Search

Purpose: Sexual and gender minority (SGM) people are at greater risk for substance use than heterosexual and cisgender people, but most prior work is limited by cross-sectional analyses or the examination of single substance use. This study examined substance use over time among SGM people to identify patterns of polysubstance use at the intersection of sex and gender. Methods: Data were collected annually over 4 years from SGM respondents (n = 11,822) in The Population Research in Identity and Disparities for Equality (PRIDE) Study. Differences in substance use patterns (any prior 30-day use of 15 substances) by gender subgroup were examined with latent class analysis, and multinomial regression models tested relationships between gender subgroup and substance use. Results: Eight classes of substance use were observed. The three most common patterns were low substance use (49%), heavy episodic alcohol use (≥5 alcoholic drinks on one occasion) with some cannabis and tobacco use (14%), and cannabis use with some tobacco and declining heavy episodic alcohol use (13%). Differences observed included lower odds of patterns defined by heavy episodic alcohol use with some cannabis and tobacco use in all gender subgroups relative to cisgender men and persons with low substance use (odds ratios [ORs] 0.26-0.60). Gender expansive people assigned female at birth, gender expansive people assigned male at birth, and transgender men had greater odds of reporting cannabis use with small percentages of heavy episodic alcohol and tobacco use (ORs: 1.41-1.60). Conclusion: This study suggests that there are unique patterns of polysubstance use over time among gender subgroups of SGM people.

In 2020, California passed a flavored tobacco sales restriction (FTSR), but the tobacco companies filed a referendum, and the ban will not be implemented unless approved by voters in November 2022. This study examined the percentage of the California population covered by a city FTSR and identified groups more likely to be covered. Mean demographics as well as tobacco use and control measures were compared for California cities with (n = 93) and without (n = 389) a FTSR, and t tests were used to examine the differences. We calculated adjusted odds ratios using logistic regression models. City FTSR policies covered 20.7% of the California population. Adjusted predictors of having a FTSR included the American Lung Association tobacco control score (odds ratio [OR] = 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [1.17, 1.38]), voting democratic (OR = 1.06, 95% CI: [1.02, 1.10]). and having a lower adult smoking prevalence (OR = 0.84, 95% CI: [0.72, 0.99]). A state-level policy would cover all populations in California.

PurposeCo-use of tobacco and cannabis is a common and complex behavior. The lack of harmonized measures of co-use yields confusion and inconsistencies in synthesizing evidence about the health effects of co-use. We aimed to classify co-use patterns based on temporal proximity and describe preferred products and motives for each pattern in order to improve co-use surveillance.MethodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews in a sample of 34 young adults (Mage = 22.8 years, 32.4 % female) during 2017-2019 in California, USA. We employed a qualitative thematic analysis to identify timing, reasons, and contexts for tobacco and cannabis co-use and classify co-use patterns.ResultsFour emergent patterns of co-use with increasing temporal proximity between tobacco use and cannabis use were: Same-month different-day co-use (Pattern 1); Same-day different-occasion co-use (Pattern 2); Same-occasion sequential co-use (Pattern 3); and Same-occasion simultaneous co-use (Pattern 4). Participants used various product combinations within each pattern. Similar motives for all patterns were socialization, product availability, and coping with stress/anxiety. Unique motive for temporally distant patterns (Patterns 1 and 2) was seeking substance-specific effects (e.g., stimulant effect from nicotine, relaxation effects from cannabis), while unique motives for temporally close patterns (Patterns 3 and 4) were seeking combined effects from both substances (e.g., more intense psychoactive effects, mitigating cannabis adverse effects) and behavioral trigger (e.g., cannabis use triggers tobacco use).ConclusionsOur classification of co-use patterns can facilitate consistency for measuring co-use and assessing its health impacts. Future research should also measure product types and motives for different patterns to inform intervention efforts.

IntroductionLesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning (LGBTQ) individuals use tobacco at disproportionately high rates but are as likely as straight tobacco users to want to quit and to use quitlines. Little is known about the demographics and geographic distribution of LGBTQ quitline participants, their engagement with services, or their long-term outcomes.Aims and methodsCalifornians (N = 333 429) who enrolled in a statewide quitline 2010-2022 were asked about their sexual and gender minority (SGM) status and other baseline characteristics. All were offered telephone counseling. A subset (n = 19 431) was followed up at seven months. Data were analyzed in 2023 by SGM status (LGBTQ vs. straight) and county type (rural vs. urban).ResultsOverall, 7.0% of participants were LGBTQ, including 7.4% and 5.4% of urban and rural participants, respectively. LGBTQ participants were younger than straight participants but had similar cigarette consumption. Fewer LGBTQ participants reported a physical health condition (42.1% vs. 48.4%) but more reported a behavioral health condition (71.1% vs. 54.5%; both p's < .001). Among both LGBTQ and straight participants, nearly 9 in 10 chose counseling and both groups completed nearly three sessions on average. The groups had equivalent 30-day abstinence rates (24.5% vs. 23.2%; p = .263). Similar patterns were seen in urban and rural subgroups.ConclusionsLGBTQ tobacco users engaged with and appeared to benefit from a statewide quitline even though it was not LGBTQ community-based. A quitline with staff trained in LGBTQ cultural competence can help address the high prevalence of tobacco use in the LGBTQ community and reach members wherever they live.ImplicationsThis study describes how participants of a statewide tobacco quitline broke down by sexual orientation and gender. It compares participants both by SGM status and by type of county to provide a more complete picture of quitline participation both in urban areas where LGBTQ community-based cessation programs may exist and in rural areas where they generally do not. To our knowledge, it is the first study to compare LGBTQ and straight participants on their use of quitline services and quitting aids, satisfaction with services received, and rates of attempting quitting and achieving prolonged abstinence from smoking.