Disparities in cigarette, e-cigarette, cigar, and smokeless tobacco use at the intersection of multiple social identities in the US adult population. Results from the Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey 2018-2019 survey

Introduction: Sociodemographic disparities in tobacco use are prevalent and persistent in the United States. Nevertheless, few studies have examined disparities in tobacco use from an intersectionality perspective. We developed a visualization tool to identify disparities in cigarette, e-cigarette, cigar, and smokeless tobacco use at the intersection of multiple social identities. Aims and methods: We used the 2018-2019 Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey (TUS-CPS) to estimate the prevalence of tobacco product use at the intersection of age (18-34, 35-54, ≥55 years), sex (male, female), race/ethnicity (Non-Hispanic [NH] White, NH Black, Hispanic, NH Other), and annual household income (\u3c$50 000,$50 000-$99 999, and ≥$100 000). Estimates accounted for the complex survey design. Results: For cigarettes, the most defining characteristic was income, with the highest prevalence among low-income NH White male adults aged 35-54 years (30.7%) and low-income NH White female adults aged 35-54 years (29.7%). For e-cigarettes, the most defining characteristic was age, with adults 18-34 years old having the highest prevalence. High prevalence groups for cigars included young- and middle-aged NH Black and NH White males, while NH White males had the highest prevalence of smokeless tobacco use. Conclusions: Our intersectionality visualization tool is helpful to uncover complex patterns of tobacco use, facilitating the identification of high-risk groups. Implications: We created a visualization tool to identify disparities in cigarette, e-cigarette, cigar, and smokeless tobacco use at the intersection of age, sex, race/ethnicity, and income. Our visualization tool helps uncover complex patterns of tobacco use, facilitating the identification of high-risk population groups that would otherwise be masked. These results can be used to implement tobacco control policies targeted at factors that promote or sustain tobacco use disparities

Lack of access to personal protective equipment is associated with severe COVID-19 symptoms among in-person workers

The use of personal protective equipment (PPE) at work can greatly reduce risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. However, it is unclear whether adequate PPE reduces disease severity if transmission occurs. This study investigated associations between workplace access to adequate PPE and self-reported COVID-19 symptom severity among in-person workers. We used data from the Michigan COVID-19 Recovery Surveillance Study (MI CReSS), a population-based survey of Michigan adults with a PCR-confirmed positive SARS-CoV-2 test. The sample was restricted to employed, in-person respondents with COVID-19 onset on or before November 15, 2020 (n = 893). Access to adequate PPE at work was categorized as often/always, sometimes, or rarely/never. Self-reported symptom severity was dichotomized as severe (severe or very severe) or not severe (mild, moderate, or asymptomatic). We used modified Poisson regression to estimate prevalence ratios for the relationship between adequate PPE at work and severe COVID-19 symptoms. We examined effect modification of the relationship by occupation by including a multiplicative interaction term for healthcare worker versus other occupations. After adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical covariates, respondents who rarely/never had access to PPE at work had a 24.7 % higher prevalence of self-reported severe COVID-19 symptoms (PR: 1.25, 95 % CI 1.03-1.51, p-value = 0.024) compared to respondents who often/always had access to PPE at work. Healthcare worker status did not modify the association between access to PPE and symptom severity. The findings from this study suggest an added benefit of PPE in reducing prevalence of severe COVID-19 among all in-person workers

Institutional Racism and Health: a Framework for Conceptualization, Measurement, and Analysis.

Despite growing interest in the health-related consequences of racially discriminatory institutional policies and practices, public health scholars have yet to reach a consensus on how to measure and analyze exposure to institutional racism. The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the conceptualization, measurement, and analysis of institutional racism in the context of quantitative research on minority health and health disparities in the United States. We begin by providing definitions of key concepts (e.g., racialization, racism, racial inequity) and describing linkages between these ideas. Next, we discuss the hypothesized mechanisms that link exposure to institutional racism with health. We then provide a framework to advance empirical research on institutional racism and health, informed by a literature review that summarizes measures and analytic approaches used in previous studies. The framework addresses six considerations: (1) policy identification, (2) population of interest, (3) exposure measurement, (4) outcome measurement, (5) study design, and (6) analytic approach. Research utilizing the proposed framework will help inform structural interventions to promote minority health and reduce racial and ethnic health disparities

Community cohesion, social support, and mental health among black individuals in Chicago: A cross-sectional examination of the effects on COVID-19 vaccination

