Year of Publication


Degree Name

Doctor of Nursing Practice

Committee Chair

Dr. Julianne Ossege

Clinical Mentor

Dr. Angela Grubbs

Committee Member

Dr. Elizabeth Tovar

Committee Member

Dr. Julianna Ewen


Background: Electronic Cigarette (e-cigarette) use is now more common than traditional cigarette use in adolescents and young adults (Dinardo & Rome, 2019). There is concern that the lack of screening for use and knowledge about the health consequences of e-cigarette use is driving this growth.

Objective: The purposes of this project were to (1) assess baseline e-cigarette knowledge and screening practices from healthcare professionals, and (2) evaluate changes in knowledge after delivery of an educational intervention about e-cigarettes.

Methods: In this quasi-experimental study a seven-question survey on screening practice and knowledge concerning e-cigarettes in young adults was posted on the discussion board of a national professional healthcare site for college healthcare professionals. Participants were then presented with a ten-minute educational video that discussed what defines e-cigarettes, rates of e-cigarettes use in young adults, risks to young adults who use e-cigarettes, FDA regulation of e-cigarettes, and screening tools for e-cigarettes in young adults. This was followed by a seven-question post survey to evaluate the effectiveness of the educational tool. A paired t-test was used to analyze data.

Results: Forty professionals from 14 different health professions completed the pre-test and 23 completed the post-test. Statistical significance was observed between the pre-educational and post-educational survey for the following questions. 1) Electronic Cigarettes are safer than traditional cigarettes for young adults (p = .038) and 2) Electronic Cigarettes are an effective quit tool to quit using traditional cigarettes in young adults (p = .013).

Conclusion: The educational tool was effective in changing attitudes toward electronic cigarette safety in young adults. However, the study was limited by a small sample size and specific college health provider population.