Search

Creina S Stockley,1 Anne W Taylor,2 Alicia Montgomerie,2 Eleonora Dal Grande2 1The Australian Wine Research Institute, 2Population Research & Outcome Studies, Discipline of Medicine, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia Aims: Individuals change their wine consumption over their life course, and mean volume typically declines with increasing age. Research on the reasons individuals change their consumption has primarily focused on youth/the young, but not on older adults. This study’s aim was to ascertain changes in wine consumption over a 12-month period in Australians at different ages and what influenced these changes.Methods: As part of the Spring 2013 South Australian Health Omnibus Survey, persons (n=2,908) aged 15 years and over who had most recently had a birthday in the selected household were interviewed in their home by trained interviewers. Of these, 48.9% were males and their mean age was 46.3 (standard deviation 18.9) years.Results: Regular, light–moderate wine consumers were generally stable in the amount of wine they drank over a 12 month period, particularly those aged 55 years and older. They generally cited health (48.0%) as a reason for decreasing their wine consumption. Those who usually consumed three to four standard drinks on days they drank wine were also more likely to give health (54.3%) as a reason for decreasing their consumption, as were heavy wine consumers (57.7%). The 25- to 34-year age-group was more likely to have decreased (36% vs 26%) their wine consumption in the last 12 months. The 15- to 24-year age-group was most likely to have increased (28% vs 10%) their wine consumption in the last 12 months. Health was most cited as the reason for decreasing this consumption, while family and friends were most cited as the reason for increasing this consumption.Conclusion: In this representative population of South Australians, the wine consumption of previously identified at-risk groups for both

Objectives Cardiovascular (CVD) mortality disparities between rural/regional and urban-dwelling residents of Australia are persistent. Unavailability of biomedical CVD risk factor data has, until now, limited efforts to understand the causes of the disparity. This study aimed to further investigate such disparities. Design Comparison of (1) CVD risk measures between a regional (Greater Green Triangle Risk Factor Study (GGT RFS, cross-sectional study, 2004–2006) and an urban population (North West Adelaide Health Study (NWAHS, longitudinal cohort study, 2004–2006); (2) Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) CVD mortality rates between these and other Australian regions; and (3) ABS CVD mortality rates by an area-level indicator of socioeconomic status, the Index of Relative Socioeconomic Disadvantage (IRSD). Setting Greater Green Triangle (GGT, Limestone Coast, Wimmera and Corangamite Shires) of South-Western Victoria and North-West Adelaide (NWA). Participants 1563 GGT RFS and 3036 NWAHS stage 2 participants (aged 25–74) provided some information (self-administered questionnaire +/− anthropometric and biomedical measurements). Primary and secondary outcome measures Age-group specific measures of absolute CVD risk, ABS CVD mortality rates by study group and Australian Standard Geographical Classification (ASGC) region. Results Few significant differences in CVD risk between the study regions, with absolute CVD risk ranging from approximately 5% to 30% in the 35–39 and 70–74 age groups, respectively. Similar mean 2003–2007 (crude) mortality rates in GGT (98, 95% CI 87 to 111), NWA (103, 95% CI 96 to 110) and regional Australia (92, 95% CI 91 to 94). NWA mortality rates exceeded that of other city areas (70, 95% CI 69 to 71). Lower measures of socioeconomic status were associated with worse CVD outcomes regardless of geographic location. Conclusions Metropolitan areas do not always have better CVD risk factor profiles and outcomes than rural/regional areas. Nee