INTRODUCTION
There is clear evidence that the use of cessation aids significantly increases the likelihood of successful smoking cessation. The aim of this study was to examine quitting activity and use of cessation aids among smokers from various European countries. Subgroup differences were also examined for sex, income, education, and age in each country.
METHODS
Cross-sectional data were collected in 2016 from 10683 smokers in eight European countries participating in the ITC Project: England (n=3536), Germany (n=1003), Greece (n=1000), Hungary (n=1000), the Netherlands (n=1136), Poland (n=1006), Romania (n=1001), and Spain (n=1001). We measured quitting activity, including quit attempts in the previous 12 months and intention to quit, use of cessation aids (i.e. medication, quitlines, internet, local services, e-cigarettes), and whether respondents had received advice from health professionals about quitting and e-cigarettes.
RESULTS
Quit attempts were most common in England (46.3%) and least common in Hungary (10.4%). Quit intention was highest in England and lowest in Greece. Use of e-cigarettes to quit was highest in England (51.6%) and lowest in Spain (5.0%). Use of cessation aids was generally low across all countries; in particular this was true for quitlines, internet-based support, and local services. Receiving health professional advice to quit was highest in Romania (56.5%), and lowest in Poland (20.8%); few smokers received advice about e-cigarettes from health professionals. No clear differences were found for sex and income groups. Across countries, smokers with lower education reported less quitting activity.
CONCLUSIONS
Quitting activity and use of cessation methods were low in most countries. Greater quit attempts and use of cessation aids were found in England, where large investments in tobacco control and smoking cessation have been made. Health professionals are important for motivating smokers to quit and promoting the effectiveness of various methods, but overall, few smokers get advice to quit.
INTRODUCTION
Little research exists on the sociodemographic characteristics of menthol and flavoured cigarette (MFC) smokers in Europe. This study assessed the proportion of MFC smokers in Europe, their sociodemographic characteristics, and their attitudes towards tobacco control measures.
METHODS
Cross-sectional data were collected in 2016 among 10760 adult current smokers from 8 European countries (ITC Europe Project and EUREST-PLUS). Smokers of menthol, other flavoured, unflavoured tobacco, or no usual brand were compared on sociodemographic characteristics, attitudes towards a range of tobacco control measures (e.g. ban on flavouring), and on intentions regarding their smoking behaviour following the ban on flavoured tobacco. Data were analysed in SPSS Complex Samples Package using univariate analyses.
RESULTS
Among the respondents, 7.4% smoked menthol cigarettes and 2.9% other flavoured tobacco, but large differences existed between countries (e.g. 0.4% smokers smoked menthol cigarettes in Spain vs 12.4% in England). Compared to other groups, menthol cigarette smokers were younger, more likely to be female, better educated, had higher household income, and smoked fewer cigarettes (all p<0.001). A quarter of menthol smokers supported a ban on additives, compared with almost half of all other smokers (p<0.001). In case of a ban on flavourings, around a fifth of all MFC smokers intended to switch to another brand, and a third to reduce the amount they smoked or to quit smoking, but there was no consistent pattern across MFC smokers among the countries.
CONCLUSIONS
The ban on flavourings introduced by the EU Tobacco Products Directive (extended to 2020 for menthols) will affect one in ten smokers in the countries surveyed, which provides an opportunity for targeting these groups with cessation programmes. However, smokers of menthol and flavoured cigarettes in the different European countries are a heterogeneous group and may need different approaches.
Efforts to mitigate the devastation of tobacco-attributable morbidity and mortality in the European Union (EU) are founded on its newly adopted Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) along with the first-ever health treaty, the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). The aim of this Horizon 2020 Project entitled
European Regulatory Science on Tobacco: Policy Implementation to Reduce Lung Disease (EURESTPLUS)
is to monitor and evaluate the impact of the implementation of the TPD across the EU, within the context of WHO FCTC ratification. To address this aim, EUREST-PLUS consists of four objectives: 1) To create a cohort study of 6000 adult smokers in six EU MS (Germany, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Spain) within a pre-TID vs post-TPD implementation study design; 2) To conduct secondary dataset analyses of the Special Eurobarometer on Tobacco Survey (SETS); 3) To document changes in e-cigarette product parameters (technical design, labelling/packaging and chemical composition) pre-TID vs post-TPD; and 4) To enhance innovative joint research collaborations on chronic non-communicable diseases. Through this methodological approach, EUREST-PLUS is designed to generate strong inferences about the effectiveness of tobacco control policies, as well as to elucidate the mechanisms and factors by which policy implementation translates to population impact. Findings from EUREST-PLUS have potential global implications for the implementation of innovative tobacco control policies and its impact on the prevention of lung diseases.
Health education programmes and regulatory interventions addressing e-cigarettes are needed in Romania. More research is necessary on how to develop effective public health messages.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.