'Stopping the start':support for proposed tobacco control policies - a population-based survey in Great Britain 2021-2023

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed public support for four proposed tobacco control policies in Great Britain: (1) Raising the sales age of tobacco by 1 year every year (Smokefree Generation); (2) Raising the sales age of tobacco from 18 years to 21 years; (3) Providing prescription e-cigarettes as smoking cessation aids to adults who smoke; (4) Restricting e-cigarette advertising to prevent youth uptake.DESIGN: Repeat cross-sectional population-based survey weighted to match the population of Great Britain.SETTING: The survey was conducted in England, Scotland and Wales in September 2021, October 2022 and October 2023.PARTICIPANTS: 6541 adults living in Great Britain.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Support for each policy and year and prevalence ratios (PRs) comparing support between years and subgroups.RESULTS: The most popular policy each year was restricting e-cigarette advertising (74%/79%/85%), followed by raising the sales age to 21 years (50%/58%/64%), providing prescription e-cigarettes (45%/44%/47%) and Smokefree Generation (34%/44%/49%). The largest increases were for policies about the age of sale (Smokefree Generation: 2021/2022 PR=1.28, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.40, 2022/2023 PR=1.12, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.20; raising the age to 21 years: 2021/2022 PR=1.16, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.23, 2022/2023 PR=1.11, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.17). Only 30% opposed Smokefree Generation in 2023 down from 41% in 2021.CONCLUSIONS: Support for each policy increased each year, except for providing prescription e-cigarettes. Restricting e-cigarette advertising was the most popular policy, while support for age of sale policies, in particular for a Smokefree Generation, grew most.TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study protocol was published on the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/46z2c/) prior to starting the analysis.</p

Smoking prevalence and purchasing of menthol cigarettes since the menthol flavour ban in Great Britain:a population-based survey between 2020 and 2023

Background: Menthol cigarettes have been banned in Great Britain (GB) since May 2020. Still, menthol accessories and unlabelled cigarettes perceived as mentholated are available, and people can buy menthol cigarettes overseas or illicitly. This study assessed: trends in smoking menthol cigarettes among all adults and 18-24-year-olds in GB between October 2020 and March 2023; trends in and differences between England, Scotland and Wales during the same period and purchase sources among people smoking menthol versus non-flavoured cigarettes.Methods: Population-weighted data were from a monthly cross-sectional survey of adults in GB. Among people smoking cigarettes, we calculated the proportion smoking menthol cigarettes across all adults and 18-24-year-olds, and prevalence ratios (PR) between the first and last quarter. We also calculated the proportions of people smoking menthol/non-flavoured cigarettes by purchase source (including illicit sources).Results: In the first quarter, 16.2% of adults smoking cigarettes reported menthol cigarette smoking with little to no decline throughout the study (PR 0.85, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.01), while it declined among 18-24-year-olds (PR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.89). The prevalence of menthol cigarette smoking fell by two-thirds in Wales (PR 0.36, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.62) but remained relatively stable in England (PR 0.88, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.06) and Scotland (PR 0.94, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.53). The main purchasing sources were licit (93.9%), 14.8% reported illicit sources and 11.5% cross-border purchases, without notable differences from people smoking non-flavoured cigarettes.Conclusions: Roughly one million adults in GB still smoke menthol cigarettes and, with the exception of Wales and young people, there were no noteworthy changes in the post-ban period. There was no indication that the overall persistence of menthol smoking was driven by illicit purchases.Keywords: illegal tobacco products; non-cigarette tobacco products; public policy

Alcohol and smoking brief interventions by socioeconomic position:British population-based survey

Background: Alcohol and smoking brief interventions (BIs) in general practice have been shown to be effective in lowering alcohol and smoking-related harm. Aim: To assess prevalence of self-reported BI receipt among increasing or higher-risk drinkers and past-year smokers in England, Scotland, and Wales, and associations between intervention receipt and socioeconomic position. Design & setting: Cross-sectional study using data from a monthly population-based survey in England, Scotland, and Wales. Method: The study comprised 47 799 participants (15 573 increasing or higher-risk drinkers [alcohol use disorders identification test consumption score ≥5] and 7791 past-year smokers) surveyed via telephone in 2020–2022 (during the COVID-19 pandemic). All data were self-reported. Prevalence of self-reported BI receipt was assessed descriptively; associations between receipt and socioeconomic position were analysed using logistic regression. Results: Among adults in England, Scotland, and Wales, 32.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 31.8 to 32.7) reported increasing or higher-risk drinking and 17.7% (95% CI = 17.3 to 18.1) past-year smoking. Among increasing or higher-risk drinkers, 58.0% (95% CI = 57.1 to 58.9) consulted with a GP in the past year, and of these, 4.1% (95% CI = 3.6 to 4.6) reported receiving BIs. Among past-year smokers, 55.8% (95% CI = 54.5 to 57.1) attended general practice in the past year; of these, 41.0% (95% CI = 39.4 to 42.7) stated receiving BIs. There was a tendency for patients from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds to receive more alcohol (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.38, 95% CI = 1.10 to 1.73) or smoking BIs (aOR 1.11, 95% CI = 0.98 to 1.26), but for the latter the results were statistically non-significant. Results did not differ notably by nation within Great Britain. Conclusion: BIs in general practice are more common for smoking than for alcohol. A greater proportion of BIs for alcohol were found to be delivered to people who were from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds and who were increasing or higher-risk drinkers