The COVID-19 pandemic put a significant strain on communities, social resources, and personal relationships, disproportionately impacting Black and low-income communities in the United States. Community cohesion and social support are positively associated with numerous health outcomes and preventive health measures, yet were strained during the pandemic due to COVID mitigation measures. This study examined the relationships between social cohesion, social support, mental health, and COVID-19 vaccination to understand whether community cohesion and social support were associated with increased likelihood of receiving a COVID-19 vaccination. Data are from a cross-sectional survey of 537 Black Chicagoans that was disseminated between September 2021 and March 2022. Structural equation modeling was used to test associations between community cohesion, social support, loneliness, anxiety, stress, and having received a COVID-19 vaccination. Results demonstrated that social support mediated associations between community cohesion and loneliness, anxiety, and stress, but was not associated with COVID-19 vaccination. These results demonstrate the importance of community cohesion and social support on mental health and suggest there are other potential pathways that may link community cohesion and vaccination

Disparities in COVID-19 hospitalization at the intersection of race and ethnicity and income

Background: Existing studies have elucidated racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 hospitalizations, but few have examined disparities at the intersection of race and ethnicity and income. Methods: We used a population-based probability survey of non-institutionalized adults in Michigan with a polymerase chain reaction-positive SARS-CoV-2 test before November 16, 2020. We categorized respondents by race and ethnicity and annual household income: low-income (\u3c $50,000) Non-Hispanic (NH) Black, high-income (≥$50,000) NH Black, low-income Hispanic, high-income Hispanic, low-income NH White, and high-income NH White. We used modified Poisson regression models, adjusting for sex, age group, survey mode, and sample wave, to estimate COVID-19 hospitalization prevalence ratios by race and ethnicity and income. Results: Over half of the analytic sample (n = 1593) was female (54.9%) and age 45 or older (52.5%), with 14.5% hospitalized for COVID-19. Hospitalization was most prevalent among low-income (32.9%) and high-income (31.2%) Non-Hispanic (NH) Black adults, followed by low-income NH White (15.3%), low-income Hispanic (12.9%), high-income NH White (9.6%), and high-income Hispanic adults (8.8%). In adjusted models, NH Black adults, regardless of income (low-income prevalence ratio [PR]: 1.86, 95% CI: 1.36-2.54; high-income PR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.07-2.31), and low-income NH White adults (PR: 1.52, 95% CI: 1.12-2.07), had higher prevalence of hospitalization compared to high-income NH White adults. We observed no significant difference in the prevalence of hospitalization among Hispanic adults relative to high-income NH White adults. Conclusions: We observed disparities in COVID-19 hospitalization at the intersection of race and ethnicity and income for NH Black adults and low-income NH White adults relative to high-income NH White adults, but not for Hispanic adults

Patterns of poly tobacco use among adults in the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study, 2013-2017: A multistate Markov transition analysis

Background: A better understanding of sociodemographic transition patterns between single, dual and poly tobacco product use may help improve tobacco control policy interventions. Methods: HRs of transition between never, non-current (no past 30-day use), cigarette, e-cigarette, other combustible, smokeless tobacco (SLT), dual and poly tobacco use states in adults were estimated for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education and income using a multistate model for waves 1-4 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health study (2013-2017), a US-based cohort study, accounting for complex survey design. Results: Sole cigarette and SLT use were persistent, with 77% and 78% of adults continuing use after one wave. Other use states were more transient, with 29%-48% of adults reporting the same pattern after one wave. If single-product users transitioned, it was most likely to non-current use while dual or poly cigarette users were most likely to transition to exclusive cigarette use. Males were more likely than females to initiate combustible product use after a history of no use, and after a period of tobacco use cessation. Hispanic and non-Hispanic black participants initiated cigarette use at higher rates than non-Hispanic white participants, and had higher rates of experimentation with tobacco products between study waves. Lower socioeconomic status was associated with higher rates of transition into combustible tobacco use. Conclusions: Dual and poly tobacco use is largely transient, while single-use patterns are more stable over time. Transitions differ by age, sex, race/ethnicity, education and income, which may influence the impact of current and future tobacco control efforts

Sociodemographic Patterns of Exclusive and Dual Use of ENDS and Menthol/Non-Menthol Cigarettes among US Youth (Ages 15–17) Using Two Nationally Representative Surveys (2013–2017)

The use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) among youth in the United States has increased rapidly in the past decade. Simultaneously, while youth cigarette smoking has declined considerably, youth are still more likely to use menthol cigarettes than any other age group. We used nationally representative data on 15–17-year-olds from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study and the National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS) (2013–2017) to better understand current cigarette (by menthol flavoring) and ENDS use in the US. We calculated weighted population prevalence estimates across years for multiple patterns of current cigarette and ENDS use (i.e., exclusive menthol cigarette, exclusive non-menthol cigarette, exclusive ENDS, dual ENDS and menthol cigarette, and dual ENDS and non-menthol cigarette) by sex, race/ethnicity, parental education level, household income, and homeownership. Overall, both exclusive menthol and non-menthol cigarette use declined from 2013–2017. Exclusive ENDS use increased, particularly among youth who were non-Hispanic White or had a higher socioeconomic status (measured by parental education, household income, and homeownership). Dual use of ENDS with either menthol or non-menthol cigarettes did not change significantly. Monitoring changes in these sociodemographic patterns will help inform future youth tobacco prevention strategies

