Search

Introduction: On April 1, 2017, California Proposition 56 (Prop 56) was implemented, increasing the excise tax on cigarettes by $2/pack. This study compares the association of Prop 56 with smoking prevalence and smoking intensity across racial/ethnic groups, further examining distinctions across income subgroups within each racial/ethnic group., Aims and Methods: The study used pooled cross-sectional data from the 2012-2018 California Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. We examined two outcomes: current smoking prevalence and smoking intensity conditional on current smoking. A two-part econometric model was used to estimate the association of Prop 56 with smoking prevalence and intensity using multiple logistic regression and multiple linear regression, respectively. The two-part model was run separately for all adults (full sample) and each racial/ethnic group. Within each racial/ethnic group, we ran stratified analyses by income subgroups., Results: The results indicated that Prop 56 was negatively associated with smoking prevalence among full sample, Hispanic, White, and African American adults and negatively associated with smoking intensity among full sample and White smokers. Stratified analyses by race/ethnicity and income showed that Prop 56 was negatively associated with smoking prevalence among low-income full sample and White adults and among middle-income smokers in the full, Hispanic, White, African American, and Asian samples. Prop 56 was negatively associated with smoking intensity among middle-income Hispanic and high-income White smokers. The association between Prop 56 and smoking intensity was positive among high-income African American smokers., Conclusion: Prop 56 was associated with a reduction in smoking prevalence across multiple racial/ethnic groups, particularly within the low- and middle-income subgroups., Implications: Our findings indicate that the reduction in smoking prevalence immediately following the implementation of Prop 56 tobacco tax increase was significant across a variety racial/ethnic groups, particularly low- and middle-income subgroups. We found differential responses in smoking prevalence across income groups among Whites but not among racial/ethnic minorities. We found no evidence of any significance association between Proposition 56 and smoking intensity among minorities and economically vulnerable populations, except for middle-income Hispanics. Researchers, policy makers, and advocates should consider the additional merits of targeted, community-based, noneconomic tobacco control interventions in reaching low- and middle-income groups within racial/ethnic minorities., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved.For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: This study examined the effects of cigarette price on intention to quit, quit attempts, and successful cessation among African American smokers in the United States and explored whether price effects differed by income level and menthol use status. Price effects were further compared to White counterparts., Methods: We used pooled cross-sectional data from 2006 to 2007 and 2010 to 2011 Tobacco Use Supplements to the Current Population Survey to analyze 4213 African American recent active smokers. Three dependent variables were examined: any quit attempts in the past 12 months, successful cessation for at least 3 months, and intention to quit in the next 6 months. For each dependent variable, separate multiple logistic regression models were estimated to determine the impact of cigarette prices., Results: There was no indication that price was associated with quit attempts or successful cessation, but price was positively associated with increased odds of intending to quit among African American smokers (p < .001). In contrast, prices were positively associated with intention to quit and quit attempts for White smokers. The association between price and intention to quit was significantly positive for African American low-income and menthol smokers but was not statistically significant for African American high-income and non-menthol smokers. There was no evidence of a price effect on quit attempts and successful cessation for each subgroup of African Americans., Conclusions: Tobacco tax policy alone may not be enough to increase quit attempts or successful cessation among African Americans. Community-based cessation programs tailored toward African American smokers, especially low-income menthol smokers, are needed., Implications: The results revealed that, among African American smokers, particularly among low-income and menthol smoking African American smokers, price appears to be positively associated with intention to quit; nevertheless, this deterrent effect does not appear to translate to actualized quit attempts or successful cessation. Increasing cigarette prices as a standalone policy may not be independently effective in increasing quit attempts and successful cessation within the African American community. Community-based cessation interventions tailored for African Americans are needed to help further translate desired cessation into actualized quit attempts., (© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Few studies have examined the relationship between menthol use and smoking cessation across various racial/ethnic groups; the findings were mixed. This study explored the association of menthol cigarette use with quit attempts, smoking cessation, and intention-to-quit among US adults and by race/ethnicity., Methods: Using the 2006/2007 and 2010/2011 Tobacco Use Supplements to the Current Population Survey data, this study analyzed 54 448 recent active smokers, defined as current smokers or former smokers who quit less than 12 months ago. Three behaviors were examined: any quit attempts in the past 12 months, successful cessation for ≥3 months, and intention-to-quit smoking in the next 6 months. For each cessation behavior, multiple logistic regression models were estimated separately for the full-sample and stratified racial/ethnic subsamples., Results: While 72.3% of African American recent active smokers typically smoked menthol cigarettes, this proportion was 21.7%, 21.5%, and 28.0% for whites, Asians, and Hispanics, respectively. African American menthol smokers had higher odds of quit attempts compared to non-African American, non-menthol smokers (full-sample analysis), as well as African American non-menthol smokers (subsample analysis). Menthol use was not significantly associated with quit attempts in other racial/ethnic subsamples. There was no significant difference in either successful cessation or intention-to-quit between menthol and non-menthol smokers., Conclusions: African American menthol smokers were more likely to attempt to quit smoking than non-menthol smokers but these quit attempts did not translate into successful cessation. This study revealed no association of menthol use with quit attempts, successful cessation, and intention-to-quit among other racial/ethnic groups., Implications: The findings suggested that African American menthol smokers were more motivated to quit smoking; yet, the results also indicated no significant differences in successful cessation between African American menthol and non-menthol smokers. Interventions targeting menthol smokers within the African American community may help bridge this gap. While more local sales restrictions are beginning to occur (eg, Tobacco 21 efforts), additional policies restricting price discounting as well as the regulation of access to and the time, place, and/or manner of menthol tobacco advertising could also improve cessation rates. Further evaluation is needed to determine the viability of these policies., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)