Search

ABSTRACT Aims There is a growing interest in very low rate [fewer than one cigarette per day (CPD)] and light (one to nine CPD) smokers and in some parts of the world their numbers appear to be increasing. This paper examined changes in prevalence over the past 5 years, cessation patterns, and smoking and demographic characteristics of very low rate, light and moderate-to-heavy (10+ CPD) smokers in England. Design Cross-sectional and longitudinal data from aggregated monthly waves of a household survey: the Smoking Toolkit Study. Setting England. Participants A total of 23 245 smokers interviewed between November 2006 and May 2011 and 4147 who provided data at 6-month follow-up. Measurements We compared the demographic and smoking characteristics between the three groups of smokers at baseline, and the rate of attempts to quit, use of aids to cessation and success of quit attempts at follow-up. Findings Very low rate smoking remained extremely rare (1.9% of smokers in 2006 to 2.8% in 2011), but light smoking became increasingly common (23.9-32.8%). Compared with moderate-to-heavy smokers, very low rate and light smokers were younger, more often female and from a higher socio-economic background. They were more motivated to quit and enjoyed smoking less. During the 6-month follow-up period, light smokers, but not very low rate smokers, were more likely to attempt to quit than moderate-to-heavy smokers. When they tried to quit, very low rate and light smokers used aids to cessation less than moderate-to-heavy smokers but still used them to a substantial degree: 18%, 31% and 44% used over-the-counter nicotine replacement therapy in their most recent quit attempt for the three types of smoker, respectively. Even very low rate smokers had a substantial failure rate: 65% failed in their most recent quit attempt within 6 months. Conclusions Very low rate (fewer than one cigarette per day) and light (one to nine cigarettes per day) smokers in England are at least as motivated to quit as heavier smokers. Although they use cessation medication less than heavier smokers and are more likely to succeed, they still use such medication and fail in quit attempts to a substantial degree. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background and aims: Estimating ‘return on investment’ (ROI) from smoking cessation interventions requires reach and effectiveness parameters for interventions for use in economic models such as the EQUIPT ROI tool ( http://roi.equipt.eu). This paper describes the derivation of these parameter estimates for England that can be adapted to create ROI models for use by other countries. Methods: Estimates were derived for interventions in terms of their reach and effectiveness in: (1) promoting quit attempts and (2) improving the success of quit attempts (abstinence for at least 12 months). The sources were systematic reviews of efficacy supplemented by individual effectiveness evaluations and national surveys. Findings: Quit attempt rates were estimated to be increased by the following percentages (with reach in parentheses): 20% by tax increases raising the cost of smoking 5% above the cost of living index (100%); 10% by enforced comprehensive indoor public smoking bans (100%); 3% by mass media campaigns achieving 400 gross rating points (100%); 40% by brief opportunistic physician advice (21%); and 110% by use of a licensed nicotine product to reduce cigarette consumption (12%). Quit success rates were estimated to be increased by the following ratios: 60% by single‐form nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) (5%); 114% by NRT patch plus a faster‐acting NRT (2%);124% by prescribed varenicline (5%); 60% by bupropion (1%); 100% by nortriptyline (0%), 10) 298% by cytisine (0%); 40% by individual face‐to‐face behavioural support (2%); 37% by telephone support (0.5%); 88% by group behavioural support (1%); 63% by text messaging (0.5%); and 19% by printed self‐help materials (1%). There was insufficient evidence to obtain reliable, country‐specific estimates for interventions such as websites, smartphone applications and e‐cigarettes. Conclusions: Tax increases, indoor smoking bans, brief opportunistic physician advice and use of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for smoking reduction can all increase population quit attempt rates. Quit success rates can be increased by provision of NRT, varenicline, bupropion, nortriptyline, cytisine and behavioural support delivered through a variety of modalities. Parameter estimates for the effectiveness and reach of these interventions can contribute to return on investment estimates in support of national or regional policy decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim To evaluate smokeless tobacco cessation in communities of South Asian origin. Design Multi-centre prospective cohort study. Setting Three tobacco cessation services offering specialist smokeless tobacco cessation outreach clinic support to South Asians ( Bangladeshi, Indian and Pakistani) resident in England. Participants A total of 239 South Asian participants seeking to stop smokeless tobacco use between November 2010 and December 2011. Measurements Socio-demographics, tobacco use and dependence, self-reported abstinence at 4 weeks and satisfaction measures. Findings Participants' mean age was 45 [standard deviation ( SD) = 13] years, were predominantly female (76%), of Bangladeshi origin (74%), either home carers (53%) or not working (29%). Sixty-three per cent were recruited from community locations, 21% through a clinical contact and 16% through friends and family. Mean daily number of smokeless tobacco intakes was 10 ( SD = 7) and the mean dependence score was 4.5 ( SD = 1.9). Sixty-three per cent of participants achieved continuous abstinence 4 weeks after quitting. Using nicotine replacement therapy ( NRT) versus not using it [ OR = 3.47, 95% confidence interval ( CI): 1.25, 9.62] and below median (≤8) daily smokeless tobacco intakes ( OR = 1.91, 95% CI: 1.07, 3.40) predicted successful abstinence. Conclusion South Asian smokeless tobacco users resident in England accessing services to help them stop appear to have short-term success rates comparable with smokers attending stop-smoking services, with higher success rates being reported by those using nicotine replacement therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Previous research has shown that a substantial proportion of smokers believe that nicotine causes serious diseases such as cancer, possibly deterring the use of nicotine replacement therapy ( NRT) for smoking cessation or smoking reduction. This study examined beliefs about the harms specifically from long-term use of NRT and associations between these and its use for smoking cessation and smoking reduction. Design and setting Data were collected from 1657 smokers and recent ex-smokers involved in the Smoking Toolkit Study, a series of monthly household surveys of English adults aged 16 and over. Measurements Participants were asked if they thought the use of NRT for a year or more was harmful, and if so, to volunteer what they believed the harms to be. They were also asked if they were using NRT for smoking reduction and/or if they had used NRT in the past year during a quit attempt. Findings Six percent and 25% of smokers respectively, believed that the long term use of NRT was very or quit harmful to health; and a further 29% reported that they 'didn't know'. The most commonly reported harms were addiction and lung cancer. There was no association between these beliefs and use of NRT for smoking reduction or smoking cessation. Conclusion A significant minority of smokers in England believe that the use of nicotine replacement therapy for a year or more is harmful. However, belief that long-term nicotine replacement therapy use can cause health harm does not appear to act as a deterrent to using it in a quit attempt or for smoking reduction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]