Racial differences in systemic sclerosis disease presentation: a European Scleroderma Trials and Research group study

Objectives. Racial factors play a significant role in SSc. We evaluated differences in SSc presentations between white patients (WP), Asian patients (AP) and black patients (BP) and analysed the effects of geographical locations.Methods. SSc characteristics of patients from the EUSTAR cohort were cross-sectionally compared across racial groups using survival and multiple logistic regression analyses.Results. The study included 9162 WP, 341 AP and 181 BP. AP developed the first non-RP feature faster than WP but slower than BP. AP were less frequently anti-centromere (ACA; odds ratio (OR) = 0.4, P &lt; 0.001) and more frequently anti-topoisomerase-I autoantibodies (ATA) positive (OR = 1.2, P = 0.068), while BP were less likely to be ACA and ATA positive than were WP [OR(ACA) = 0.3, P &lt; 0.001; OR(ATA) = 0.5, P = 0.020]. AP had less often (OR = 0.7, P = 0.06) and BP more often (OR = 2.7, P &lt; 0.001) diffuse skin involvement than had WP.AP and BP were more likely to have pulmonary hypertension [OR(AP) = 2.6, P &lt; 0.001; OR(BP) = 2.7, P = 0.03 vs WP] and a reduced forced vital capacity [OR(AP) = 2.5, P &lt; 0.001; OR(BP) = 2.4, P &lt; 0.004] than were WP. AP more often had an impaired diffusing capacity of the lung than had BP and WP [OR(AP vs BP) = 1.9, P = 0.038; OR(AP vs WP) = 2.4, P &lt; 0.001]. After RP onset, AP and BP had a higher hazard to die than had WP [hazard ratio (HR) (AP) = 1.6, P = 0.011; HR(BP) = 2.1, P &lt; 0.001].Conclusion. Compared with WP, and mostly independent of geographical location, AP have a faster and earlier disease onset with high prevalences of ATA, pulmonary hypertension and forced vital capacity impairment and higher mortality. BP had the fastest disease onset, a high prevalence of diffuse skin involvement and nominally the highest mortality

A Mobile App for Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Development and Usability Study

BackgroundCardiovascular disease (CVD) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are posing a huge burden on health care systems worldwide. Mobile apps can deliver behavior change interventions for chronic disease prevention on a large scale, but current evidence for their effectiveness is limited. ObjectiveThis paper reported on the development and user testing of a mobile app that aims at increasing risk awareness and engaging users in behavior change. It would form part of an intervention for primary prevention of CVD and T2DM. MethodsThe theoretical framework of the app design was based on the Behaviour Change Wheel, combined with the capability, opportunity, and motivation for behavior change system and the behavior change techniques from the Behavior Change Technique Taxonomy (version 1). In addition, evidence from scientific literature has guided the development process. The prototype was tested for user-friendliness via an iterative approach. We conducted semistructured interviews with individuals in the target populations, which included the System Usability Scale. We transcribed and analyzed the interviews using descriptive statistics for the System Usability Scale and thematic analysis to identify app features that improved utility and usability. ResultsThe target population was Australians aged ≥45 years. The app included 4 core modules (risk score, goal setting, health measures, and education). In these modules, users learned about their risk for CVD and T2DM; set goals for smoking, alcohol consumption, diet, and physical activity; and tracked them. In total, we included 12 behavior change techniques. We conducted 2 rounds of usability testing, each involving 5 participants. The average age of the participants was 58 (SD 8) years. Totally, 60% (6/10) of the participants owned iPhone Operating System phones, and 40% (4/10) of them owned Android phones. In the first round, we identified a technical issue that prevented 30% (3/10) of the participants from completing the registration process. Among the 70% (7/10) of participants who were able to complete the registration process, 71% (5/7) rated the app above average, based on the System Usability Scale. During the interviews, we identified some issues related to functionality, content, and language and clarity. We used the participants’ feedback to improve these aspects. ConclusionsWe developed the app using behavior change theory and scientific evidence. The user testing allowed us to identify and remove technical errors and integrate additional functions into the app, which the participants had requested. Next, we will evaluate the feasibility of the revised version of the app developed through this design process and usability testing