Switching to “lighter” cigarettes and quitting smoking

Tobacco Control - Tập 18 Số 6 - Trang 485-490 - 2009
Hilary A. Tindle1, Saul Shiffman2, Anne M. Hartman3, James E. Bost2
1230 McKee Place, Suite 600, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 15213, USA
2University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA
3National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA

Tóm tắt

Objective:Smokers who switch to “lighter” cigarettes may be diverted from quitting smoking. We assessed factors associated with switching and the association between switching and (1) making a quit attempt, and (2) recent quitting, yielding a measure of net quitting (attempts × recent quitting).Design:In 2003, a total of 30 800 ever-smokers who smoked in the past year provided history of switching and 3 reasons for switching: harm reduction, quitting smoking and flavour. Among those who made a past-year quit attempt, recent quitting was defined as ⩾90-day abstinence when surveyed. Multivariable logistic regression identified determinants of outcomes.Results:In all, 12 009 (38%) of ever-smokers switched. Among switchers, the most commonly cited reasons were flavour only (26%) and all 3 reasons (18%). Switchers (vs non-switchers) were more likely to make a quit attempt between 2002 and 2003 (51% vs 41%, p<0.001, adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.58, (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.48 to 1.69)), but less likely to have recently quit (9% vs 17%, p<0.001; AOR 0.40 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.45)), yielding lower overall net quitting (4.3% vs 7.0%, p<0.001; AOR 0.54, (95% CI 0.47 to 0.61)). The effects of switching on outcomes were most pronounced for reasons including quitting smoking, whereas switching for harm reduction alone had no association with outcomes.Conclusion:Compared with no switching, a history of switching was associated with 46% lower odds of net quitting.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

US Federal Trade Commission. Federal Trade Commission cigarette report for 2004 and 2005. Washington, DC, USA: Federal Trade Commission, 2007.

10.1080/1462220412331320716

10.1136/tc.2004.009167

10.1136/tc.11.suppl_1.i18

National Cancer Institute. The FTC cigarette test method for determining tar, nicotine, and carbon monoxide yields of US cigarettes. National Cancer Institute smoking and tobacco control monograph no. 7, NIH publication no. 96-4028. Bethesda, Maryland, USA: National Cancer Institute, 1996.

Burns D M , ed. Smoking lower yield cigarettes and disease risks. In Risks associated with smoking cigarettes with low machine-measured yields of tar and nicotine. National Cancer Institute smoking and tobacco control monograph no. 13. Bethesda, Maryland, USA: National Cancer Institute, 2001: 65–158.</emph>

10.1056/NEJM198307213090303

10.1093/jnci/92.2.106

10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-04-0542

10.1093/jnci/93.2.134

10.1136/bmj.37936.585382.44

Samet J . The changing cigarette and disease risk: current status of the evidence. Bethesda, Maryland, USA: National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, 1996.

Thun, 2001, Health impact of “reduced yield” cigarettes: a critical assessment of the epidemiological evidence., Tob Control, 10, i4, 10.1136/tc.10.suppl_1.i4

10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.01850.x

10.1136/tc.2007.023812

10.1016/j.amepre.2004.03.010

10.1080/14622200701540796

World Health Organization. WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Article 11: Packaging and labelling of tobacco products. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO, 2003: 9–10.

Giovino G . Attitudes, knowledge, and beliefs about low-yield cigarettes among adolescents and adults. In The FTC cigarette test method for determining tar, nicotine, and carbon monoxide yields of US cigarettes. National Cancer Institute smoking and tobacco control monograph no. 7, NIH publication no. 96-4028. Bethesda, Maryland, USA: National Cancer Institute, 1996; 39–57.

Siegel, 1996, The extent of cigarette brand and company switching: results from the Adult Use-of-Tobacco Survey., Am J Prevent Med, 12, 14, 10.1016/S0749-3797(18)30364-7

10.2105/AJPH.2005.072785

Kessler G . U.S. v. Philip Morris Inc. et al. Civil Action No. 99–2496 (GK) September 29, 2000, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. U.S Plaintiff v. Philip Morris Inc. et al, Defendants, Civil Action No. 99–2496 (GK) September 28, 2000. Washington, DC, USA: US District Court for the District of Columbia, 2000.

Lautenberg F . Lautenberg, Snowe bill to prohibit false and deceptive cigarette labeling passes key senate committee. Newark, New Jersey, USA: Senator F Lautenberg’s Press Office, 2008.

10.1080/1462220031000158663

Haddock, 1999, An examination of cigarette brand switching to reduce health risks., Ann Behav Med, 21, 128, 10.1007/BF02908293

10.1080/1462220021000032870

US Census Bureau. Census Bureau technical paper 66: design and methodology. October 2006. http://www.census.gov/apsd/techdoc/cps/cps-main.html (accessed 27 September 2009).

Hartman AM . The 2003 Tobacco Use Special Cessation Supplement to the Current Population Survey (TUS-CPS): representative survey findings. http://riskfactor.cancer.gov/studies/tus-cps/results/data03/ (accessed 27 September 2009).

Fagerstrom, 2003, Time to first cigarette; the best single indicator of tobacco dependence?, Monaldi Arch Chest Dis, 59, 91

10.1111/j.1360-0443.2004.00540.x

10.1093/jnci/89.8.572

10.1177/096228029600500306

Benowitz NL . Compensatory smoking of low-yield cigarettes. In Risks associated with smoking cigarettes with low machine-measured yields of tar and nicotine. National Cancer Institute smoking and tobacco control monograph no. 13. Bethesda, Maryland, USA: National Cancer Institute, 2001: 39–63.

Shiffman, 2001, Smokers’ beliefs about “light” and “ultra light” cigarettes., Tob Control, 10, i17, 10.1136/tc.10.suppl_1.i17

10.1136/tc.2005.011692

10.1080/1462220021000032717

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Tobacco Control

Tập 18 Số 6

485-490

Thông tin tác giả