From the aSchool of Public Health, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA; bSchool of Economics, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA; cSchool of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY; and dSchool of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Epidemiology. 2017 Nov;28(6):863-871. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000736.
Few studies have examined associations of geographically proximal cigarette prices with within-person changes in smoking outcomes or assessed interactions between cigarette prices and smoking bans.
We linked neighborhood cigarette prices (inflation-adjusted) at chain supermarkets and drug stores and bar/restaurant smoking ban policies to cohort participants (632 smokers from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis, 2001-2012, baseline mean age 58 years) using geocoded retailer and participant addresses. We used fixed-effects models to investigate associations of within-person changes in price and ban exposures with within-person changes in five smoking outcomes: current smoking, heavy (≥10 cigarettes) smoking, cessation, relapse, and intensity (average number of cigarettes smoked per day, natural log transformed). We assessed intensity associations among all smokers, and heavy (≥10 cigarettes per day) and light (<10) baseline smokers. Finally, we tested interactions between cigarette price and bans.
A $1 increase in price was associated with a 3% reduction in risk of current smoking (adjusted risk ratio [aRR]: 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.93, 1.0), a 7% reduction in risk of heavy smoking (aRR: 0.93; CI = 0.87, 0.99), a 20% increase in risk of smoking cessation (aRR: 1.2; CI = 0.99, 1.4), and a 35% reduction in the average number of cigarettes smoked per day by heavy baseline smokers (ratio of geometric means: 0.65; CI = 0.45, 0.93). We found no association between smoking bans and outcomes, and no evidence that price effects were modified by the presence of bans.
Results underscore the importance of local prices, but not hospitality smoking bans, in influencing older adults' smoking behaviors.
很少有研究调查地理位置相近的香烟价格与个人吸烟结果变化之间的关联,也没有评估香烟价格与禁烟令之间的相互作用。
我们将连锁超市和药店的社区香烟价格(通胀调整后)和酒吧/餐馆禁烟政策与队列参与者(2001-2012 年多民族动脉粥样硬化研究中的 632 名吸烟者,基线平均年龄 58 岁)联系起来,使用经地理编码的零售商和参与者地址。我们使用固定效应模型来研究个人价格和禁烟令暴露变化与五个吸烟结果的个人变化之间的关联:当前吸烟、重度(≥10 支)吸烟、戒烟、复吸和强度(每天吸烟的平均支数,自然对数转换)。我们评估了所有吸烟者以及重度(每天≥10 支)和轻度(每天<10 支)基线吸烟者的强度关联。最后,我们测试了香烟价格和禁令之间的相互作用。
价格每增加 1 美元,当前吸烟的风险降低 3%(调整后的风险比[aRR]:0.97;95%置信区间[CI]:0.93,1.0),重度吸烟的风险降低 7%(aRR:0.93;CI:0.87,0.99),戒烟的风险增加 20%(aRR:1.2;CI:0.99,1.4),重度吸烟者每天吸烟的平均数量减少 35%(几何均数比:0.65;CI:0.45,0.93)。我们没有发现禁烟令与结果之间的关联,也没有证据表明价格效应受到禁烟令的影响。
结果强调了当地价格的重要性,但不是禁烟令,对影响老年人吸烟行为的重要性。