The actual and anticipated effects of a menthol cigarette ban: a scoping review

Abstract Background The United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA), under the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, banned characterizing flavors in cigarettes; however, mentholated tobacco products were exempt. Since 2009, over 20 US jurisdictions and numerous countries around the world have extended this restriction to menthol. Currently, the FDA is reconsidering its position on a nation-wide menthol cigarette ban. However, the effects of such a ban remain unclear. We conducted a scoping review to explore the impact of a menthol cigarette ban on individual behaviors (initiation, cessation, and product switching), sales, and compliance. Methods We conducted a search of the international literature using PubMed, EBSCO, and Web of Science (to November 25, 2019). We retrieved articles relevant to the impacts of an implemented or hypothetical menthol ban. We also included studies of flavored tobacco product bans due to their potential relevance in gauging compliance and product substitutability. Results The search identified 493 articles, of which 24 were included. Studies examined the effects of implemented menthol bans (n = 6), hypothetical menthol bans (n = 12) and implemented flavor bans that exclude menthol (n = 6). Menthol bans were found to reduce sales and increase smoking cessation with only partial substitution for non-menthol cigarettes. US smokers’ reactions to a hypothetical ban indicate that about 25–64% would attempt to quit smoking and 11–46% would consider switching to other tobacco products, including 15–30% to e-cigarettes. Flavor ban studies indicate reductions in initiation of 6%. Ban compliance was high, but studies indicate that the tobacco industry and retailers have attempted to circumvent their impact via packaging changes and online sales. Conclusion Our review finds that extending the US cigarette flavor ban to menthol products would promote smoking cessation and reduce initiation. This evidence supports further action by the FDA towards mentholated tobacco products. However, few studies have been conducted in the vaping era.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/173483/1/12889_2020_Article_9055.pd

Assessment of electronic nicotine delivery systems with cigarette use and self-reported wheezing in the US adult population

Importance: The prevalence of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) use has increased, leading to a concern about their respiratory health outcomes. It is unclear whether ENDS use increases the risk of wheezing, a common symptom of respiratory conditions. Objective: To provide an analysis of the longitudinal association between ENDS and cigarette use and self-reported wheezing among US adults. Design, setting, and participants: The US nationally representative Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study was used. Longitudinal data for adults 18 years or older from wave 1 (2013-2014) to wave 5 (2018-2019) were analyzed. Data were analyzed from August 2021 to January 2023. Main outcomes and measures: The prevalence of self-reported wheezing (waves 2-5) was estimated for 6 strata of tobacco product use (never cigarette and noncurrent ENDS use, never cigarette and current ENDS use, current cigarette and noncurrent ENDS use, current cigarette and current ENDS use, former cigarette and noncurrent ENDS use, and former cigarette and current ENDS use). A generalized estimating equations framework evaluated the association between cigarette and ENDS use and self-reported wheezing at the subsequent wave. An interaction term between cigarette and ENDS use was added to estimate the association between joint cigarette and ENDS use categories and the association of ENDS within strata of cigarette use. Results: The analytical sample consisted of 17 075 US adults with a mean (SD) age of 45.4 (17) years, of whom 8922 (51%) were female and 10 242 (66%) were Non-Hispanic White. When compared with never cigarette and noncurrent ENDS use, the greatest association in reporting wheezing was for current cigarette and current ENDS use (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 3.26; 95% CI, 2.82-3.77), which was similar to current cigarette and noncurrent ENDS use (AOR, 3.20; 95% CI, 2.91-3.51) and substantially greater than former cigarette and current ENDS use (AOR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.57-2.41). Associations were small and not statistically significant for the odds of self-reported wheezing among never cigarette and current ENDS use when compared with never cigarette and noncurrent ENDS use (AOR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.83-1.72), and for odds of wheezing and current cigarette and current ENDS use when compared with current cigarette and noncurrent ENDS use (AOR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.91-1.15). Conclusions and relevance: In this cohort study, exclusive ENDS use was not associated with an increase in the risk of self-reported wheezing. However, a small increase in risk between ENDS use and wheezing was reported by individuals who use cigarettes. This study adds to the literature about the potential health effects associated with ENDS use