking. Given the subjective nature of self-rated health, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Future longitudinal studies incorporating objective health measures are essential to assess the long-term impacts of e-cigarette use and inform evidence-based harm reduction policies.
Keywords: Cigarette smoking; E-cigarette; Harm reduction; Public health; Self-rated health.
© 2025. The Author(s).
Conflict of interest statement
Declarations. Conflict of interest: Don Eliseo Lucero Prisno III and Isaac Olushola Ogunkola declared no conflict of interest. Yusuff Adebayo Adebisi received funding in the past through the Tobacco Harm Reduction Scholarship and the Kevin Molloy Fellowship, both awarded by Knowledge-Action-Change (KAC) UK, an independent public health organization. KAC receives funding from Global Action to End Smoking (GA), an independent U.S. nonprofit 501(c)(3) grantmaking organization that supports Health & Science Research, Cessation Education, and Agricultural Transformation initiatives. This research was conducted independently and is not linked to any prior funding sources. Ethics approval: This was a secondary analysis of publicly available, anonymized data. No ethical approval was sought. Human and animal rights and Informed consent: As this study involved secondary data analysis, no ethical approval or informed consent was required by the authors for this research, as it qualifies for exemption from human subjects research. Patient and public involvement: Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.
Figures


References
-
- Chang JT, Anic GM, Rostron BL, Tanwar M, Chang CM (2021) Cigarette smoking reduction and health risks: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nicotine Tob Res 23(4):635–642. 10.1093/ntr/ntaa156 - PubMed
-
- Levett JY, Filion KB, Reynier P, Prell C, Eisenberg MJ (2023) Efficacy and safety of E-cigarette use for smoking cessation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Med 136(8):804-813.e4. 10.1016/j.amjmed.2023.04.014 - PubMed
-
- Auer R, Schoeni A, Humair JP et al (2024) Electronic nicotine-delivery systems for smoking cessation. N Engl J Med 390(7):601–610. 10.1056/NEJMoa2308815 - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials